Talk:Post-nominal letters

countries
The article should IMO state what countries use such a convention. To this Frenchman, post-nominal letters look strange when first encountered, if not bragging. :) Leafcat (talk) 07:28, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

merge discussion
Yes, it makes sense to merge this article with the "Post-nomial" article. In fact,is there even such a word as "nomial"???

I'm not aware of any such word - I get the impression the article was created as a result of a mis-spelling? Michael Dorosh Talk  15:03, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

rights to use post-nominal letters
Does anyone know if a right is granted to use and award post-nominal letters? Is it by a Government, or can an individual choose to add letters after his name (eg a new combination of his/her own choosing)?


 * The letters that refer to the various British honors are obviously "granted" by the British government, and using them without permission might very well be a criminal offense. Similarly, some U.S. states prohibit the use of Esq. for anyone who is not a lawyer. I don't know what you mean by "his/her own choosing". If I want to refer to myself as "John Smith, ABCDEFG", then I guess no one is going to arrest me...but what is the point? 209.92.136.131 21:12, 14 March 2007 (UTC)


 * It depends on the post-noms you are talking about. Military awards are given (in the US), generally on the authority of Congress or the President. That is, they are either given on the authority of the commission of an officer (given by Congress), or they are directly given by Congress or the President (e.g., Soldier's Medal, Medal of Honor). Civilian titles are either government endorsed or given merit by accredited institutions.


 * As to whether you can choose to add post-noms on a whim, the short answer is that it depends on which ones. If you are a member of the US military and wear a decoration you are not authorized you can be subject to up to 6 months in prison for violating UCMJ article 134. On the civilian side, for the most part you can call yourself whatever you want, so long as you do not try to exercise the powers or privileges of that title. Dr. Dre is obviously not a medical doctor, but he'll get along just fine as long as he doesn't try to operate on someone. In other cases, it doesn't matter at all. For example, in most states, "social worker" is not a protected title and anyone can call themselves that when practices in a human services roles and there are no consequences.

comment
What if you have a BSc(Hons) and a MSc? Which do you use then? Can you use both? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.189.120.153 (talk) 01:45, 27 December 2008 (UTC)


 * For anyone looking here, you can use both if they are separately achieved degrees (not like the oxford/camb MA's). Some people may only list the MSc as it is the higher degree, but there isn't anything wrong with using both. Aloneinthewild (talk) 15:07, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

at your local

 * Letters are listed in the following order after the person's name in the UK (other locals follow similarly):

I guess that the parenthesis means "similar rules are followed in other locales (countries)"; but I hesitate to correct it lest I've missed something. —Tamfang (talk) 03:50, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Bug or feature?
I don't understand "2. Decorations and honours and decorations (in descending order of precedence)." I would delete "and decorations" were it not for the possibility I'm overlooking something. --Vaughan Pratt (talk) 03:07, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Usage
Quote: "Awards from the same faculty replace lower-ranking degrees". This is not supported by the Oxford Calendar (referenced as Note 2). While the Oxford Calendar states that BA MA should be avoided, this is because in the case of Oxford (and Cambridge and Trinity Dublin)the BA and MA refer to the SAME degree. Oxford BAs can usually convert to MA (referred to as incepting)after a period of time, without further study or examination. This is in contrast to most other British universities where, currently, an MA is a further or higher degree awarded after further study and examination (often part taught, part research). Oxbridge do offer such higher degrees, for example MPhil. The Scottish universities award an MA as a first degree in arts subjects (but don't award a BA as a stage to MA). For an Oxford Graduate to place BA MA after their names would imply two degrees when it is in fact only one. Carelessorc (talk) 15:01, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

New University of Oxford Style Guide published
Could someone update 2011 version to 2012 please? - I am an editing novice ! http://www.ox.ac.uk/media/global/wwwoxacuk/localsites/gazette/documents/universitycalendar/Calendar_Style_Guide_2012.pdf — Preceding unsigned comment added by Afgy (talk • contribs) 19:17, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

