User talk:George Burgess

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Other officers who could be women but are not (PM, for example) do not receive a special mention in the ladies' order of precedence. I fail to see why the LHC should be treated differently. -- Emsworth 19:56, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] British Civil Service

What is the "various titles" mean? Could you list titles? Reply here please.--212.100.250.209 17:29, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

"Various titles" means just that. Unlike main grades such as Assistant Secretary or Under Secretary, there was no generic title for posts at this level. Grade 4 posts tend to be rare and specialised, existing in specialised areas such as scientists, lawyers, economists or where an unusually large or high profile division merited a higher grade for its head. Not all departments use the new SCS equivalent Band 1A.--George Burgess 11:17, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sorry to be persistent, but for example? This page (scroll down to "Temporary Secretary") seems to think that Temporary Secretary is one of the names. Also, under "Civil Service" on that page, it thinks that below Principal comes Assistant Principal. Finally, why do no "ranks" below Principal have grade numbers?--62.253.64.17 16:23, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I have never come across a Temporary Secretary, and can find no reference to that grade in any source other than the "Yes Minister" page you refer to. The grade of "Assistant Principal" did exist some years ago (at the time that the "Yes Minister" programmes were first broadcast), as part of the Fast Stream programme to develop around 100 graduate entrants each year. By the early 90's when I joined the Civil Service it had been replaced by grades of Administration Trainee and Higher Executive Officer (Development) [I will add material to the page describing the Fast Stream programme]. The Grades numbered 1 to 7 were part of what was known as the "Open Structure" and were managed nationwide, whilst those below were delegated to individual departments. The boundary between national/local control has now moved up so that only those in the Senior Civil Service are managed nationally. Below the SCS, departments now do their own thing - in the Scottish Executive for example, the old grades from AA to Senior Principal/Grade 6 have now become A1,A2,A3,A4,B1,B2,B3,C1,C2 and C3. The table is a simplification of structures that have evolved over the last 150 years. Until the 1970's, there was a split between Administrative and Executive grades, and there existed a grade of Chief Executive Officer at the same level as Principal - to have a "CEO" half way up the pecking order must have caused great confusion, rather like the many grades of Secretary, none of whom could type.--George Burgess 11:38, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks awfully for your help.--213.18.248.27 12:36, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sculptors in ordinary

Nice job adding bios for Sculptor in Ordinary for Scotland. I mostly pieced the list together this morning from google, but I'm not satisfied that it's comprehensive (and I assumed that holders keep the office until death, rather than knowing this for sure). Do you know of any official resource that lists holders? Also, is there an equivalent SiO for England? -- John Fader (talk | contribs) 22:09, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I moved the Sculptor article to Sculptor in Ordinary for Scotland and now moved the similarly named Botanist, Scotland to the title given in the text. But these articles also need a category of some kind, such as Category:Royal Household of Scotland, perhaps? -- Uppland 23:17, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I can't speak for botanist, but I think a category is unnecessary for Sculptor. As there's only five HMSiOfSs, Category:Scottish sculptors should suffice. -- John Fader (talk | contribs) 23:31, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC) Ignore me, it's late and I'm stupid. -- John Fader (talk | contribs) 23:47, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Andes

Hi George - you just linked Cerro Potosí in the Andes article for a mountain in Bolivia; but the mountain at the page linked to is a different mountain of the same name in Mexico; the Bolivian one will need a new page, something like Cerro Potosí (Bolivia). I don't know anything about the Bolivian peak so won't start any article myself. The Mexican one will also need a disambig line adding. - MPF 22:06, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] List of MPs

Hi there, I noticed you've manged to fill in MPs elected in the UK general election, 1966, I was wondering where you got the data from -- Joolz 8 July 2005 13:04 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the response, I'll add it as a reference -- Joolz 8 July 2005 13:41 (UTC)

[edit] Scottish Executive

Hi George. My understanding was this: The Scottish Executive uses those arms as is printed on all Scottish Acts here, as do UK Acts feature the British Government arms on Acts here. The difference between the Royal Coat of Arms for Scotland and the Scottish Executive's arms is the helm is present on one and not the other, just as is the difference between the Royal Coat of Arms of the United Kingdom and the British Government's Arms. Craigy (talk) 12:48, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

UK Arms (with helm)

