Talk:Peregrine Cavendish, 12th Duke of Devonshire

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

References[edit]

Where is the information on this page coming from? --Elonka 20:37, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Doubtless it's cracrofts or burkes but I've added a link for some of the details which will do for now. Alci12 17:38, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Information regarding additional three children[edit]

Where is the proof for the additional three children? The offical Chatsworth web-site doesn't mention them [1]. Because of the lack of a reliable referece I am reverting the site to the version of Tryde. --IrishCent 18:00, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

A host of IPs and SPAs seem determined to insert the information that there are six children. Which would be fine if any of them provided a reliable source for the information. There are no sources at all, reliable or not, for the claim that there are six; current sources unequivocally state three children. --Bonadea (talk) 19:45, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have filed a Suspected Sockpuppet case here. --BelovedFreak 22:39, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Information regarding additional children[edit]

According to the information provided by the GRO [2] the 12th Duke of Devonshire has 4 children (two boys - William & Ian ; two girls - Celina & Jasmine). I have added the missing information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.123.6.102 (talk) 11:48, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Where? Provided to whom? The General Register Office doesn't provide information online. The weight of evidence - Burke's, Debrett's, online genealogies, the fact 'Ian Cavendish' appears nowhere on the internet except here - suggest otherwise. I recommend that until substantive proof, rather than merely mentioning the name of a government organisation without showing the information they provided, can be found, the entry remains at three children. Phettyplace (talk) 2:47, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

I have access to the GRO indexes and there is absolutely no evidence of any more children than the three listed to this marriage. The mother's maiden name of Heywood-Lonsdale makes the search for any other children very simple and there are not any more. 86.24.70.90 (talk) 16:32, 18 April 2011 (UTC) Moriarty[reply]

Websites providing evidence for three children[edit]

Websites providing evidence for four children[edit]

None.

Sock puppets[edit]

I am not sure where to post this, but clearly this page has again fallen victim to sock puppets. There was a similar problem last year. The following users have only made changes to this page, and have failed to provide any evidence corroborating their changes:

if there are to many who claim for four children they might be right! i called the Chatsworth House and they confirm it. Also, it amazed me how 2 people here control the knowledge! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.214.215.147 (talk) 16:24, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is absurd. There are not 'to' many people who think there are four children: there are several IP addresses who have done nothing to contribute to Wikipedia apart from contest this one point. They have provided absolutely no evidence beyond citing a website which doesn't allow public access and the fact they have called 'the Chatsworth House'. On the other hand, far more than '2 people here' have reverted the patently incorrect edits. I have provided four websites which provide evidence of three children - and I'm sure there are more around - and you have provided none.
Until you can provide any websites to support your claim, the entry stays at three children. Phettyplace (talk) 02:40, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have included evidence from the official website of 'the Chatsworth House', stating that the Duke has three children. Phettyplace (talk) 02:49, 23 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Remark[edit]

1. The link to the Chatsworth House is a pdf file having no info about neither of his children. 2. The Chatsworth House by calling addresses to this website: http://www.cavendishhouse.org/index.php?dukeinfo=52 which gives formal information about all Dukes.

I hope this will end the controversy in this connection. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.126.187.123 (talk) 11:40, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, this does not end the controversy. There is nothing wrong with linking a PDF file. It 'does' list three children, quite explicitly. It comes from the official Chatsworth House website. Your link is an unofficial website which has clearly mirrored the Wikipedia entry, unfortunately at a time when the vandalism hadn't been corrected. Reverting again. Phettyplace (talk) 02:44, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
YOU MUST BE KIDDEN ME!!!! YOH HAVE THE PICS OF THE ALL FAMILY THERE....FOUR CHILDREN!!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.147.133.2 (talk) 03:05, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]


The official site and the mentioned pdf file gives only prove of three children (two daughters and a son). Also in the official guide book (Ed. 2008) there are only mentioned three children. The web site cavendishhouse.org is privatly owned and in my eyes no reliable source. So I reverted the changes. IrishCent 10:22, 26 July 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Irishcent (talk • contribs)

Thanks Irishcent. Phettyplace (talk) 02:05, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of the most bizarre disputes I have ever encountered on Wikipedia. Why on earth would anyone wish to create a fictitious child for an obscure British nobleman? Cavendishhouse.org, by the way, appears to be a mirror of this article, and thus has no independent merit. Utterly bizarre, though. john k (talk) 02:46, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've semi-protected the page, to prevent IPs from editing it, given the vandalism. john k (talk) 02:47, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

