Talk:Lists of post-nominal letters

Order of Letters

Two things I would like to change (apart from getting rid of the school letters!):

• First (and I don't think it can be disputed): Medical qualifications surely means FRCS, LRCP, DPH, and so on. Degrees in medicine and surgery (BM, BCh, BAO, MCh, DM, and other permutations) are university degrees and should appear as such. They are medical qualifications, but for the purposes of where to list them I think they are degrees. My Debrett even lists "MB BS" and "MS" in the university degree section.

• Secondly (more controversial): I think religious orders (pace Debrett) should appear immediately after the name (in the case of a baronet, possibly after Bt/Bart; presumably members of religious orders would not be esquires[?]). Basil Hume, for example, is almost always "Basil Hume OSB OM". I know it's not necessarily a good guide, but type "Basil Hume OSB OM" and "Basil Hume OM OSB" into Google and you will get twenty times as many returns for the former version (inlcuding the Royal Society of Portrait Painters, the Catholic Church in England and Wales, and Clifford Longley) as for the latter (only two of those, both of them Italian). Henry Wansbrough is definitely always "The Very Revd Dom Henry Wansbrough OSB MA STL LSS", not "MA STL LSS OSB". The letters for the religious order are bestowed by the Church on behalf of God, to whom even the Queen defers! They are also virtually part of the person's name, especially if he has taken a new name on becoming a monk (or friar etc).

What are these organisations?

• Fellow of the Academy of Saint Cecilia FASC
  • Has a website and claims some fairly noteworthy connections but it's not clear what it is for. Fellowship appears to cost £15 p.a. for anybody who can claim an interest in early music.

• Fellow of the Academy of Musicians FAM
  • A Google search returns only this page, or some other version of it.

• Fellow of the Faculty of Young Musicians FFYM
  • A Google search returns only this page, or some other version of it, and this: Fellow#Learned_societies.

• Fellow of the Academy of Saint Philip Neri FASPN
  • A Google search returns only this page, or some other version of it.

• Fellow of the Faculty of Liturgical Musicians FFLM
  • Has this website, but is apparently not currently active. It appears to have something to do with The Most Revderend Andrew Linley, RSStS, Supervising Bishop, The Liberal Rite.

Are the above linked with organisations such as

• Metropolitan College of Music,
• North and Midlands School of Music, and
• Norwich School of Church Music?

I wonder if these are spin-offs of the Burgon Society and the now inactive Central Institute London.

--Oxonian2006 16:34, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

• I don't think any are related to the Burgon Society in my knowledge. I've heard that activity has waned for some of these music societies... --Charlie Huang 【遯卋山人】 22:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Google does not return any (relevent) results for:

• European Accademy of Financial Management
• Academy of Musicians
• Faculty of Young Musicians
• Academy of Saint Philip Neri

Hence I am removing them.
Contributed by User:Derbyadhag, 16:01, 23 December 2007

This is both misleading and wrong. See:

• "European Academy of Financial Management" yields http://www.ecfm.sk/vzdelavanie.html in both altavista and google
• "Academy of Musicians" could be anything, however http://www.freewebs.com/academyofmusicians/ looks relevant. It was the first result in altavista
• according to Fellow#Learned_or_professional_societies, "Faculty of Young Musicians" is now defunct. However postnominals could in principle be retained in the list for historical interest. The result was returned by google and other search engines.
• for "Academy of Saint Philip Neri" google returns nothing, but altavista returns http://www.definition-of.com/FASPN, which is not definitive, but appears at least not to be a simple Wikipedia mirror.

