Talk:John Mortimer

I quote "In 1976 (Cardiff-South Wales) Mortimer was defence counsel at the obscene abusive case against a young mothers fight to get her child back from Social Services." The case was not based on obscenity and the use of that adjective in this instance departs from editorial guidelines with regard to a neutral point of view.Jatrius (talk) 20:30, 19 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

I deleted the sentence; if it's not about obscenity in the legal sense, there were probably many cases about "a young mothers[sic] fight to get her child back from Social Services". If it is in fact a notable case that comes to mind to British readers, enough context to uniquely define the case and hopefully explain what makes it notable should be added.--Prosfilaes (talk) 18:01, 19 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hello,

Just noticed that the link for his son Ross Bentley points to the wrong Ross Bentley his son does not have a wikipedia page.

Lainy LainyKitty 18:55, 4 December 2006 (UTC)Reply

 

Image:John Mortimer.jpg 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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:48, 5 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

The article says that he was knighted but gives no details. What order? I'm an American and that sort of thing confuses me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.31.194.252 (talk) 13:56, 17 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Almost certainly KBE (Knight Commander). Many of us in the UK regard such things as a joke anyway. Philip Cross (talk) 14:07, 17 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

In fact he was a Knight Bachelor. For further information, see the wiki article of that title, or Orders, decorations, and medals of the United Kingdom. Philip Cross regards such things as a joke, but the vast majority of the population do not, which is why the system continues unabated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.21.237.245 (talk) 21:35, 17 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

The article Order of the British Empire is more thorough. Philip Cross (talk) 21:55, 17 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

But largely irrelevant with regard to Knights Bachelor. Pedantry, i.e. getting things right, is something of which Wikipedia could well do with more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.20.215.31 (talk) 17:51, 18 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

Has no master, it has a dean.--User:Thewikiman 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I just added a long overdue ibox. I cherrypicked a few of his most notable works, rather than repeat the whole list. – ukexpat (talk) 14:55, 19 January 2009 (UTC)Reply

I just added a few more relevant project banners and gave them all a C assessment. The article is probably a B, but I don't feel qualified to make that call. – ukexpat (talk) 15:03, 25 February 2009 (UTC)Reply

I can't access the Times obituary cited there (it just goes to the Times main page), so I am confused about what this sentence is trying to say. I can guess (it reminds me of Robert Graves' stories in Goodbye to all That), but what does it mean? Adam Bishop (talk) 09:28, 4 July 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on John Mortimer. 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/20140222061220/http://www.lastingtribute.co.uk/tribute/mortimer/2998415 to http://www.lastingtribute.co.uk/tribute/mortimer/2998415

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} 09:04, 30 August 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on John Mortimer. 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/20070403191043/http://www.625.org.uk/biograph/biogmort.htm to http://www.625.org.uk/biograph/biogmort.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110717003819/http://www.thehist.com/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=122&Itemid=598 to http://www.thehist.com/index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=122&Itemid=598
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110717003915/http://www.thehist.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=648&Itemid=601 to http://www.thehist.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=648&Itemid=601

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: 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:32, 7 December 2017 (UTC)Reply