Talk:Unparliamentary language

Linguistics: Applied Linguistics Low‑importance

	Linguistics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linguistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of linguistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinguisticsWikipedia:WikiProject LinguisticsTemplate:WikiProject LinguisticsLinguistics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Applied Linguistics Task Force.
	This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

Politics Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

"Economical with the truth"

Was it this phrase that owes its popularity to Matrix Churchill, as the article states? What about "economical with the actualité" (Arms-to-Iraq)? -86.140.131.100 21:41, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

General terminology

The article talks about "the House" and "the Speaker". Wouldn't it be more inclusive to refer to parliamentary chambers and presiding officers? "The House" usually refers to the lower house of a bicameral legislature, whereas both chambers have rules about unparliamentary language. -- JackofOz (talk) 00:36, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So have there been any instances of an otherwise innocent phrase which has gained notoriety being ruled as "unparliamentary language"? An example which springs to mind is "hiking the Appalachian trail". (Sorry to use an US one, but I don't read Private Eye, so I'm behind in knowing the equivalent current British examples -- although discussing Uganda did come to mind.) -- llywrch (talk) 20:17, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What's the penalty for use of unparliamentary language?

Or is there any penalty? 24.214.230.66 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 23:01, 18 August 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Good question, as far as I understand it usualy being barred from the debate for the reminder of the day. Perhaps somebody should write a line or to, ought to be something about it in some of the sources the articles got by now. 90.142.144.88 (talk) 16:29, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Unparliamentary language. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/20101025101110/http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/1212/1224260596889.html to http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/1212/1224260596889.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:08, 10 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]