Just because you don't immediately get confirmation by typing something into Google, that doesn't mean that thing is wrong. Just remember this simple equation:

Google ≠ God

—DIV (128.250.80.15 (talk) 04:24, 20 June 2008 (UTC))

Doctors

The usage of Dr (prenominal) and PhD (postnominal) varies, and both are seen. I suggest removing the general rule mentioned in the notes accordingly. Also 'suffices' is a verb; whereas 'is suffices' makes no sense. typo 'obtanied' in the preceding line was missed. Icairns 10:41, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I have read somewhere that the rule is, at Oxford, "Dr John Smith", but at Cambridge, "John Smith, Esq, PhD". For a knighted doctor "Dr Sir John Smith" is acceptable (Dr Sir Conrad Swan, for example) although I would drop "Dr" as a matter of preference (perhaps, "Sir Conrad Swan KCVO PhD", would do, though if he is, as I believe, a Cambridge PhD, perhaps "Dr Conrad Swan" was un-Cambridge anyway). What other universities do, I don't know. There may be an argument for preferring "The Reverend John Smith DD", "Sir John Smith DCL", "John Smith DLitt", etc in order to recognise that the doctor is of the senior kind. I know at least one person who persists in the belief that doctors of philosophy are not entitled to the title "Dr". He is in a very small minority.--Oxonian2006 16:34, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

In my experience the 'rule' is rather that the honorific 'Dr' is used for medical doctors generally, but for doctors of philosophy etc. only within their own field or by students, with the suffix PhD being used outside the field. At Cambridge the nameplates outside fellow's rooms had the honorifics 'Dr', 'Prof.' etc, as appropriate, rather than the postnominal letters. Whether this usage extended to other contexts I cannot say. Stackers 23:31, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

All those who claim a doctorate in some form may use 'Dr' as can physicians. In the case of Anglican clergy the usual title is 'Rev Mr' but if a priest holds a doctorate (such as DD from Lambeth) then the address is 'Rev Dr' whereas 'Rev' alone refers to other Protestant clergy. Catholic and Orthodox clergy prefer 'Fr' (Father). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnwander (talk • contribs) 19:31, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Link letters where appropriate?

For example, MBE to the right disambig'd page Robin Patterson 06:11, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Well, I guess that will work if this article stays static, but I can foresee confusion if it expands beyond the present UK and Commonwealth letters given. e.g., if American prof'l terms are added, who decides whether ME is Mechanical Engineer or Medical Examiner? Quill 07:52, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Legal post nominal letters?

Um, I don't know about other countries, but in Canada post-nominal letters are restricted to internal use in an organization or are controlled by the government. If I have time, this page will get overhauled. I think if anyone wants to keep the intra-organizational ones they should be listed as separate from the country, or at least Canada. --metta, The Sunborn ☸ 14:41, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Most of these are "controlled by the government". To issue people with post-nominals, an organisation needs a charter from the Crown granting it permission to do that - such charters are held by, for instance, universities, learned societies and professional organisations like the Institute of Chartered Accountants. Are there any in particular here that you don't think are authorised? Proteus (Talk) 14:54, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Yes, I only noticed one, under Canada anyway. I looked at the British section and thought it fishy that the Order of Jesus gets a post-nom. I really didn't know. There are very few organizations with this status in Canada; Universities, Professional Organizaions, and the governemnt itself (Military). The United Empire Loyalists AFAIK is not allowed to do grant post-nominal letters. And maybe not overhaul the article, just needs to have the professional post-noms in Canada.--metta, The Sunborn ☸ 16:21, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

"SJ", being a religious post-nominal, is probably issued by the Vatican or the RCC rather than the Crown. Major religions usually have de facto permission to issue titles and post-nominals (I doubt there is a warrant permitting the use of "Rabbi" by Rabbis, for instance, but there's no way the government of any Commonwealth country would object to its use). I agree, however, that "UE" is almost certainly unauthorised, and should probably be removed. Some schools also try to give their alumni post-nominals as well, but these are also unauthorised and can't be used in any formal sense (I'm willing to be corrected on this, as some very important schools may in fact have permission to do this, but I'm not aware of any such exceptions). Proteus (Talk) 16:37, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

"UE" is official. It has never been revoked since it was proclaimed by Lord Dorchester in 1789. However, it is true that there is no body to regulate who has the right to use the letters.

• I think I lost you guys. Are you saying that the above discussion only pertains to Canada? Certainly wouldn't hold true in the U.S., e.g.