UK Government Arms (no helm)

Arms for Scotland (with helm)

Scottish Executive Arms (no helm)
Jumping in few months later, lemme just say that it's wrong to call either set of arms the "government's arms." They're the royal arms, period. Heraldically speaking, the omission of helm and crest is a purely discretionary decision anybody can make when displaying his/her arms. Now it's possible that the govt & scottish executive choose to omit those helms on purpose, as a way of signalling that they're not the queen; it could have some sort of symbolic meaning. But it has no heraldic meaning. Doops | talk 03:45, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Secretary to the Treasury

Just a note to say that I have seen your recent additions to Secretary to the Treasury and I am quite impressed: do you have access to a comprehensive list? One question: is it possible to add "from" and "to" dates from your source? For example, "Parliamentary Secretaries to the Treasury, 1852–present" currently has:

Assuming they are all consecutive not concurrent, they would be:

But thanks again for your excellent additions. -- ALoan (Talk) 17:36, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Lord Justice General

My apologies. I did not mean to present my position as being "more correct" it is just that I (wrongly) assumed that given that the Lord Justice General was addressed as Lord President during the Scottish Parliament opening and the induction of the new First Minister (for the Great Seal) that he was now Lord President in the order of precedence... Davidkinnen 19:36, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Procurator Fiscal

I hadn't noticed the message, but I had created a Procurator Fiscal page... or at least it should have been created. Davidkinnen 18:25, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Scottish Wikipedians' notice board

Hi. Here is a new notice board that may be of interest. Here's shortcut: WP:SCOWNB.

Ta re Scots law info.--Mais oui! 19:05, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] List of prizes, medals, and awards

Hi, your edits to this page state that Sweden awards the order of the "Porth star". Is this a typo ? Perhaps you meant North star ? Manik Raina 06:31, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Order of Victoria and Albert

You added to the Order of Victoria and Albert page that no awards were given out after the death of Queen Victoria. According to the Titles_and_Honours_of_Queen_Elizabeth_II she became the Sovereign of the Order in 1952. Is this just because the order was never officially scrapped ? Dowew 06:47, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Are you certain the order didn't give any privilages, even post-nominal letters ? I only ask because I was research the former Governor General's of Canada and one of the pages for the vice-regal consort Maud Petty-FitzMaurice, Marchioness of Lansdowne lists the postnominals VA, although it also lists the Order of St. John which is obviously incorrect. Dowew 11:19, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Members of the Order were entitled to use the post-nominal letters VA, but this is neither a rank nor a title - rather like the Order of the Companions of Honour. I will add a reference to the post-nominal letters to the article.--George Burgess 13:59, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Scotland- sewel motions

I am surprised that employment protection is not a devolved matter. It does explain the lack of a sewel motion though. I have just removed the Private Members Bill sentence then, since it is not really relevant now. Thanks for updating me. Astrotrain 22:55, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dumbarton Burghs

I did restore most of the deleted material, but it may be both articles need some improvement. I thought it was a bad merge with Dumbarton (UK Parliament constituency) since, in spite of similar names, they did not correspond very closely with each other, althought they did both include the town of Dumbarton the majority of the one constituency was not in the other, and vice versa, although this might not be obvious to anyone who does not know the geography of the area. PatGallacher 19:37, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Many thanks for your note and correction. You're quite right that I made a simple mistake on the Stirling Burghs infobox. Best wishes, Warofdreams talk 10:12, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lord Hacking

Hello, do you have a source on Lord Hacking being created a baronet? Mackensen (talk) 00:26, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please check your WP:NA entry

Greetings, editor! Your name appears on Wikipedia:List of non-admins with high edit counts. If you have not done so lately, please take a look at that page and check your listing to be sure that following the particulars are correct:

  1. If you are an admin, please remove your name from the list.
  2. If you are currently interested in being considered for adminship, please be sure your name is in bold; if you are opposed to being considered for adminship, please cross out your name (but do not delete it, as it will automatically be re-added in the next page update).
  3. Please check to see if you are in the right category for classification by number of edits.

