Talk:Francis Fulford (born 1953)

Quotes

In keeping with style guidelines (Wikipedia:Profanity) I am amending the quotes to remove the asterisks. (Note that those in the programme titles are appropriate because they accurately name the shows.)

The third quote is unreferenced and appears to be due to a third person. Can someone correct this? It's a good quote

Also, the following link to a refernced article is broken, so I have removed it -- http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7-1205652_1,00.html Leberquesgue (talk) 23:05, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Untitled nobility

The article says "...they [the Fulfords] remain members of the untitled nobility, a specifically British social class."

This seems strange to me because untitled nobility is commonplace among continental nobility, but NOT among the British. People who would be members of untitled nobility on the continent are usually classed as gentry in the UK, not nobility. The Fulfords appear to predate the abolition of feudal tenure in England, prior to which their class would have been considered untitled nobility but we're going back centuries here.

My point is that the Fulfords do appear to be a remnant of untitled nobilty, but untitled nobility are a specifically un-British class, not the other way around.

121.73.7.84 (talk) 07:15, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Well they are armigers so that makes them noble in the eyes of the Crown. We would notmally refer to them as Landed Gentry but they are aristocracy or nobility all the same. I am surprised anyone is arguing about this.86.155.190.12 (talk) 22:18, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I partially agree with you in the sense that in a mainland European context having a coat of arms implies nobility. But in a British context a gentleman may have a coat of arms (be an armiger) yet he would not usually be regarded as a nobleman by British society. That is a status usually reserved for titled families. This is largely beside the point anyway. My original comment was the there's nothing specifically British about untitled nobility. Untitled nobility is commonplace in the European tradition, so how can it be "specifically British". The landed gentry are a specifically British social class, a social position in mainland Europe largely occupied by the specifically un-British untitled nobility. As I understand it, the Fulfords were most probably considered noble during feudal times, so their claim to be untitled nobility isn't unfounded, it's just not specifically British. 121.73.7.84 (talk) 12:54, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Revisiting this page after several years I am pleased to find it much improved, especially the clarification around the family's status. They are most likely a remnant of untitled feudal nobility, but the assertion that there is something specifically British about untitled nobility - which is misleading for readers unknowledgable of the subject - has been eliminated. 121.73.7.84 (talk) 12:25, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

YoB

So when was he born? In 1952 or 1953? --Csesznekgirl (talk) 17:53, 3 November 2010 (UTC)