Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2013-11-20/Featured content

Discuss this story

You could say "Tippett", "Sir Michael", "Sir Michael Tippett", or even just plain old "Michael", but "Sir Tippett" is not the correct way to refer to an English knight of the realm. Pedantically yrs, Ben Mac Dui 13:14, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed, thanks. - Dank (push to talk) 13:29, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's if you want to reinforce a system of inherited wealth and power (knighthoods are predominantly a class-based institution, of course). I refuse to acknowledge them in writing, and no one has to do so on en.WP. Tony (talk) 04:33, 2 December 2013 (UTC) PS Dank, if you're going to add it to Tippett's name, perhaps to Britten's as well? Or neither. BTW, superb page this week. The top pic is a dramatic gem. Tony (talk) 04:35, 2 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a big fan of the honours system either but whether we ignore or use it, it's best to get it right - and yes, it is as ever an excellent page. Sir Ben de MacDui, CBE, KPMG and bar

Thanks much guys. Just saw this. "Sir" is gone. - Dank (push to talk) 02:34, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note that the first group of "fractional currency" is correctly referred to as "postage currency" due to the unique status of US stamps even prior to the Civil War. The Post Office noted that people were already using stamps as money (see Encased postage) as of July 1862. The Secretary of the Treasury was not the inventor of this in any way. What is most noteworthy is the hubris of several living people in having their own portraits on the fractional currency - the only time living persons have (identifiably) appeared on currency in the US. Collect (talk) 13:18, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

File:61st Academy Awards.jpg appears to have an invalid Fair Use rationale. It does not cover all points needed to be non free content on Wikipedia. Someone might want to take care of that.--Mark Miller (talk) 03:58, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]