Talk:Iain Moncreiffe

message: I have to agree with the restoration -- the final paragraph was extremely interesting. I don't think it's beneath us to flesh somebody out, give him a little character, as long as its written in as NPOV way as possible. I've heard of Sir Iain before, but I never felt I knew anything about him until now! Doops 19:39, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: : A self-confessed incorrigible snob, he took silk relatively late in his career, because very few barristers specialised in heraldic matters and he wished to highlight the importance of this field of speciality.
What does this mean?  Did silk disqualify him from acting as a barrister, or what?  —Tamfang 23:23, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good question, Tam. I don't know either.--Eva bd 17:00, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I likewise assume that's what "took silk" means; but I'm in the dark about why either snobbery or a desire to highlight the specialty would motivate him to do so late. —Tamfang (talk) 00:56, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  sequiturne? 

message: I have acquired a copy of "Royal Highness: Ancestry of the royal child" by Sir Iain. No where in the book does he mention ANY sources. Can anyone attest to its reliability as a secondary or subsequent source for the purpose of enriching Wikipedia articles? 
Any advice would be appreciated. Paul Roberton (talk) 16:29, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a reliable secondary source, on Sir Iain's authority. If it conflicts with other reliable sources, the fact that it has no other authority will weigh against it; but not much. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 16:38, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Royal Highness: Ancestry of the royal child" 

message: : The baronetcy derived from the feudal barony of Moncreiffe, near Perth, Scotland. {Not so - a Scottish feudal barony and a baronetcy are very different. The barony of Moncreiffe descends from an original grant to Sir Thomas Moncreiffe of that Ilk (b. 1626) created 1st Baronet Moncreiffe in the Baronetcy of Nova Scotia on 30 November 1685 (REF. Burke's Peerage, Baronetage & Knightage, 107th edition, 2003, vol 1, page 1337) for whom two feudal baronies were united - Moncreiffe and Easter Moncreiffe - the elder of which dates back to the 1400s when Malcolm Moncreiffe of that Ilk received a charter incorporating his various estates into one free Barony of Moncreiffe.}
The passage in braces was just added by User:Bdurie; I removed it along with the sentence objected-to.  Improvements are invited. —Tamfang (talk) 00:50, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  the barony and the baronetcy 

message: ...of that Ilk is Scots for "of the same [place]", since his estate was Moncreiffe Island itself
This section is incorrect in describing 'of that Ilk' as a territorial designation. It instead is a descriptor used by many chiefs of the name and arms of clans. Rather than using 'Moncreiffe of Moncreiffe' as some do, Moncreiffe of that Ilk means 'Moncreiffe of the same [surname]'. ShroudedEdge (talk) 11:43, 19 July 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless I have severely misunderstood something, Name of Name is a territorial designation (though not of the kind that goes with a peerage or baronetcy).  "Drummond of Megginch" is that Drummond who owns the estate Megginch.  "Moncreiffe of Moncreiffe" is that Moncreiffe who owns the estate Moncreiffe.  Many clan chiefs have this form, but not all (e.g. Cameron of Lochiel). —Tamfang (talk) 09:07, 9 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  'of that Ilk' 

message: :
Is that last Sir correct?  I am not aware that he had a knighthood before he succeeded as chief and baronet. —Tamfang (talk) 22:53, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sir, Sir