Talk:Roy Meadow

message: I changed this back to Furore from a different IP address yesterday and appended a comment that Furor was not a word in English. However, searching through various dictionaries (including Wiktionary) finds that it is - its just that I personally as an English person have never ever come across it spelt without the final "e". I am now confused...
148.177.129.212 10:15, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Furor vs Furore

message: I can't find the phrase "travesty of justice" anywhere in the official transcript of Lord Justice Judge's remarks in [[2004] EWCA Crim 1] http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2004/1.html
NotSaussure 13:57, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aftermath 

message: An anon, 86.4.29.226 has been trying to change "Sir Roy Meadow" to "Mr Roy Meadow". He/she is also introducing typos, like "Meadows's", and "Meadows" and "meadow's". 
Would the anon please state here what the problem is with "Sir Roy". If it's a Manual of Style issue, and if there's some policy that we don't use titles such as "Sir", that's fine. I don't claim to know all Wikipedia policies, but I'd like a link. However, since the anon is not just removing the "Sir", but is actively changing it to "Mr", I think it's unlikely to be a question of style.
This BBC article about him begins with "Professor Sir Roy Meadow", and refers to him as "Sir Roy" thereafter. See also here and here. I see no reason to doubt that he is "Sir". If there's some reason to remove the title, I think it should be discussed here. ElinorD (talk) 15:40, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not the anon! To me, the Manual of Style Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_%28biographies%29#Subsequent_uses_of_names suggests that, after the first naming, he should be referred to as "Sir Roy" or "Meadow" but not "Mr Roy Meadow" or "Professor Meadow". I prefer "Meadow". I would not change from "Sir Roy" if it were being used consistently, but it is not. Thincat 10:41, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no problem with "Meadow", although the BBC article refers to him as "Sir Roy" after the first mention, and I like that. I did have a problem with the systematic changing of "Sir" to "Mr". ElinorD (talk) 10:47, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I have changed "Professor Meadow" to "Meadow" (in accordance with Manual of Style) and "Sir Roy" to "Meadow". In the latter case the MoS does not seem to be definitive but I think consistency is desirable. For guidance I looked at Michael Woodruff (a recently featured article) that uses the surname, and David Attenborough (everyone's favourite knight) which is almost entirely surname although "Sir David" appears twice. What is good enough for them should be more than good enough for Meadow. Thincat 12:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Sir Roy

message: "He certainly profited greatly from his many court appearances as an "expert witness"". I can't find any evidence of this. Maybe the language should be more moderate. Workerbee  —Preceding comment was added at 13:11, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Profit?

message: I hold no brief for Roy Meadow - and I think that the lessons tragically learned then about society's obsessions could profitably be applied to the more recent eruptions of hysteria about different kinds of child abuse.  However, I must comment that Judge Danforth in Arthur Miller's play does not proceed falsely and recklessly at all.  He is a scrupulous representative of the law, struggling to apply it in a case where some of the testimony is false and vindictive - but above all, where society's assumptions are based on a fallacy.  That is the tragedy.
Rogersansom (talk) 08:03, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Aftermath

message: I have removed the 'multiple issues' tag dated Dec 2011 as the issues appear to have been resolved.
Limhey (talk) 18:21, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Tags

message: Substituted at 04:59, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Assessment comment

message: “Sally Clark, who was wrongly convicted of the murder of her two baby sons, and later committed suicide”
No she did not. The links provided for that claim don't say anything of the sort, and the next link says that the coroner ruled the opposite to be true. Where did this come from? 2A0E:1D47:4115:4800:8D21:E50E:36A:1CE1 (talk) 09:36, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Now trimmed. Thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 09:56, 26 February 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sally Clark suicide? 

message: This text:  is a very close paraphrase of several sources and comes from here  or else the site that source quotes. However nowhere are we told who said this. That who template can't be answered. We have no idea who said that. All quotes in Wikipedia must be attributed so this should come out, but the following sentence depends on it too. Any suggestions on a rewrite? Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 09:27, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Is http://www.mojuk.org.uk/ regarded as WP:RS? If not, we should not be including this in any case? Martinevans123 (talk) 09:33, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Very good question. No is the answer. I misread it as "ministry of justice" and thought it was some kind of appendix document about the case, but it is clearly not that. I'll make an edit. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 11:25, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Breathtakingly dishonest - says who?