2005 UTC I prefer Thomas Babington Macaulay and strongly disagree with the current title 1st Baron Macaulay First of all 1st is a barbarism Second the repetition of Macaulay does nothing for the article title we can find out his peerage title by reading the article itself He may be called Lord Macaulay and in that case there should be a redirect at Lord Macaulay but I assure you that Macaulay is never referred to these days as Thomas Babington Macaulay 1st Baron Macaulay I ve just put in a request for Horatio Nelson 1st Viscount Nelson to get the same treatment Cf Walter Scott and Arthur Sullivan where Wikipedia doesn t even mention the Sir in their titles But I see that Alfred Lord Tennyson gets the same treatment so maybe I m too late 15 30 20 May