This pertains to all Commonwealth countries. The US only really has academic and professional post-nominals, and I'm unaware of any legal protection they may have. Proteus (Talk) 22:59, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Yes, there *is* legal protection, one can't just use the initials "MD" or "RN" for example; I believe the idea is that the public must be protected. Also, you mentioned "SJ" above, and the US certainly has religious orders and their associated letters. And US citizens who have foreign honours may use their post-nominal letters as far as I know. Quill 10:05, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I'd like to see a 'fix' here as well, but for a couple of different reasons. This is called "List of..." but there is a redirect at "Post Nominal", which is where an article should be. Also, I agree that it's not always clear which countries we're speaking about. Quill 22:38, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I agree - there should be an article on Post-nominal letters (there is one at the moment, but it's a stub). (It could discuss, amongst other things, what we've been talking about here.) This article should probably be in two parts: a list of all post-nominals (including academic degrees, etc.) in alphabetical order, and a list of Commonwealth honours etc. in the order they appear after the name. That would allow both easy understanding of any particular post-nominal someone has come across ("What does "DCL" mean?") and a reference concerning in which order they should appear ("Which comes first, "AK" or "GCB"?"). Proteus (Talk) 22:59, 7 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Works for me. Quill 10:05, 8 Oct 2004 (UTC)

A reference concerning in which order they should appear ("Which comes first, "AK" or "GCB"?"). Leave it to the limeies to require an order on such things. AFAIK you can legally put title's in any order. However, government awards must be displayed in order on your chest.

Yeah, I also was thinking you are missing the rarely used kt post-nom to denote a knight without an order. Compaire and contrast with KT. On a side note, today in class the enigneering licencing group came and talked with us, I am a nuclear engineering student. They said unless you are licenced to practice engineering you can't actually call yourself an engineer, which I thought was real cool. Of course the same goes for doctors, dentists and lawyers, nurses and hygeneists are very close to becomming that way too. Then again, Canada just started licencing "traditional Chinese medicine", so we will have a very full list of professional post-noms. ---The Sunborn

I realize that the postnominal letters for the Order of St. John are only for internal use within the order, but would anyone have any objection to my adding them ? Dowew 03:57, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

I'd have no objection as long as it's very clear they're not for general usage. Proteus (Talk) 12:49, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

England and Wales

In relation to LL.D this can be a substantive degree and therefore is not always an honorary degree.

As for BVC and LPC these are abbreviations for the two professional courses and are not post nominal letters.

But do they give rise to post nomials? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.211.143.153 (talk) 19:46, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

LL.L

I'm Wondering if anyone Knows what LL.L Means. As Far as I can Tell It is Some Kind of Law Degree ? Michael Drew 00:36, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Legum Licentiate, or roughly, licensure of laws. -James Howard (talk/web) 01:46, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

As far as I know LL.L is the a Law Degree for Lawyers under the Civil Law system in Quebec 02:08, 26 October 2005 (UTC)69.193.120.33 02:08, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

French post nominals ?

Should we point out things like French Canadian Privy Councilors utilize the postnominal letters "C.P." to indicate that they are in the privy council ? For example Pierre Elliot Trudeau's order of canada citation doesn't translate this [1]

Provincial Orders

The Canadian Provincial Orders are out of order. see Canadian order of precedence (Decorations and Medals) I am going to change them Dowew 01:43, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Order of post-nominal letters

Honours are listed first in descending order of precedence, followed by degrees and memberships of learned societies in ascending order.

I almost agree with that; degrees are usually listen in ascending order (e.g. BSc PhD). So shouldn't they be listed in the table in that order? Or at least there should be a note that they are usually listed in the opposite order.

But what about "learned societies"? In the table they seem to be in the order they should be listed after a name. But I don't think this is "ascending order" as the sentence quoted above seems to suggest. The example I'm familiar with is of Chartered Physicists, who use CPhys MInstP (in agreement with the table). But I'd argue that CPhys is the higher grade – or more accurately chartered status and membership aren't on the same scale. --JRawle 18:36, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Ref Notes

I have started using ref notes to link to footnotes in the Canadian section. Does anyone have any objection to this format ? Dowew 23:46, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

I have done them, but I think they are kinda distracting so I am going to change them back Dowew 21:31, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

