[Wikipedia-l] Naming Conventions (names and titles)

[Tesla Coil]

On 25 Sept 2002, Rob Brewer wrote:
>>>> In no case is it [[Edward Stanley, 14th Earl of Derby]] and
>>>> [[Edward Stanley, 15th Earl of Derby]]. "English-speakers do
>>>> not put family names as part of the title."
>>>
>>> ...which is quite clearly untrue, at least when referring
>>> in formal terms to historical figures. The Dictionary of
>>> National Biography, for example, lists peers by their family
>>> name, as in: CAVENDISH, Spencer Compton, Marquis of Hartington
>>> and 8th Duke of Devonshire.
>>
>> I think Tesla was referring to that specific standard form of quoting a
>> title, where I believe he's correct - you would indeed *not* cite the
>> surname in that particular formulation.
>
> I may have misunderstood Tesla... I understood Tesla to be quoting 
> from [[Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles)]], and took
> it as a complaint. I'll look in to the convention when I have time.

I was quoting [[Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles)]],
but only as a citation of what seems to be Wikipedia "Legal Code"
on entry titles.  

I considered referring to Oxford's Dictionary of National Biography
in this context myself, but I'm not certain how much it helps on 
the issue.  There, you'll have an entry WATSON-WENTWORTH, CHARLES,
second Marquis of Rockingham - but other articles will name him as
Lord Rockingham, or simply Rockingham, no Charles Watson-Wentworth
about it.  On whether the Wikipedia entry title should be [[Lord
Rockingham]] or [[Charles Watson-Wentworth]] this could argue for
either position.  About all I can say of it is that anyone finding
[[Charles Watson-Wentworth|Lord Rockingham]] too inconvenient or 
complicated to write in an article would the more easily surrender
before the task of navigating the Dictionary of National Biography
in writing said article.

Returning to "English-speakers do not put family names as part of 
the title."  Looking through a biography last night, I noticed it
included a portrait identified as "John Montagu, Earl of Sandwich."
The book was published in Great Britain, and though I suppose that
no guarantee it adheres to Queen's English, I have my doubts this
is anything of a hard and fast rule.

The real question here is whether to recognize that Edward Stanley,
the 14th Earl of Derby is for many persons *The* [[Earl of Derby]],
or that the [[Earl of Derby]] is a *title* that has been conferred 
to many persons and that its movement may prove history by itself.