Talk:Ian Paisley Jr

message: Content is good, but article would need at least a few more reference citations, preferably at least one per section, for a B rating. John Carter (talk) 21:12, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree - also relies very heavily on audio broadcasts which are no longer available freely. Reference is correctly made to them, and Wikipedia says that's enough, but verification would be almost impossible unless some way was found to listen to them once more. If anyone knows of any resources offering streaming audio files for BBC Radio's "The House I Grew Up In", and which could be accessed, please post here, or provide links within the article. Thanks. Ref (chew)(do) 16:23, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Assessment 

message: Following British usage I think he should be called 'Ian Paisley, Jr', not 'Jr.', i.e. without a full point. In British English abbreviations formed by curtailing the word (there's a technical term but I can't remember it) do traditionally have a full point whereas contractions don't. The first category includes 'Hon.' and 'Rev.' and the second 'Dr' and 'Revd'. 'Jr' is obviously 'J[unio]r' just like 'R[everen]d' so the full point is not wanted. If he were American then the full point would be appropriate as the Americans do, as I understand it, write 'Mr.', 'Dr.', etc. In more trendy British usage (which also looks more elegant) full points are being dropped altogether ('PhD' rather than 'Ph.D.', 'Rt Hon' rather than 'Rt Hon.')--Oxonian2006 (talk) 17:38, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There's also "Jnr" and "Junior", both of which are used on his website. "Ian Paisley, Jnr is also the spelling used on his profile on the DUP website. Perhaps we should go with that? Timrollpickering (talk) 14:31, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: My Hart (39th edn) lists 'Jun.' I would rather follow OUP than the DUP or even Ian Paisley, fils, himself. I suppose there is no established pattern in British English as it is not so much a British thing to do. There are also pages for William Henry Perkin, Jr. and Charles Dickens, Jr. I don't know whether his personal preference should carry any weight. It's not like the spelling, pronunciation, or hyphenation of a name. It's a matter of correct typographical rendition according to the national norm. It is, of course, not very important.--Oxonian2006 (talk) 17:54, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jr/Jr. 

message: lol this cannot be true = Catchphrase host Roy Walker described him on a 2005 NI Celebrity Christmas Special of the show as "the poster boy for legalised abortion". A ruccous ensued where Paisley got the living daylights beaten out of him by "Clonous Cyclone" Barry McGuigan and D:ream's lead singer who feared he might be next if he didn't back McGuigan up.
Shabba3001 (talk) 02:00, 16 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: true?

message: I do not think the title 'Hon' is correct?  Can anyone verify this? Gavin Lisburn (talk) 00:22, 22 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed the 'Hon', I've never seen it used before anywhere.--Theosony (talk) 05:45, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: According to Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(biographies)#Names I don't believe it should be used, even if correct, but I could be wrong. Canterbury Tail talk 19:59, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: For an MP/MLA template it should be used, but it only when it is applicable.--Theosony (talk) 20:40, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Hon. is only used by Judges in the UK, not politicians, and Rt Hon by members of the privy council. And even then on Wikipedia it is not used in the opening sentence as decided upon by the appropriate Wikiproject. So no, shouldn't be there as he's not actually entitled to it. Canterbury Tail talk 13:18, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes he is entitled to it - he's the son of a life peer. See The Honourable#United Kingdom. Timrollpickering (talk) 14:15, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Ah fair enough, never thought of it from that angle. Canterbury Tail talk 16:21, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

text: Thanks! I'll re-add the title.--Theosony (talk) 03:23, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Hon

message: Hi everyone,
I think the first paragraph of the political scandal section was poorly sourced. In order to follow WP:BLP policy, I deleted it.
:All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion.
My change can be easily undone by clicking on the link in the history list and then selecting "undo".
I predict two sources can be found: A record of parliament for Daithí McKay's comment. A transcript or YouTube copy of Spotlight (NI). But I am not a resident of Northern Ireland, and cannot judge the reliability of such sources, and the policy emphasizes "removed immediately", I'll let someone else reinsert the material (: this time properly sourced :).
--Kevinkor2 (talk) 17:24, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Political scandal