Thank you, and have a wiki wiki day! BDAbramson T 04:07, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Secretary (disambiguation)

I have replied to your note at my Talk page. Ta.--Mais oui! 15:17, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Charles Arthur Uryan Rhys, 8th Baron Dynevor

Good afternoon. I was just wondering what the thinking was behind your latest change to the OBE link in Charles Arthur Uryan Rhys, 8th Baron Dynevor. I did not want to revert that change as there may be a good reason that I've missed. Avalon 02:37, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I was insufficiently clear. I agree with your intent. However, if you look at the page you appear to have deleted the pipe "|" so as to link to Order of the British EmpireOBE. I assumed and still assume that this is a simple error that anyone might make. However, I just thought I'd check before I changed it. Avalon 13:02, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Scottish Royal Household

Sorry about that. I thought that the Scottish Lord High Constable of Scotland and so forth were directly equivalent to the English Great Officers of State which have the same names (which are not in the Household), which people keep confusing with the English Household officers (which have similar names). I will revert my edits and then leave Scotland alone. Thanks for pointing that out. Richard75 19:01, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Marchmont Herald

Thanks for your additions to the Scottish heraldry pages. Well done.--Evadb 07:28, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WatchlistBot

My bot is tagging all articles (with supervision, since some subcategories are not actually about exonumia) under Category:Exonumia with {{Exonumianotice}}, just as basically all articles under Category:Numismatics are tagged with {{Numismaticnotice}}. This helps people find the project, and allows us to create a project watchlist. Is Dean of the Thistle not exonumia? Exonumia is not my area of expertise, so if you have some advice about what to tag and what to skip, I'd appreciate it. Ingrid 13:09, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of Baronetcies

You addition of many Baronetcies of Nova Scotia is wonderful, but they should be on the List of Baronetcies article, not on the Baronetage of Nova Scotia article, which is meant to be only extant (or dormant) baronetcies (look at Baronetage of the United Kingdom or Baronetage of England for example). The List of baronetcies article is meant to have all baronetcies ever created on, and all your work would be a wonderful addition. --Berks105 09:50, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I see nothing on the Baronetage of Nova Scotia page to indicate that it should only include extant or dormant baronetcies, nor that the List of Baronetcies should include extant, dormant and extinct. If anything, it should be the other way round, with the fuller listing on the separate pages (England, Nova Scotia etc.) and only the extant (and possibly dormant) ones on the List of Baronetcies page, which is already at 150KB and pretty unwieldy. The intention behind my removal of the limited entries on the List of Baronetcies page was to draw the reader to the fuller, albeit still incomplete, information on the Nova Scotia page. I'll leave it to others to decide what goes where, and concentrate on getting the basic information onto the Nova Scotia page as time and enthusiasm permit.--George Burgess 13:42, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

This is the opening line of the List of Baronetcies page "This page lists all baronetcies, extant, extinct, dormant (D), unproven (U), under review (R), abeyant, or forfeit, in the baronetages of England, Nova Scotia, Great Britain, Ireland and the United Kingdom". Whether it should be the other way round is not the point, look at the other Baronetage pages, listed are only the extant ones; a similar system is in place for the Peerages page. --Berks105 13:47, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I have now arranged the pages so they are set out how they should the others are, its best they all follow the same pattern. Baronetage of Nova Scotia now only has extant baronetcies on (as do the other baronetage pages), while the List of baronetcies page has all your work on all Nova Scotia baronetcies on it (in numberical order not alphatical but otherwise exactly the same). --Berks105 20:36, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

The List of baronetcies page may be intended to list "all" baronetcies, but at the moment it clearly does not. While it was obvious from the previous Baronetage of Nova Scotia page that the list only covered from A to H, the new arrangement by year disguises that. Some warning needs to be added to make it clear that the lists are only partial.--George Burgess 21:35, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I have now made it clear on the List of baronetcies page that it does not currently contain all baronetcies. Hopefully at some point it will! --Berks105 15:40, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Age of Consent in Scotland

OK, I reintroduced the stuff about the Sewel convention. I was probably a little hasty in removing it so I apologise. Does my revision look OK to you now?

