Talk:Lord President of the Council

I am right in thinking the plural of Lord President is Lords President, aren't I? Mothers-in-law and so on... Harris 20:39, 14 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Nope. In this case the head-word of the noun phrase is "President", with "Lord" being an adjective signifying how important this particular President is. (Mothers-in-law are mothers, but Lord Presidents are Presidents, not Lords. [They may also be Lords, but that's incidental to the matter of them being Lord Presidents.]) Proteus (Talk) 00:19, 15 Oct 2004 (UTC)

That makes sense. I'll get me coat. Harris 13:51, 16 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hmm...just realized the Lord Granville died in January 1763, while Bedford apparently didn't become Lord President until December Septemberg - anyone have handy anything which would note who (if anyone) filled in in the interim? I'll be able to look it up at some point, but not immediately. john k 21:37, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

On looking it up, it would appear that the post was empty between Granville's death and Bedford's appointment. 130.91.119.144 17:57, 24 February 2006 (UTC) [That was me. john k 17:58, 24 February 2006 (UTC)]

Category

Someone's moved Category:Lord Presidents of the Council to (the incorrect, as per the discussion above) Category:Lords President of the Council, but I have no idea how category renaming works. I'm a bit annoyed that it works in a way that doesn't even bother checking the talk page of the associated article, but hey. Proteus (Talk) 16:14, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey, don't be too mad ... I have a few dozen category renamings to feed to my bot each day. It's simply impractical to full check each one; I just trust the Cfd people to feed my bot the right information. --Cyde↔Weys 13:09, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Is there anything to stop us moving it back? --Harris 17:15, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually I'm not sure "Lord Presidents" is correct. Apart from its appearance in a parliamentary report [1], "Lords President of the Council" is the form used by two respectable publications that carefully distinguish singular and plural forms, [2] and [3]. The only published source for Lord Presidents I can find online is a reprint of an historical book that seems somewhat out of date.--Lo2u 22:17, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

The category was changed to "Lords President", but for some reason it has been changed back... Ardric47 23:09, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, someone asked me to change it back claiming that "Lord Presidents" was correct ... gahhh ... okay, here's what's going to happen. I'm going to be doing other stuff for a few days, and once you guys hammer this out here, leave me a message on my talk page and I'll have Cydebot go through again and make sure everything is perfect. --Cyde↔Weys 15:54, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Early office holders

I've been working on the list of office holders and can't seem to find a source on Henry FitzAlan, 19th Earl of Arundel holding the office at any point. His Wikipedia page suggests he was a prominent member of the Tudor court but nothing specific about holding the title. I've taken him out of the list, but if there are sources to verify him holding the position it would be pertinent to put him back in.

Another issue is that a lot of the early office holders don't have any information in the ministerial portfolio column— it may be helpful to broaden the scope here to include other offices appointed by the Crown. Many of the early Lord Presidents concurrently served as Lord-Lieutenants and custodes rotulorum for multiple counties; I think this information would be an interesting addition, but more importantly helps demonstrate the evolution of this sinecure office and to whom it was granted. Furthermore, column after column of blankspace is honestly very boring visually. Unless there are any strong objections I'll work on this shortly. ToastButterToast (talk) 10:30, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

mistake

Viscount Whitelaw never served as Deputy Prime Minister; he was Home Secretary, Deputy Conservative Party Leader and then Lord President; DPM was not reconstituted until Howe in '88, at which time Thatcher's press secretary ridiculed the significance of the office to the press. 98.10.165.90 (talk) 17:17, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Separately, I don't believe that the statement that Andrea Leadsom's appointment was the first in some time where the post holder was not a full Cabinet member is correct. Struggling to find a good online source, but I believe the same was true of her two immediate predecessors, Chris Grayling and David Lidington. Moreover, I think it's been true of all of her successors to date too, so the focus on Leadsom seems undue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.96.73.148 (talk) 14:42, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Salary?

Does this position come with an income? Cassandra

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Robert Carr2.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 04:24, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Robert Carr2.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 13:07, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Table numbering

Please stop all edit warring on this article and explain gain consensus on the matter. Sun Creator^(talk) 05:20, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

You are prolonging the alleged edit war and 3RR excuses efforts to prevent sockpuppetry. I'd like to ask ‎FollowTheTortoise to join us if they are willing to oblige and, if not, then I would refer to their comments at Talk:Chief Secretary to the Treasury‎ as that was one of several articles in which this "new member" Iolanda1 has attempted to introduce numbering of British po‎litical officeholders. This has already been attempted by another account at the various prime minister articles and stopped by sysops. There is an SPI case which admittedly needs to be fully stated. No Great Shaker (talk) 09:12, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the tag. To reiterate my comment from Talk:Chief Secretary to the Treasury‎, I don't think that we should number UK political office holders for two reasons:

• holders of UK political offices, unlike in the US, for instance, are very rarely referred to as the xth holder of their office in the press and more generally and
• for some UK political offices, it is difficult to work out who the first office holder was and thus what number designation the current holder should be given (for example, the Chancellor of the Exchequer). Therefore, if we were to number office holders, then this could lead to disparity across pages that I don't think would be satisfactory.

All the best, FollowTheTortoise (talk) 12:13, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Thank you again, FTT. Best wishes and stay safe. No Great Shaker (talk) 12:16, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

I agree with No Great Shaker (talk · contribs)'s point here - lists of British office holders are generally not numbered, because it's very hard to do in any kind of accurate way. Ultimately what this comes down to is the same standard that applies to any content on Wikipedia - can the content be attributed to a reliable source? I am not aware of one for this sort of information, and so the numbering needs to go. ninety:one 15:13, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the replies. I've removed the Table numbering. Sun Creator^(talk) 00:50, 21 February 2021 (UTC)