Talk:Kathleen Cavendish, Marchioness of Hartington

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

Neutrality tag...[edit]

...removed until whoever inserted it can actually be bothered to write here about why they dispute the neutrality.BaseTurnComplete (talk) 23:32, 29 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Title[edit]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Peerage#Pages on peerages states the following:

"A peer's article should be at "Name, (Ordinal) Rank (of) Title"…except in cases where the title is never (or hardly ever) used."

It further states:

"Wives of peers, when the title is used in the article name (the same rules apply as for substantive peers as to whether it should be), should have their married surnames."

As with Bertrand Russell, whose article is at that name rather than "Bertrand Russell, 3rd Earl Russell", this article should be at Kathleen Kennedy Cavendish. She was always known as Kathleen or "Kick" Kennedy and never as Lady Cavendish. I will move it there shortly if there are no substantive objections. Mike R (talk) 14:52, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I certainly object to "Kathleen Kennedy Cavendish", as you've just said she was known as "Kathleen Kennedy", and it was never her name. (And it's hardly surprising she wasn't known as "Lady Cavendish", since she was Lady Hartington.) Proteus (Talk) 08:28, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that the title of this article is as it is to conform to the WikiProject rule, "Wives of peers, when the title is used in the article name, should have their married surnames." I believe, however, that this rule is unprecented, arbitrary, and that it diverges unreasonably from the usual practice of encyclopedists writing about history.

Wives of titled men are always listed by the maiden names in works of historical reference. That's because the antecedents and connections of women who marry titled noblemen and royals are of great historical and political import, and for this reason, the wives of the nobility and of royalty, too, have always and everywhere been referred to by the name of their father's family, as for example (historically speaking) "Lady Diana Spencer, Princess of Wales", (not "Diana Windsor, Princess of Wales"). Or "Lady Jane Grey, the Nine Days' Queen", instead of "Lady Jane Dudley", which was her married name.)

If the rule should stand, then it should also be applied to royalty, too, and then we would need to change the names listed in the entries for the six wives of King Henry VIII of England from:

1. Catherine of Aragon, Queen of England 2. Anne Boleyn, Queen of England 3. Jane Seymour, Queen of England 4. Anne of Cleves, Queen of England 5. Catherine Howard, Queen of England 6. Catherine Parr, Queen of England

to:

1. Catherine Tudor, Queen of England 2. Anne Tudor, Queen of England 3. Jane Tudor, Queen of England 4. Anne Tudor, Queen of England 5. Catherine Tudor, Queen of England 6. Catherine Tudor, Queen of England

I am entering these comments also on the Wikiproject Page. I hope we can fix this.

Ivain (talk) 17:19, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

17:18, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Article Title[edit]

This article should be titled "Kathleen Kennedy", this is her common name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.95.93.71 (talk) 04:54, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are three other Kathleen Kennedys on Wikipedia (well to be technical, one is Kathleen Kennedy Townsend), which is why Kathleen Kennedy points to a disambiguation page, on which there is a link to this page, so if someone were to search Kathleen Kennedy, they'd find her easily. Kathleen Cavendish, Marchioness of Hartington is her proper title and should remain the title of the article. Montauk Daisy (talk) 09:13, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support comments by Montauk Daisy article title should remain as is. MilborneOne (talk) 12:36, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If not "Kathleen Kennedy" or "Kathleen Kennedy Cavendish", I suggest "Kathleen Agnes Kennedy", "Kathleen A. Kennedy", or "Kathleen Kennedy (1920–1948)". The whole "Marchioness of Hartington" makes the article title unnecessarily lengthy since she was more commonly known under the Kennedy name. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 17:16, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree as comments from three years ago. MilborneOne (talk) 17:52, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What exactly makes the whole "Marchioness of Hartington" her "proper title", though? It certainly wasn't her common name. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 17:56, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have asked at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Peerage and Baronetage#Kathleen Cavendish, Marchioness of Hartington for some input to explain the naming convention. MilborneOne (talk) 18:19, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have come here in response to MilborneOne's request. I see no objection to the article being renamed "Kathleen Kennedy", if that is what reliable sources mostly call her. I know that American women have a habit of stringing their past and present surnames together, and good luck to them, but that is still quite alien to the British, and in my view the article on this lady should be called either by her name before she was married or by her married name. A confusion of surnames should surely not be built into the name of an article which includes a courtesy title. After her marriage, Kathleen Kennedy's name was her husband's. In society, she was "Kathleen Hartington", and to a reference work her name was "Kathleen Cavendish, Marchioness of Hartington". Her name did not change when her husband died. The question is surely about what we consider her "common name"? Moonraker (talk) 22:23, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The question is "what would be wrong with shortening the article title"? The whole "Marchioness of Hartington" just makes the title more lengthy than needed. If anything, she would've been "Kathleen Cavendish" and not "Hartington" in society since Billy's last name was Cavendish and not Hartington. Her common name is definitely Kennedy, yet MilborneOne opposes condensing the article title to include that, claiming it's not her "proper title" (which I don't exactly follow). XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 22:34, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nearly all possible permutations of the name redirect to here so I am not sure why it needs to change and because you dont like the length of the name that is not a reason to change it. Just to note that she would have never been called Kathleen Cavendish formerly or in any other way the nobility never use surnames but treat the titles as if they were surnames, she would have been called formerly the "Marchioness of Hartington" or informerly "Lady Hartington", after her husband died she was always refered to as "Kathleen, Marchiones of Hartington" as her sister-in-law had by then become the Marchioness of Hartington.MilborneOne (talk) 00:11, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It isn't so much me not liking the length as it is common name conflict. I rarely hear her referred to as "Marchioness of Hartington" or her husband Billy as "Marquess of Hartington". XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 00:27, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As I said only in formal documents, newspapers and the like called them Lord and Lady Hartington or used the formal title depending on context, certainly "Lady Hartington" throws up 3,000 odd results. MilborneOne (talk) 01:11, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
A quick Google search of "Lady Hartington" displayed more women than just Kathleen. As I mentioned, she is much more commonly known for being a Kennedy than being a Cavendish. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 03:51, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Religion[edit]

