I think that this article should be titled "Lord Draben", even if it goes against the "no titles on article names" rule. My reasoning is the following: "Draben" may not be his (sur)name at all, but just a title. If this is the case (and if we have no other name to refer to him than just his title), we should refer to him by his proper title.

Take this example: Charles Chetwynd-Talbot is the current Earl of Shrewsbury. His surname is Chetwynd-Talbot, but to call him Lord Chetwynd-Talbot would be erroneous: one would refer to him as Lord Shrewsbury, his title.

Using the same reasoning, let's say that this individual is "John Doe, Earl of Draben". He would be addressed as "Lord Draben", but to call him "Draben" would be a mistake: he would be either referred to as "John Doe" (his name), or as "Lord Draben" (his title); never as "Draben" (in formal circumstances anyway). --  Seth Cooper  owl post! 16:56, October 5, 2012 (UTC)

That sounds reasonable. -- 1337star (Drop me a line!) 19:08, October 5, 2012 (UTC)