PhD w/o Masters degree
The section on UK usage of degrees suggests that part of the difference between UK and US usage is that it is possible in the UK to earner a higher degree without necessarily obtaining a lower one. But it is possible to earn a PhD in the US without getting a Masters degree, although I would imagine that the practice varies from institution to institution, and even among different departments in one particular institution. Wschart (talk) 12:32, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

et
"Where two different postgraduate qualifications with the same name have been obtained (for example two different postgraduate MAs from King's College London and University of Sussex), this can be indicated by using one degree postnominal, and the abbreviations of the two awarding bodies in parentheses, sometimes joined by the Latin "et" (or with an ampersand), e.g. "Jane Smith MA (KCL et Sussex)", and not "Jane Smith MA MA". However, when qualifications with the same name have been gained through different routes (for example an MA from Oxford University converted from a Bachelor of Arts, and a studied and examined postgraduate degree from King's College London these are listed separately with the institution only listed after the non-examined qualification (e.g. "Jane Smith MA(Oxf) MA", and not "Jane Smith MA (Oxf et KCL)")."


 * This is wrong. 'et' is only used for incorporations between the Oxbridge universities to indicate that they have the same degree but recognised by both or all three of the ancient universities. Therefore 'Jane Smith MA(KCL et Sussex)' would mean that she took her MA at KCL and it was recognised as having been taken at Sussex as well without further examination; i.e. she still has only one degree. In other cases they should be listed separately, therefore 'Jane Smith MA(KCL) MA(Sussex)' is correct in indicating they are two separate degrees. The paragraph above has probably arisen from muddling the faculty-based system of the Oxbridge unis (of recognising that one has gained the status of Master in the Faculty of Arts and that one cannot gain that same status again which would be like a Captain in the army becoming a Captain again in the same regiment) with the qualifications-based system of the other unis (that one can become an MA more than once because they are separate and distinct qualifications rather an indication of their rank and faculty placing). --Charlie Huang 【遯卋山人】 16:49, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Example of "office", per lead?
This article contains no examples of uses of postnomials for officeholders. An obvious example would be a "Fellow of the [some organization here]" initialism, but I don't know enough about them right off the top of my head to add something. We need a title like that which either has its own article, or has a section at an article, so we can link to it, like " ". — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  20:58, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Original Research?
I've tagged three paragraphs in the Etiquette for deciding which higher educational qualifications may be listed post-nominally > In the UK sub-section that appear to be original research. I've been adding references to this article, and I cannot find anything to support the assertions made here. I notice that part of this section was already questioned in 2013, without any response, and another part in 2015. Robminchin (talk) 01:52, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 1 one external link on Post-nominal letters. 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 User:Cyberpower678/FaQs for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.debretts.com/forms-address/hierarchies/letters-after-name/fellowships-learned-societies

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 10:30, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Resolving conflicts between Suffix (name), Post-nominal letters, and Patronymic
Please see Talk:Suffix (name) for discussion of converting that page to WP:SUMMARY style, at a better name. The proposal there may affect some redirects to the present article. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  22:39, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Fake Post-Nominals
...in other words, using post-nominals that you didn't earn, such as saying you are [name][surname] Q.C.. Is it illegal? 101.161.167.89 (talk) 20:12, 12 January 2017 (UTC)


 * It depends on the laws of the place where the fake post-nominals are used. From what I've seen in the laws in the states of the USA, there's a fair chance it's illegal to use post-nominals related to professions where the public is likely to suffer harm if they are fooled by the post-nomialls (especially if the state has laws that regulate the profession, such as law, medicine, accounting, and engineering). But it's unlikely to be an offense to use relatively harmless post-nominals, such as BA. Jc3s5h (talk) 21:19, 12 January 2017 (UTC)


