Talk:Mary Warnock, Baroness Warnock

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by WikiProject Peerage.

	Philosophy Portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale.
Additional information: Related task forces (core areas): Ethics Related task forces (major fields): Philosophy of mind Philosophers

Hi, why the page move? I've had a look at Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names), and practice is to put people at their most commonly used names. For this person, it's definitely "Mary Warnock", not "Helen Mary Warnock" (tho the latter can of course be a redirect).

Also, I'm afraid the weird double name is correct. For another eg see Margaret Thatcher. There are hideously complicated rules for naming people with titles; I'm British and still have no idea about all the UK ones, but know to avoid editing them! There are aristo geeks who usually fix these things... Cheers, JackyR 19:01, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments. I tried to move the name to "Mary Warnock", but the software would not allow it. Rather than put in a request for administrator assistance, I did what I thought was the next best thing. I am happy to change the peerage title back to the double name as it seems to be the proper way, but it should not be used as the article title. Warnock is known by her pre-title name just as Margaret Thatcher is. I will attempt the move to "Mary Warnock" again. --Blainster 19:38, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Apparently if the redirect name has a history, the move will not take place. The article name Mary Warnock has had two changes (one by me), so I guess I will have to list this article on the change request page to get it changed from Helen Mary Warnock to Mary Warnock. --Blainster 19:59, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles)#Other non-royal names §2 says "use the dignity in the title, unless the individual is exclusively referred to by personal name." So I think "Mary Warnock, Baroness Warnock" is acceptable (other egs: Martin Rees, Baron Rees of Ludlow, Robert May, Baron May of Oxford). But I'm not pushing for this: do as you feel right. JackyR 21:29, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, I am out of my league here. Generally the standard is to title an article by the most commonly used name. Formal titles are listed in the intro, but not used in the article title (unless the person is known by the formal title). I am more familiar with the scientific community, and the knighted (?) scientists do not use their formal titles professionally Roger Penrose, Stephen Hawking. Martin Reese, for example, does not use his title in his professional publications. They don't even generally use their university title in them. In fact, when one sees a book by "Dr. Smith" it is often a sign that the material is sub-standard and the publisher is using the title to try to boost sales. The references to Warnock that I have seen are her book and article bylines, and Mary Warnock is what is generally used. When one searches for a person on google or wikipedia one doesn't generally use a full name unless the shorter version is too common. So that is my rationale, but I'm just one voice here. --Blainster 23:03, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Completely agree. I've never seen why this particular set of titles get added when others don't. But I guess there are people who both know and care, who have haggled over this already, so ours not to reason why! JackyR 13:09, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requested Move

It is suggested that the article name be changed from "Mary Warnock, Baroness Warnock" to the more common use "Mary Warnock".

• Support --Blainster 20:12, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
• Support JackyR 21:20, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
• Seems already to have been done... David Kernow 03:30, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
• Oppose. See the naming conventions. "Baroness Warnock" gets more than half the Google hits of "Mary Warnock", and so is far above the threshold for inclusion in the title. Proteus (Talk) 17:55, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Another editor changed the article title from "Helen Mary Warnock" to "Mary Warnock, Baroness Warnock", so I have taken the liberty of changing the text above to reflect this. The request to change the title to "Mary Warnock" remains. --Blainster 16:58, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

The current title is correct per our naming conventions. —Nightstallion (?) 11:17, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 04:16, 10 November 2007 (UTC)