This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hey...I've added the John Brooke-Little article to the list for peer review. Any of you contributors are welcome to make additions to the discussions. I know he's not a Scottish herald, but your input is valued.-- Evadb 10:16, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Somewhere I wonder if we should mentioned that the Court of Claims at the 1953 coronation of QEII refused the right of the LL to the title LL "KofA" Alci12 15:18, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
"Claim of Lyon King of Arms: To be assigned the usual place in the Procession and at the Ceremony pertaining to his office and permitted to perform its duties as heretofore or as may be on the present occasion found appropriate
The Lord Chancellor: On these claims appearance has been dispensed with. The Court adjudges that the right of the respective claimants to be present be allowed but that no duties be assigned by this Court."
I heard a rumor that the Lord Lyon sent someone down to a Scottish airport to remove a coat of arms from the tail of a British Airways jet; he felt BA was using it inappropriately. Anyone know if there is any truth to this? -- Jfruh ( talk) 02:57, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Unlike the English Kings of Arms, he does not need permission from the Earl Marshal. I think this is doubly unclear. "He" should be "Lord Lyon" (I think), but I have no idea what he does not need permission for (issue arms, render judgment, whatever). OtherDave ( talk) 16:09, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
The introduction has The post was formerly held by an important nobleman, whose functions were in practice carried out by his assistant, the Lyon-Depute.
but the list of office-holders has no important noblemen that I can see. If any of these are Lyon-Depute it should be noted. Gordon Findlay ( talk) 05:23, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
What is the evidence that the "Court of Lord Lyon", insofar as that term refers to the office and functions of a UK government official, has designated this website as the Court's official website? It is unusual, if not unique, for an office whose authority derives from being part of and operated by government to use a " .com" domain name -- which usually denotes a privately owned, non-governmental, commercial site. Even if not unique, how do we know that this particular website (which is being cited as a reliable source for various allegations in Wikipedia articles) has been designated as the official online source of the Court's and/or Lord Lyon's communications? Do the courts or offices of the other kings-of-arms and official UK heralds have similar websites with similar domain names? Is this website funded from the Lord Lyon's governmental budget? How does it qualify as a reliable source for Wikipedia purposes? FactStraight ( talk) 03:58, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Hey...I've added the John Brooke-Little article to the list for peer review. Any of you contributors are welcome to make additions to the discussions. I know he's not a Scottish herald, but your input is valued.-- Evadb 10:16, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Somewhere I wonder if we should mentioned that the Court of Claims at the 1953 coronation of QEII refused the right of the LL to the title LL "KofA" Alci12 15:18, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
"Claim of Lyon King of Arms: To be assigned the usual place in the Procession and at the Ceremony pertaining to his office and permitted to perform its duties as heretofore or as may be on the present occasion found appropriate
The Lord Chancellor: On these claims appearance has been dispensed with. The Court adjudges that the right of the respective claimants to be present be allowed but that no duties be assigned by this Court."
I heard a rumor that the Lord Lyon sent someone down to a Scottish airport to remove a coat of arms from the tail of a British Airways jet; he felt BA was using it inappropriately. Anyone know if there is any truth to this? -- Jfruh ( talk) 02:57, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Unlike the English Kings of Arms, he does not need permission from the Earl Marshal. I think this is doubly unclear. "He" should be "Lord Lyon" (I think), but I have no idea what he does not need permission for (issue arms, render judgment, whatever). OtherDave ( talk) 16:09, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
The introduction has The post was formerly held by an important nobleman, whose functions were in practice carried out by his assistant, the Lyon-Depute.
but the list of office-holders has no important noblemen that I can see. If any of these are Lyon-Depute it should be noted. Gordon Findlay ( talk) 05:23, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
What is the evidence that the "Court of Lord Lyon", insofar as that term refers to the office and functions of a UK government official, has designated this website as the Court's official website? It is unusual, if not unique, for an office whose authority derives from being part of and operated by government to use a " .com" domain name -- which usually denotes a privately owned, non-governmental, commercial site. Even if not unique, how do we know that this particular website (which is being cited as a reliable source for various allegations in Wikipedia articles) has been designated as the official online source of the Court's and/or Lord Lyon's communications? Do the courts or offices of the other kings-of-arms and official UK heralds have similar websites with similar domain names? Is this website funded from the Lord Lyon's governmental budget? How does it qualify as a reliable source for Wikipedia purposes? FactStraight ( talk) 03:58, 30 August 2013 (UTC)