REPLY[edit]

On the contrary I think this site is a mirror to the cavendishhouse.org site!! There is more info there than in this page so...and it looks reliable by far most. IF THERE IS A DISPUTE PROTECTING THE PAGE IS NOT AN ANSWER IS AN ACT OF TERROR!!! I GUESS I AM GOING TO CREATE A NEW PAGE FOR THIS GUY WHICH IS MORE RELIABLE AND UNPROTECTED BY ALL MEANS.

Really? Really?? john k (talk) 04:46, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much john k. Isn't it all bizarre? Do we think that this chap is perhaps called Ian Cavendish and determined to ennoble himself by means of Wikipedia?! Phettyplace (talk) 08:58, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Here we go... Peregrine Cavendish, 12th Duke of Devonshire - 12th I've put it up for deletion (or will momentarily). Phettyplace (talk) 09:09, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

REMARK[edit]

GUYS THAT'S WHY I DONT TRUST THE INFO GIVEN IN WIKIPEDIA!!! TOO MANY PEOPLE THINKS THEY KNOW TO MANY THINGS!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pion1122 (talk • contribs) 14:28, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing google gives nothing about the first kid William Cavendish...not a single word...so what does it mean? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pion1122 (talk • contribs) 14:36, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop doing this, it's incredibly tiresome. There is no information on William Cavendish because he goes by his courtesy title, Lord Burlington. Try googling Bill Burlington.Phettyplace (talk) 17:11, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Renouncing his peerage[edit]

I don't know how his Grace the Duke of Devonshire was proposing to renounce his peerage, given that the Peerage Act 1963 only allows a person inheriting a hereditary peerage to disclaim within twelve months of their succession, the provisions allowing greater freedom to disclaim peerages were removed from the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 before it got Royal Assent (and wouldn't have applied to the present Duke in the form proposed), and the Leader's Group on Members Leaving the House of Lords only recommends that members be allowed to retire from the House, not to give up their Peerage. Sam Blacketer (talk) 22:58, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You have a good point, but the error may be ours and not that of the Duke. This appears to be the original source... currently we link to a blog post containing responses from an Earl. In any event, what he seems to have said would apply only if he's removed from the House of Lords, so your thought about retiring wouldn't really apply. And he seems to be saying just that he'd stop using the title himself and simply be known as Peregrine Cavendish. I don't suppose he'd have any trouble doing that. Anyway, the key point is that he doesn't seem to use the phrase "renounce". In terms of the legal status, he only mentions a "new passport". The pdf linked here suggests that titles should be entered "for holders who use their title as part of their name for all purposes". I suppose he could get a new passport without the title.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 10:20, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Photo?[edit]

I'm a bit surprised that there's no photo of the current duke on the page. Surely, there has been something published that can be used legally? --Michael K SmithTalk 12:38, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 3 December 2011[edit]

In the 'Family' section, the link for Amanda Heywood-Lonsdale comes straight back to this page. I suggest unlinking it.

213.246.92.141 (talk) 16:38, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not done: There's nothing inherently wrong with that, see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking#Redirects. At some point, an article dealing specifically with Amanda Heywood-Lonsdale may well get created. --Redrose64 (talk) 16:57, 3 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Stoker"[edit]

Apparently, the Duke uses the nickname "Stoker" as a given name.[3][4] I am going to note this in the article. Should we, according to common name policy, consider the article's title? DBD 21:46, 14 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I see you went ahead and moved the article without actually starting a discussion on the matter. I'm not going to move it back, but I think it should have been discussed first. Tad Lincoln (talk) 21:09, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Eviction of family...[edit]

sorry, but i'm very new to this. is this article

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2297210/Duke-Devonshire-evicts-farmer-family-worked-estate-1830--rent-day-late.html

relevant as a reference? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.145.26.80 (talk) 11:40, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Peregrine Cavendish, 12th Duke of Devonshire. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:10, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Peregrine Cavendish, 12th Duke of Devonshire. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:20, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Peregrine_Cavendish,_12th_Duke_of_Devonshire&oldid=1206954308"