[edit] High Constable

Well the ceremonial itself uses High Constable of Scotland.Alci12 21:47, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] MPs elected in the United Kingdom general election, 1924

For some reason I ended up at this page and saw that there seems to be no Conservatives and lots of Unionist MPs, was this a temporary name change or is something amiss? (I forgot to sign) Rex the first talk | contribs 23:21, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Re Unionist v Conservative. The party designation is as given in the source quoted, a contemporary almanac. This description is probably influenced by the fact that the Conservative organisation in Scotland at the time was the Scottish Unionist Party rather than the Conservative Party as in England. That the Almanac has picked up contemporary Scottish terminology rather than that currently used (see reference at Conservative Party (UK) to the Party's formal title and the common description of it and its allies as "Unionist" during the early part of the 20th century) is simply a reflection of its Scottish origin. There is therefore no problem with the article - references to Unionist can be interpreted as Conservative if you wish.--George Burgess 20:58, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Cheers, I know nothing about it but saw that in both elections either side (1929 and 1923) there was no Unionist. Thanks for your reply! Rex the first talk | contribs 09:37, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Attorney General for Ireland

Could you double-check your source for "R. Green", supposedly appointed September 21, 1842? The date is out of sequence, and I suspect there's confusion with Richard Wilson Greene, Solicitor-General for Ireland November 1, 1842. Thanks. Choess 23:26, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Names and dates were simply taken from Conservative Government 1841-1846, where the dates are also out of sequence. The source for that is given as C. Cook and B. Keith, British Historical Facts 1830-1900, but I do not have access to that publication.George Burgess 09:58, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RE:Dick Douglas

Hi George. Thanks for that, it was actually another Richard Douglas that was listed and I added the CB to the incorrect one. Thanks Craigy (talk) 20:46, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lord Advocate

Lahta math. I haven't amended them to that header as judges, but as Law Officers. I imagined the header for all those offices, that are connected to the judicial system - would it maybe be better to rename it from 'Judiciary Offices' to 'Law Offices' ? Phoe 20:02, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Conservative or Unionist party tags in Scotland

Just added this discussion to the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject UK Parliament constituencies page. Any input from yourself would be greaty appreciated. Thanks. Galloglass 12:14, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Goronwy Roberts

Sorry, I should have given warning that I was in the process of merging the two articles before I did the redirect. Deb 22:05, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Notice

An automated review of content on Wikipedia has discovered that your February 2006 contributions to the article on Sir John Skene were copied from another website. They have been removed. Please keep in mind that doing so is a copyright infringement and not acceptable on Wikipedia.

If you are aware of any other instances in which you may have done this, please bring them to our attention so that the situation can be remedied. DS 16:18, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

  • As requested, you may wish to examine this page (www.wikipedia-watch.org/plagiarism/1638.html). DS 18:36, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Labour Government 1945-1951

Sorry, multiple unbalanced brackets are automatically flagged up as possible vandalism, and there are too many pages vandalized each day for every one to be edited by hand to correct them if they are not malisious.

perfectblue 18:06, 11 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Jesse Collings

I'm really not trying to irritate anyone - sorry if you felt that tagging a new article approriately is annoying. In reality, I wouldn't normally do it, but I was testing my new program, NPWatcher, and I had to find something to tag, and this article was the first I look at. Hope you understand - Martinp23 17:28, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lord Clyde

Hi, since you have created the articles about James Clyde, Lord Clyde and James Clyde, Lord Clyde (1863-1944), I would like to ask you, whether it would not be better to disambiguate them by their second name? (James Latham Clyde, Lord Clyde and James Avon Clyde, Lord Clyde). This would also help to avoid confusions with James Clyde, Baron Clyde. Greetings ~~ Phoe talk 09:15, 22 November 2006 (UTC) ~~

Heya, for your information: the moves are done, the links are corrected and I have redirected James Clyde, Lord Clyde to the disambiguation page James Clyde. Greetings and thanks for the expansion. ~~ Phoe talk 16:42, 27 November 2006 (UTC) ~~

[edit] Privy Seal

In May you placed a succession stub on Richard Maitland. I have not looked it up but it seems unlikely to me that it is correct. It states that after Richard Maitland the next Keeper of the Privy Seal was the Duke of Lauderdale. But surely the gap is too great? Is someone missing here. David Lauder 16:48, 11 December 2006 (UTC).

I see Kittybrewster has corrected that. Thanks. David Lauder 09:59, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lord Justice General

I am trying, with some difficulty, to find when the post of Lord Justice General was formally constituted. Can you offer me a book source? David Lauder 09:57, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../g/e/o/User_talk%7EGeorge_Burgess_9067.html"