When her name was changed, the LoAR inadvertently spelled her previous name as Angharad Aethnen filia Cuneddae.
When her name was registered, the LoAR failed to note that it was a name appeal of her earlier registration.
When his name was registered, the LoAR noted that it was a correction from his previous registration in December 1990; we now would more clearly call this a name reconsideration.
When his name was registered, the LoAR neglected to note that it was actually a name change. His previous name, Jamie MacLeod, is released.
When his name was registered, the LoAR neglected to note that it was submitted as an appeal of the spelling of his prior name registration in November 1992. We would now call this a request for name reconsideration.
This name and identical device were registered twice, once in January 1996 and once in July 1996. We are choosing to keep the latter name spelling, as it more closely matches the submission paperwork. The blazon given for the July 1996 device registration did not specify the hydra as being wingless. As that is a significant detail, we are retaining the earlier January 1996 blazon.
When her name was registered, the LoAR listed it as a new name instead of a change of holding name.
When her name was registered, the LoAR didn't note that a similar variant was registered in July 1997. As it happens, both name forms have identical name spellings, with the exception that one uses von instead of of, and so it seems the von variant is the preferred spelling.
When her name was registered, the LoAR noted it as a new name, instead of noting her previous name registered in February 1997. The name was in fact submitted twice, with an identical submission form. The second registration is closer to the originally submitted name, and thus was likely intended as a name correction instead of a name change or a new separate name.
When her name was registered, the LoAR misspelled her name as Nicholette von Zweiberge. Her original name submission was listed on the September 1997 LoAR in both the returns and the acceptances, although it was returned due to lack of paperwork. As her device was registered under the same name in December 1997, the January 1998 LoAR attempted to correct the mistake by registering her name then, but misspelled it.
When his name was registered, the LoAR noted it as a new name, instead of noting his previous name registered in April 1998. The name was in fact submitted twice, identically. The second registration matches the case of the originally submitted name, and thus was likely intended as a name correction instead of a name change or a new separate name.
When his name was submitted and subsequently registered, the form did not indicate that he had submitted the name previously, which had been registered in June 2000. The submitter has since indicated a preference of which name to keep, so we are making that change now. His previous name, Leonidas Mantineus, is released.
When her name was registered after being pended, the LoAR failed to note that she had been assigned a holding name, and thus this was a name change from holding name not a new name.
When her name was registered, the LoAR failed to note that she had been assigned a holding name for her device. This is a change from a holding name, not a new name.
When his name was registered, the LoAR failed to note that he had been assigned a holding name for his device. This was a name change from holding name, not a new name.
When his device was registered, the LoAR neglected to note that it was actually a device change. His previous device, Quarterly vert and gules, a hare sejant erect contourny argent, in chief three increscents Or, is released.
When her name was registered, the LoAR failed to note that she had been assigned a holding name for her device. This is a change of holding name, not a new name.
When her name was registered, the LoAR failed to note that she had been assigned a holding name for her device. This was a change of holding name, not a new name.
When her name was registered, the LoAR failed to note that she had been assigned a holding name for her device. This was a change of holding name, not a new name.
When her name was registered, the LoAR failed to note that she had been assigned a holding name previously for her device. This is a change of holding name, not a new name.
When his name was registered, the LoAR failed to note that he had been assigned a holding name previously for his device. This is a change of holding name, not a new name.
When his name was registered, the LoAR failed to note that he had been assigned a holding name for his device. This was a name change from holding name, not a new name.
Created at 2016-03-26T15:44:43