Talk:Rory Cellan-Jones

Semi-protected
I've semi-protected this article for 5 days. On 11 April 2007 the subject edited his own article on-air in a BBC TV News item about Wikipedia, and as the edit history shows, no sooner was this shown on the Six O'Clock News than the vandals started turning up. -- Arwel (talk) 17:28, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, the subject was *shown* editing the article on-air - the history shows that he did it earlier today :). Mart inp23 19:48, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Pity it took three hours to figure out he wasn't an expert on asteroids though... Hut 8.5 20:16, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah - it surprised me that Rory's username was given a COI warning at 1430 ish, yet no one reverted the changes until after the story appeared. Sigh Mart inp23  20:22, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * At the time I gave the COI warning (14:36), he had only done this edit, which I assumed to be factual but unsourced. Shortly after I left him the warning, he did this far more blatant edit, but by that time I had left and was no longer watching the User:COIBot reports. RJASE1 Talk  01:36, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to remove the bit about his editing from the article - self referencing, undue weight. This same thing came up with Lisa Daniels and I think the same rationale applies - this wasn't a very big news story and our mention of it is here only because it was Wikipedia. Natalie 16:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Twitter
According to this article - http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/technology/2008/07/tech_corr_in_tech_hell.html he has a Twitter account. would it be worth expanding the bio box to list what subjects he writes for, and his twitter? SkippyUK (talk) 09:20, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

More notably, he is the highest profile person to date to have a potentially damaging mixup with the twitpic service, as referenced: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/technology/2009/03/causing_offence_by_accident.html This probably lends more weight to adding a twitter section. 97.113.90.114 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:35, 25 March 2009 (UTC).

Expertise
He's a lovely guy, but everything he writes about technology gives the impression that he's read a story he doesn't quite understand and now has to say something about it or he won't be paid.

From the article: "He has also evaluated the growth of online websites and companies including the rise of Google and wikipedia and online retailing."

OK, so has my father, 'evaluated', that is, and he swore a few years ago that he wouldn't allow a computer in the house while /he/ was alive. So, no doubt, has the little old lady / man down the road, who's just bought a television and is now working on how to make the pictures light up.

Or: "In 2004 he made an appearance on The Money Programme." Hmmm, enough said! Anyone who knows The Money Programme knows that appearing on it says nothing about technological knowledge or credibility.

If he went back to financial reporting, where everyone knows that no one really understands such a complex field, he'd at least be floundering as an equal in the pool of economists, worldwide. In comparison, computers are simple and logical enough to be understood by people, at least by the clever amongst them. In such a field of certainty and *verifiable* expertise he flounders, sadly, in the shallows, never quite seeming able to see what the strong, off-shore swimmers are occupying themselves with. When he picks up the stale flotsam and dries it out in his blog, those who know can tell. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.173.174.31 (talk) 21:39, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
 * This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject, it is a place to discuss how to improve the article. If you want to suggest a change to the article please say what it is. Hut 8.5 13:33, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Pronunciation of name
Can we please have a source for the assertion that Cellan is "pronounced /ˈkɛθlən/ KETH-lən"? When his name is mentioned on the radio they seem to pronounce it pretty much as in Welsh, ie [ˈkɛɬan]. Flapdragon (talk) 16:25, 26 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I was going to argue for neither, as both James and Simon say "Kellan", but hey listen to Rory pronounce his own name on this interview that's on YouTube: . Softlavender (talk) 04:22, 9 March 2012 (UTC)


 * The 'll' in Cellan-Jones is pronounced as in the Welsh language. Therefore it is not pronounced 'Kethlan'. The ɬ symbol, as used in the article is correct. I recommend you listen to Welsh pronunciations of Welsh place names, such as Llandudno. Rory's father was Welsh but I don't know why he didn't pronounce his surname in the Welsh. Maybe he was tired of English people mangling it. Prudens Hominem (talk) 09:41, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Hyphen for Rory, none for James and Simon.
Rory is the illegitimate son of James Cellan Jones (no hyphen). James's son Simon has no hyphen either. Because Rory is not a full member of the family, he uses a hyphen in his acquired (not birth) surname. This is all covered in James's memoir, Forsyte and Hindsight: Screen Directing for Pleasure and Profit. Softlavender (talk) 07:34, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * This implies that he changed his surname or added the hyphen at some point, which is simply not true. On the contrary, his birth was registered in Hammersmith as Nicholas R Cellan-Jones. Nick Cooper (talk) 09:36, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you; I have clarified that with the help of The Times obit of his father, which explains things. Softlavender (talk) 08:39, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

"specializing in economics and technology" needs citation
He discusses these subjects on the television, but I have seen no evidence that he specialises in them. This article needs more information on how he is able to claim such knowledge. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.65.35.27 (talk) 11:45, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Was Rory Cellan-Jones also a Hinchley Wood School alumni?
This seems to be the claim both on the School's wikipedia page and their website:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinchley_Wood_School#Notable_alumni Hinchley Wood School's history

I'm not sure what years they claim this to be, or whether it was the primary rather than the secondary school. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:9:8300:14CC:37:D00D:3892:667 (talk) 02:03, 31 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Hinchley Wood School is a secondary school, not a primary school, if that answers your question. Softlavender (talk) 02:12, 31 March 2015 (UTC)


 * PS: Debretts says Dulwich, so I think that claim is in error . Softlavender (talk) 02:21, 31 March 2015 (UTC)


 * There is a primary school of the same name (Hinchley Wood Primary School), IIRC these were originally one school so this may be the cause of confusion (or this claim is a complete fabrication). The Debretts article doesn't say whether he was at Dulwich for his entire term, so I think (at best) he may have been at Hinchley Wood before Dulwich. However, unless he lived nearby (wikipedia only says "London" as place of birth) then this claim does not seems plausible. Ahayd (talk) 17:21, 1 April 2015 (UTC)


 * The Hinchley Wood School article is not about the primary school, so he shouldn't be listed there even if he did attend the similarly named primary school. Debretts would have listed if he attended any other secondary or middle school. As it does not, and as there is no confirming independent source that says otherwise, he should not be listed as having attended that school. Hope that helps. Softlavender (talk) 02:18, 2 April 2015 (UTC)

Inclusion of future book Sophie from Romania
I included a sentence stating that Cellan-Jones's book was due to be published. This has been removed twice, with an assertion that its inclusion violated WP:CRYSTAL.

However, there is no explicit requirement in WP:CRYSTAL that future books are not permitted. (The editor who removed the sentence asserts that to "mention works that have not been published or screened yet" is "a violation".) Indeed, there is a large category tree under Category:Upcoming products that includes categories for books etc. that have not yet been published, implying that there is no requirement to not mention future works.

To my mind, WP:CRYSTAL concerns unfounded speculation. As I previously stated, there is no real doubt that the book is due for publication, and I provided a solid reference. And as can be easily verified, the book is available for pre-order from various established retailers, and furthermore Cellan-Jones has shown the publisher's proofs (post on X).

Hence I cannot accept that inclusion of the sentence violates WP:CRYSTAL so I am reinstating it.

--A bit iffy (talk) 08:36, 21 June 2024 (UTC)


 * It's blatant promotionalism and has gotten no independent coverage. Softlavender (talk) 01:44, 22 June 2024 (UTC)