Talk:Joan Plowright

Baroness

Lady Olivier, surely - rather than Baroness - which would suggest she held the title in her own right? Wikiman, 28th July 2006

This is always a contentious issue on Wikipedia. The wife of a life peer is a baroness, because a life peer is a baron. By convention, they are always addressed as "Lady", while a life peeress in her own right is addressed as "Baroness". But then, male life peers are always addressed as "Lord" (not "Baron"), yet on Wikipedia we use Baron. Using "Baroness" for a peer's wife is therefore consistent. JRawle (Talk) 01:20, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but this is just plain wrong, the title of Baroness is only ever used to refer to someone who is a peer in her own right. Otherwise, the courtesy title of the wife of a knight or life peer is always 'Lady <surname>'. To quote Burke's Peerage:

A baron's wife should be referred to in print as 'Lady Blank', 'The Lady Blank' or 'The Rt Hon The Lady Blank' in ascending order of formality and a baron's divorced wife as 'Jane Lady Blank'. A baron's children are addressed on an envelope as 'The Hon [short for 'Honourable' and sometimes still, if in rather old fashioned style, only partly shortened to Hon.ble] Adam/Eve Binks' (where Binks is the name of the family holding the barony of, e.g., Blank). They have no special form of address in direct speech. A baron would normally be addressed to his face as 'Lord Blank', his wife, whether current or divorced, and widow as 'Lady Blank'. Some peers and peeresses do not use the prefix Rt Hon on the grounds that it more properly belongs to Privy Counsellors: Lady Grimthorpe is one such among wives of barons. The form of second person address 'My Lord'/,My Lady', formerly in use even by those who felt themselves the social equal (or even the social superior) of the holder of the barony or his wife/former wife/widow, would now tend to be used only by domestic servants (if any), estate workers (if any), tenants (if any) and tradesmen in a small way of business.[1] user:lawsonrob 2028, 26 November 2006

Also, it should definitely be stated in this entry that, publicly, as an actress, she is indeed known as Dame Joan Plowright. Her title of "Lady Olivier" is her "private life" title.

Marriage to Olivier

213.219.151.76 (talk • contribs) removed this text, commenting in the edit summary, "remove uncited weasly gossip - if cite found reinsert":

although there is evidence that they were estranged some years before that event, possibly due to Olivier's bisexuality, but more likely because of his growing problems with alcohol.

I found the following citation [2], however the article is dated May 2006, and so I suspect is using Wikipedia as its source. Therefore I'm not re-inserting the passage for the moment.

• That they were estranged was added by 67.172.190.185 (talk • contribs) [3]
• Bisexuality was first mentioned as a cause by 70.19.35.225 (talk • contribs) [4]
• Alcohol was mentioned by 67.172.187.122 (talk • contribs) [5]

JRawle (Talk) 22:32, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Joan Plowright.png

Image:Joan Plowright.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 20:48, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Joan Plowright. 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/20110630083646/http://wif.org/past-recipients to http://wif.org/past-recipients

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

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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} 01:09, 2 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Joan Plowright. 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/20151101161627/http://www.scunthorpetelegraph.co.uk/pictures/STAR-PUPILS-REVEALED-Famous-people-Scunthorpe/pictures-26690493-detail/pictures.html to http://www.scunthorpetelegraph.co.uk/pictures/STAR-PUPILS-REVEALED-Famous-people-Scunthorpe/pictures-26690493-detail/pictures.html

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

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:16, 26 November 2017 (UTC)

Comment

Moved from article Keith D (talk) 09:54, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

This is incorrect. Dame Joan is not a Baroness and is not entitled to be called ' the Right Honourable'. That title is reserved for members of the Privy Council - a mistake which is sadly made a great deal on Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2a00:23c4:c382:d200:c57c:1fe1:bf09:14b3 (talk • contribs) 22:51, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

Title again

185.186.207.96, Gold Wiz113, Angus.irvine.9, as just the latest to contend Plowright's titles, please discuss here instead of flipping the article back and forth. And you should really be relying on how reliable sources refer to this individual person, rather than arguing about how titling rules ought to be applied to her. -- Fyrael (talk) 14:16, 27 September 2021 (UTC)