Did she convert to Anglicanism upon her marriage, or did she stay a Roman Catholic? --Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 20:34, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

She never converted. She remained a member of the RC church — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.77.127.106 (talk) 16:01, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Who is Townshend?[edit]

... mentioned in the "Death" section, without forename, link, or explanation -- Y not? 21:23, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

one would imagine it to be the Marquess Townshend 78.144.208.101 (talk) 02:07, 18 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Paris visit[edit]

In May 1948, Kathleen learned that her father would be traveling to Paris. In an effort to gain his consent for her upcoming plans to marry Fitzwilliam, she decided to fly to Paris to meet with her father... On May 13, 1948, Kennedy and Fitzwilliam were flying from Paris to the French Riviera for a vacation [fatal crash]

It doesn't say whether she met her father in Paris, and what his attitude was. Valetude (talk) 12:58, 8 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"her married partner"?[edit]

The last sentence of the second paragraph states "Kathleen died in a plane crash in 1948, flying to the south of France on holiday with her married partner The 8th Earl Fitzwilliam." The phrase "her married partner" is utterly confusing. In what way were they "married partners"? Were they married to each other? (Yes, I realize that they were not.) I presume that someone thought that "partner" was a useful term for referring to two people who were in some sort of romantic relationship, but it just raises more questions than it answers. I think it should be changed to something like "...with the 8th Earl Fitzwilliam, with whom she had become romantically involved". Thoughts? Bricology (talk) 07:17, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 1 November 2020[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: Not moved, finding consensus against 'Kathleen "Kick" Kennedy' and no consensus here for the alternative 'Kick Kennedy' (non-admin closure) BegbertBiggs (talk) 00:59, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Kathleen Cavendish, Marchioness of Hartington → Kathleen "Kick" Kennedy – I suggest that this is a case of "common name". She is far better known as JFK's sister than as a minor British aristocrat, and her death is regarded as part of the Kennedy curse. Also, she wasn't really a proper Marchioness, this is just a courtesy title, and she was only married for a few months before her husband was killed in the war. It might be nice to call her plain "Kathleen Kennedy", but we have two other people of this name on Wikipedia (her niece and the film producer) and it's not clear that she is primary. So using her well-known nickname seems like the best form of disambiguation. PatGallacher (talk) 11:48, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I oppose the suggested title. I have never seen such a format, and that may be due to WP:TSC advising against having quotation marks in article titles. If anything needs changing, why not simply Kick Kennedy? It redirects here. On the other hand, the sources cited in the article call her Kathleen Kennedy just as often as Kick Kennedy, and the courtesy title is then a natural disambiguation from the namesakes. Courtesy marchionesses are called marchionesses just the same. Interestingly, however, none of the sources cited here call her Kathleen Cavendish. Surtsicna (talk) 12:35, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose based on format, as explained by Surtsicna. Open to other suggestions though, as Pat does raise good points. (please Reply to icon mention me on reply; thanks!) Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 17:30, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Well, how about plain "Kick Kennedy" then? We could call her "Kathleen Kennedy, Marchioness of Hartington", but this would be an awkward hybrid, similar to "Prince Harry of Wales" which was eventually rejected. As a general rule we are prepared to use courtesy titles, but in a few borderline cases like this it could be a valid argument against using it. PatGallacher (talk) 20:34, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 21:21, 1 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per WP:NICKNAME: "Avoid ... adding a nickname ... in quotes ... between first and last name." — BarrelProof (talk) 15:44, 2 November 2020 (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.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:54, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kathleen_Cavendish,_Marchioness_of_Hartington&oldid=1206583159"