Talk:William Thomas (MP for Old Sarum and Downton)

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

William was MP[edit]

This William Thomas is identified, on his biography in the History of Parliament Online in the volume for 1509-58, with the William Thomas who was MP for Old Sarum and Downton. I have discovered a separate stub article William Thomas (died 1554). I am proposing to add the details to this page, with citation to the HOP article.Cloptonson (talk) 19:15, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 24 December 2022[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: page moved to William Thomas (MP for Old Sarum and Downton). Arbitrarily0 (talk) 13:58, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]


William Thomas (scholar)William Thomas (died 1554) – The current title is ambiguous with a half dozen other scholars. Additionally, I don't know that there is a "dominant qualifier" (as the term is used by WP:NCPDAB) for this subject as he appears to be just as notable as a politician and courtier. (If moved, William Thomas (scholar) will need to be redirected to William Thomas and the links updated accordingly.) Graham (talk) 04:13, 22 December 2022 (UTC) This is a contested technical request (permalink). Polyamorph (talk) 09:36, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Content below copied from WP:RM/TR:
  • @Graham11: It looks like (from the William Thomas dab list) that (scholar, died 1554) might be a better dab for this. Would that be acceptable? UtherSRG (talk) 11:54, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @UtherSRG: Is "scholar" the dominant qualifier here, or is the subject equally (or perhaps more) notable for his political role? (WP:NCPDAB provides, For historical figures for whom there is no dominant qualifier (at least no practical one), the descriptor may be omitted in favour of a single use of the date of birth or death.) Graham (talk) 20:30, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    There are several qualifiers which could be used for this person, year of birth is sometimes regarded as a last resort, at any rate I don't think this is uncontroversial. PatGallacher (talk) 13:42, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    What do you suggest, PatGallacher? Graham (talk) 20:30, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.