Difference between revisions of "Talk:Disgraced noble"
(more info needed here) |
|||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[[user:Westarctica | [[user:Westarctica]] - This article needs expanding to explain what happens to those who are merely life peers, not members of the hereditary nobility, whp become disgraced or disbarred. It also does not mention being stripped of public offices for disgraced noble-- while I assume these would be lost, the article does not say so and considering the seriousness of the act of disgracing, these things should probably be specified. You may also want to state what happens with regard to their coat of arms, if any, as well as to any orders to which they may belong. This might be phrased as, "A disgraced noble may only [display a coat of arms in such and such a way]" or "must display a coat of arms with such and such a mark on it," such as a debruisement, for example, though there are many ways to indicate this, some traditional European ones and many more not, and (perhaps?) is considered barred from membership in any Westactican noble orders to which he or she may have previously belonged (again, for example) though if any of these things is NOT the case, it is worth stating so-- either way, more specifics are needed here, and need to be broken down for hereditary vs life peers, since you have made that distinction (or else remove the distinction). [[User:Baron of Bastanchury|Baron of Bastanchury]] ([[User talk:Baron of Bastanchury|talk]]) 20:46, 20 April 2021 (UTC) |
Latest revision as of 20:46, 20 April 2021
user:Westarctica - This article needs expanding to explain what happens to those who are merely life peers, not members of the hereditary nobility, whp become disgraced or disbarred. It also does not mention being stripped of public offices for disgraced noble-- while I assume these would be lost, the article does not say so and considering the seriousness of the act of disgracing, these things should probably be specified. You may also want to state what happens with regard to their coat of arms, if any, as well as to any orders to which they may belong. This might be phrased as, "A disgraced noble may only [display a coat of arms in such and such a way]" or "must display a coat of arms with such and such a mark on it," such as a debruisement, for example, though there are many ways to indicate this, some traditional European ones and many more not, and (perhaps?) is considered barred from membership in any Westactican noble orders to which he or she may have previously belonged (again, for example) though if any of these things is NOT the case, it is worth stating so-- either way, more specifics are needed here, and need to be broken down for hereditary vs life peers, since you have made that distinction (or else remove the distinction). Baron of Bastanchury (talk) 20:46, 20 April 2021 (UTC)