 * I imagine that most countries have rules on fraud, which would cover the use of fake post-nominals with the intention to deceive for gain. It is also illegal in some countries to falsely claim to have received a medal or other decoration, which would cover the use of the relevant post-nominals. Some post-nominals may also be protected titles (e.g. UK chartered status) or trademarks, which could lead to a civil action to prevent their use. Even in cases where it is not illegal, it may well be a breach of professional ethics and lead to being struck off or other disciplinary action – any barrister who falsely claimed to be a QC would probably get into trouble fairly quickly. Robminchin (talk) 23:52, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
 * You are very correct. Whilst in some instances such can be illegal, in others it is not, however where it is not, ethics and professionalism comes to mind. Weirdly though, there are instances where post-nominals of organisations with Royal Charters clash, although this shouldn't technically happen. Reading through the recent changes in the history of the article I discovered that the National Assembly for Wales is now called the Senedd Cymru and that members are no longer Assembly Members (AM) but instead Members of the Senedd (MS). The problem with MS is that it can easily be confused with Master of Surgery and Master of Science. Whilst the latter is usually shown as MSc/MSci, MS is most commonly seen after the names of Surgeons and most would associate such. Even more confusingly before 2020, AM was also used by Members of the London Assembly, who still use such today, although in an unofficial capacity. There are other instances where memberships and qualification of certain societies and organisations conflict also, however most of these are either religious ones, self-styled orders or newer trade-like associations. I have come across people with some frankly absurd combinations, including on Wiki draft articles, some of which they either bought or made up themselves. UaMaol (talk) 03:27, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Charterships
In the UK some societies hold a royal charter allowing them to indicate that some of their members have Chartered status (they have a high level of professionalism), and those members are entitled to use post-nominal letters such as CEng (chartered engineer). This article does not explain where these post-nominals should be shown. I hold 2 charterships, one granted directly from my professional body, and a second chartership granted through an association between my professional body and the Engineering Council (CEng charterships are not issued directly by the engineering council, but only by ascribing professional bodies such as the Institution of Electrical Engineers. My professional society lists CEng first, then my membership of the professional body, followed by my professional bodies chartership.  This seems illogical as the charterships are not placed next to each other, neither are the post-nominals in chronological order.

I was hoping that this article would shed some light onto this.

Would anyone like to update the page to include chartership post-nominals?

FreeFlow99 (talk) 11:42, 23 July 2018 (UTC)


 * The article (like everything in Wikipedia) is based on published sources, so only covers what can be verified elsewhere. It has "chartered and other professional statuses should be shown before the designatory letters for the relevant professional body (e.g. CEng FMIET; EngTech TMIET)" and also "Chartered status is shown before the relevant professional membership, e.g. "Prof. Dame Carole Jordan DBE FRS CPhys FInstP", where DBE indicates Dame of the Order of the British Empire, FRS Fellow of the Royal Society, CPhys Chartered Physicist, and FInstP Fellow of the Institute of Physics, the awarding body for CPhys."
 * From these rules, I would place both charterships in front of the professional organisation – for CEng this would br the Enguneering Council-affiliated professional body you gained it through. To do otherwise could cause confusion. For example: CPhys FInstP CEng FIEE means the person got their CEng from the IEE, not the IoP, but CEng CPhys FInstP FIEE means they got both CPhys and CEng through the IoP but are also a fellow of the IEE. CEng FInstP CPhys FIEE would imply that they gained CEng through the IoP but CPhys through the IEE (which shouldn't be possible). The order of the two charterships isn't strictly defined and you can do what seems best (I notice the IoP website almost always used CEng CPhys, whether because CEng is considered senior or simply following alphabetical order is unknowable). Robminchin (talk) 21:28, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

Post-nominals
Of the four descriptions in the opening sentence 'Post-nominal letters, also called post-nominal initials, post-nominal titles, designatory letters or simply post-nominals' I am only familiar with last suggestion 'post-nominals'. Each of the first two descriptions, ‘post-nominal letters’ and ‘post-nominal initials’ could be a tautology. I am surprised at ‘post-nominal titles’ and I think the title of the article should be simply ‘post-nominals'. Anthony Staunton (talk) 00:19, 29 September 2023 (UTC)


 * A quick internet search shows that 'post nominals' appears most common in Australia, while 'post nominal letters' is generally used in British English. There doesn't appear to be any particularly good reason to change the WP:ENGVAR from British English to Australian English, so MOS:RETAIN seems to apply. Robminchin (talk) 00:32, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
 * And more to the point, part of the purpose of the opening sentence is to identify alternative terms so readers are certain they are on the right page. We would not remove source-attested alternatives regardless what the ENGVAR of the article is.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  04:46, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the quick responses. I graduated 50 years ago and have written extensively on British orders and medals and yesterday was the very first time I came across the expression ‘post-nominal letters.’ A quick Internet check is something I should have done. I agree with the comment about Australia, but I am sceptical ‘post-nominal letters’ is preferred in British English. I think something more authoritative is needed. I have raised the issue and welcome anyone to run with it. Anthony Staunton (talk) 06:36, 30 September 2023 (UTC)