Talk:Ivan Ewart

message: I question the good faith of this editor who questions the notability of this subject.  Sir Ivan was a distinguished soldier, charity worker and ran one of Northern Ireland's most successful companies.  He was also a baronet. --Counter-revolutionary 08:09, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well you can question all you want, I have not sent it to AfD. Baronet is not notablem, commanding a boat in the War is not notable unless with was one of the main vessels and being a just being charity worker is not notable.--Vintagekits 09:07, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: All these things together, and the fact, which you chose to ignore, that he ran one of Northern Ireland's oldest and most successful businesses, makes him notable.  Also, you may not have "sent in to Afd" but you have questioned notability, thus prompting this discussion.--Counter-revolutionary 10:18, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, discussions are good and they help an article. Add to the article and prove notability and I will be happy to remove the tag. So far its border line.--Vintagekits 11:12, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Obviously notable. - Kittybrewster 11:39, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: What use is stating "Obviously notable", if you are going to make a comment try and at least explain it or give reasons -like I have already said improve the article and proved evidence of notability and I would be happy to remove the tag - prod tags are used to improve an article and are not an attack.--Vintagekits 12:03, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I must say I did agree with Kittybrewster and thought the notability of Sir Ivan could never be questioned.  Just goes to show.  I shall, however, try to improve the article.--Counter-revolutionary 12:20, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree, Baronets are automatically notable as they are included in the Order of precedence in both England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. Astrotrain 17:26, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You and the OofP - that means absolutely nothing. I am coming to the opinion that due to an accumilation of thing that he MAY scrape into notability - however as the article stands at the moment he doesnt. --Vintagekits 17:35, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

text: *No it doesnt. Passing WP:N and WP:BIO does.--Vintagekits 20:26, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: He passes them, he held many positions, High Sheriff &c also.--Counter-revolutionary 20:29, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: High Sheriff and Baronet are both somply honorary titles with no power of their own.--Vintagekits 20:32, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: No. A High Sheriff actually does something and is appointed on merit, which I'm sure you approve of.--Counter-revolutionary 20:41, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: See From WP:NCNT#Other_non-royal_names#4:
:Baronets, as they hold hereditary titles, often for a large part of their lives, follow the same practice as hereditary peers and should have their title noted in the beginning of the article. The format is Sir John Smith, 17th Baronet. For the article title, this format should only be used when disambiguation is necessary; otherwise, the article should be located at John Smith. John Smith, 17th Baronet should never be used with the postfix and without the prefix.
Therefore this articles name should be changed.--Ginggangsgoolies 20:44, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming