This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anthroponymy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
the study of people's names on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnthroponymyWikipedia:WikiProject AnthroponymyTemplate:WikiProject AnthroponymyAnthroponymy articles
Comments
See my comments at
Talk:Baker.
<KF> 20:02, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)
do not merge I believe there are enough different people with the name
Paul Thompson for it to warrant its own disambig page. If you put everyone with the last name of Thompson on this one disambig page, it's going to get VERY large and unweildy. Let's take another example... of say,, the last name of Smith or Lee. If you take every wiki-article for everyone with one of those last names and jam them all onto one disambig page, it's going to be a huge long list. That's just not user friendly. Leave the Paul Thompson disambig page as is.
ColtsScore14:45, 15 February 2007 (UTC)reply
comment seven is not a great number, there are much longer lists than that. As the vote has been 2:1 for two months, merging here.
Chris08:18, 8 April 2007 (UTC)reply
When a merge discussion template is put up, the discussion is automatically directed to the page suggested to be merged into. The tag was up for two months-you had plenty of time. And thanks for the suggestion!
Chris19:28, 8 April 2007 (UTC)reply
Oppose. There are plenty of David Thompsons to warrant a separate page. Merging all Thompsons here will make this page way too cluttered to be useful.
jwillbur23:34, 21 January 2008 (UTC)reply
Oppose. With only two entries, a Thomas L. Thompson disambiguation page is probably not warranted. They should be merged into the
Thomas Thompson disambiguation page, not this page, for the same reasons mentioned above for David Thompson.
jwillbur23:34, 21 January 2008 (UTC)reply
-- Gerd Richter (Germany):
Who knows Les Thompson, born 03.11.1951, died 25.07.2003 in a moto wheel accident in Germany (Saxony, B 171 between Sadisdorf an Obercarsdorf)? We live in Obercarsdorf and more often pass a the commemorative place. We would like to get to know whit pleasure a little bit mor about Les (Franzi 11, Flori 13 and grandpa 58). Email: [email protected] (Please not spam!) —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
91.14.232.250 (
talk)
08:48, 19 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Coat of Arms
Does that Coat of Arms really apply to every single person with the surname Thompson? That's inconsistent with my understanding of how these things work. I think the source for the association of this image and every person carrying the Thompson surname needs to be cited for encyclopedic use.
63.87.189.17 (
talk)
19:06, 8 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Looking for my family coat-of-arms (Thompson of England) lead me to
this, in 1992 one of my family members got my grandfather the family coat of arms with its history and it was the same as what I found (I was searching only recently so there is quite the time difference) except that it has the family motto "Dum spiro spero" which means "While I breathe, I hope." at the bottom, but you are right, there are different coats of arms, one for England, which came after the one used in Scotland (Thomson, but Thompson has a COA for Scot) and one for Ireland,
here are the other two that are not shown. (
Cerebriac (
talk)
02:17, 25 October 2010 (UTC))reply
Chris, British coats of arms are personal. They don't belong to families, they don't belong surnames, they belong to individuals. They editor above you is a little confused about heraldry, the one above him was bang-on. There are gonna be dozens upon dozens of coats of arms for people with this surname. We aren't going to list them all. Can you see how it's misleading to put a coat of arms in the infobox with a caption like "Thompson coat of arms"? The entire surname simply doesn't have one.--
Brianann MacAmhlaidh (
talk)
07:50, 3 November 2010 (UTC)reply
A better image might illustrate something to do with the etymology of the name (like here:
Randal and Randall (given names)); or maybe something showing an old form of the name in an old document; or maybe a map showing the distribution of the name. Something actually about the surname. Something that doesn't single out a few families or individuals over the countless others.--
Brianann MacAmhlaidh (
talk)
08:04, 3 November 2010 (UTC)reply
Many Americans etc. do not understand
Coat of arms. In Britain they are only issued by the
College of Arms. A lot of unscrupulous companies will issue you with a fake coat of arms, but these are frauds. Real coat of arms are not associated with surnames, but with people. I understand they can be inherited down the male line. The things on the page (and in the link above) look like obvious fakes to me, and should be deleted.
2.97.215.11 (
talk)
12:23, 2 August 2011 (UTC)reply
I wouldn't automatically say they are fake, they could be real, but it's irresponsible to show them so prominently without stating who they belong/belonged to. Then it comes down to whether so-and-so's coat of arms is relevant to this surname as a whole.--
Brianann MacAmhlaidh (
talk)
09:04, 3 August 2011 (UTC)reply
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Thompson (surname). Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with
this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with
this tool.