Talk:Jeremy Beecham, Baron Beecham

Requested move
not moved. There seems to be little doubt (in the arguments below) that this individual is better known without the title and WP:NCPEER seems reasonably clear that we should use the personal name. See Andrewa's rationale below. --rgpk (comment) 17:39, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Jeremy Beecham → Jeremy Beecham, Baron Beecham.

B2C's arguments are bogus, because the policy WP:TITLE explicitly permits topic-specific naming conventions such as WP:NCPEER. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:26, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose - Known for his career in Local government and not for being a peer. Also no need for disambiguation with this article title.--Lucy-marie (talk) 18:48, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Support. WP:NCPEER is quite clear. This chap is no longer wholly or exclusively known by his pre-peerage nomenclature. Kittybrewster  &#9742;  15:15, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose in the strongest possible terms for consistency in naming per policy and guidelines like WP:COMMONNAME, WP:TITLE, WP:D and WP:PRECISION that apply to all Wikipedia article titles. The subject is most commonly known as "Jeremy Beecham"; adding ", Baron Beecham" is additional precision that is completely unnecessary, all good reasons to ignore WP:NCPEER. --Born2cycle (talk) 20:05, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Support per WP:NCPEER. No longer exclusively known by his untitled name, and notable by his title as a shadow minister in the House of Lords.


 * Support per WP:NCPEER, which—despite B2C's understanding—is as much a part of WP:Article titles as WP:COMMONNAME. -Rrius (talk) 00:00, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose. WP:NCPEER reads in part However, there are several exceptions: Some peers who are almost exclusively known by their personal names have their articles so titled, e.g. Bertrand Russell (not "Bertrand Russell, 3rd Earl Russell"). The same applies to many well-known politicians who only received a title after they retired: Anthony Eden (not "Anthony Eden, 1st Earl of Avon"), Margaret Thatcher (not "Margaret Thatcher, Baroness Thatcher"). Beecham is a case of the first sort, being almost exclusively known by his name in political life, and (as a good Labour politician) downplaying his title. So the two conventions being quoted here as in conflict are actually in agreement. Andrewa (talk) 09:13, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Oppose - a well known figure before his elevation to the Lords. &mdash; Amakuru (talk) 17:38, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Support. Former politicians who have been ennobled are almost invariably known by their titles thereafter. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:30, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - This is not a Crystal Ball and what they are currently known is what we have to take as the current commonly used name. If in the future the individual is known regularly by their ennobled title then that would be grounds to change the article title. To though say, it is expected that the names they are known by will change is not how things work on Wikipeida.--Lucy-marie (talk) 17:36, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment: Very well put. No change of vote. Andrewa (talk) 14:29, 13 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Oppose, highly unlikely that his Lords career will be as prominent as his pre-peerage career.--Kotniski (talk) 09:15, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Jeremy Beecham, Baron Beecham. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120419233215/http://www.bura.org.uk/BURA+People/The+BURA+Board/Meet+the+BURA+Board to http://www.bura.org.uk/BURA+People/The+BURA+Board/Meet+the+BURA+Board

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:56, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Error in article: Jeremy Beecham ...
I note that in the final paragraph, Lord Beechham's date of introduction is given as 28 July 2010. This is in error: reference to both the Lords Minutes of proceedings for 27 July 2010 and that day's Hansard (Lords, v. 720 col. 1225) will show that he was introduced and subscribed the oath the previous day. Footnote 8 will need correcting too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.26.65.42 (talk) 11:16, 27 May 2020 (UTC)