Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
418 bytes added ,  04:00, July 9, 2007
→‎To "Sir" or not to "Sir": This confusion is just more evidence that the title is meaningless to most people
Line 193: Line 193:  
:: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 12:59, 8 July 2007 (EDT)
 
:: [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 12:59, 8 July 2007 (EDT)
 
:::I think there is a bit of confusion here.  The appropriate distinction is not between honorary and "real" knighthoods.  I think that all of the knighthoods we are discussing here are honorary.  Knighthoods should not be confused with hereditary titles, which is a completely different thing.  As discussed above, it is ''not appropriate'' for '''American citizens''' who have been knighted to use the title "Sir". It is ''only'' appropriate for ''British citizens'' who have been knighted to use the title "Sir". This is why "Sir Elton John" and "Sir Paul McCartney" are correct, but "Sir Bob Hope" or "Sir George Bush" would not be correct, even though Bob Hope and George Bush have been knighted. This is why no encyclopedia should call an American citizen "Sir". I think a sensible approach for us would be to call the article "Isaac Newton", with a redirect (or whatever the proper term is) from "Sir Isaac Newton", and to leave the "Sir" in the first sentence. --Hsmom 10:00, 8 July 2007 (EDT)
 
:::I think there is a bit of confusion here.  The appropriate distinction is not between honorary and "real" knighthoods.  I think that all of the knighthoods we are discussing here are honorary.  Knighthoods should not be confused with hereditary titles, which is a completely different thing.  As discussed above, it is ''not appropriate'' for '''American citizens''' who have been knighted to use the title "Sir". It is ''only'' appropriate for ''British citizens'' who have been knighted to use the title "Sir". This is why "Sir Elton John" and "Sir Paul McCartney" are correct, but "Sir Bob Hope" or "Sir George Bush" would not be correct, even though Bob Hope and George Bush have been knighted. This is why no encyclopedia should call an American citizen "Sir". I think a sensible approach for us would be to call the article "Isaac Newton", with a redirect (or whatever the proper term is) from "Sir Isaac Newton", and to leave the "Sir" in the first sentence. --Hsmom 10:00, 8 July 2007 (EDT)
 +
 +
:::: This confusion is just more evidence that the title is meaningless to most people. Philip claims to be outside England, but he is obviously some sort of anglophile who wants to draw attention to the British monarchy. He even uses British spellings. Newton's accomplishments stand on their own merit, and do need a sign of approval from some long-dead queen. [[User:RSchlafly|RSchlafly]] 00:00, 9 July 2007 (EDT)
    
==Changed Leibniz calculus dispute statement==
 
==Changed Leibniz calculus dispute statement==

Navigation menu