South African postnominal letters

Has anyone thought of doing an article on the South African postnominal letters, especially with honours such as the Decoration for Meritorious Services? South African honours, even the republican ones have postnominal letters. - (Aidan Work 03:46, 3 January 2006 (UTC))

I for one am not familiar with those postnoms but would welcome them on this page. I suppose we could also add the postnominal letters for the Hong Kong Honour System. Dowew 07:10, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Rhodesian postnominal letters

Has anyone thought of writing an article on the Rhodesian Honours System which was instituted after the declaration of the 'Republic of Rhodesia' in 1970? The Rhodesian Honours System also utilised postnominal letters as well, in line with British & British Commonwealth tradition. - (Aidan Work 03:46, 3 January 2006 (UTC))

Setup of this page ?

I think we really ought to come up with some formula for how this page will be set up ? The current problem is that many commonwealth countries still have a place for British Honours on their Order of Precidence. For one thing, I think every country that recognizes Queen Elizabeth II still uses the Royal Victorian Order as the queen's personal gift - in fact I read a document on the Australian honours site that strictly says the Government will not interfere with an Order which is the queen's personal perogative. - So do we list the RVO, LVO, and MVO (as well as the RVM) on every list ? Should the lists be in the order of wear or should they just be a list like

For example : if we simply did list the Canadian one would look something like this

Office	Post-nominal
Meritorious Service Decoration
Meritorious Service Cross	MSC
Meritorious Service Medal	MSM

whereas if were to list them is the correct order it would be

Canadian Decorations
Meritorious Service Cross	MSC
Medal of Bravery	MB
Meritorious Service Medal	MSM

I have been beefing up the New Zealand section based on the official order of wear but I didn't include any "British Orders" including the Royal Victorian Order - mostly out of Lazyness. I just want some feedback before I continue. Dowew 22:43, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Dowew, the Imperial British Royal Honours are an essential item to list in every British Dominion orders of wear, however, Canada is a notable exception, given their funny attitudes towards titles, especially knighthoods & damehoods. The South African & Rhodesian orders of wear should also include British Royal Honours, as there are still a few holders of these alive. - (Aidan Work 23:52, 3 January 2006 (UTC))

I agree that Canada's postition on honours is a little fuzzy. I should point out that there are a couple of Canadian citizens who hold British Honours (mostly Knight Bachelor) - for more information see Nickle Resolution. Dowew 05:05, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

There is one living canadian who is also a companion of honour : John de Chastelain, although he is a dual citizen Dowew 09:49, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Antigua and Barbuda

Anyone object to adding post-nominal letters for their orders ? I've found them on these websites

• [2]
• [3]

Papua New Guinea

I've added it to the page from these pages

[4] [5]

I don't think you need to ask if the info comes from a government website... its official after all... Greentubing 10:01, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Turns out from the time of the original news release about the Order and the actually formation of them the order of precidence changed. [6] I am updating accordingly Dowew 06:37, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

Jamaica

I will add these when I have more time

[7]

Prime Minister PM

I notice someone recently added to the UK section PM to mean Prime Minister, and someone else (correctly) removed it. I would like to point out, however, that Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper has recently been billing himself on leaflets (dare I use the words propoganda) as The Right Honourable Stephen Harper PM. I will make a reference notes of this on the Canadian section. Feel free to reword it to be better. Dowew 23:07, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

A lot of parliamentarians (and others) use incorrect postnominals. In Australia, members of the House of Representatives are often referred to as MHRs, which is fine, but the only correct postnominal is MP. Nevertheless, many of them have letterheads that call themselves, eg. "The Hon Joe Bloggs MHR". Whenever I see one, I just wince, cringe, weep, shrug, sigh ... and then move on. JackofOz 04:24, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

The distinction in Australia is that the Australian Federal Parliament uses the postnominal MP for the House of Representatives, but some State Parliaments use other postnominals depending upon the title of the respective chamber of parliament. For example, in Victoria, members of the House of Representatives (lower house) use MHR, whilst members of the Legislative Assembly (upper house) use MLA. AusTerrapin (talk) 08:30, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Quite some confusion there, AusTerrapin. The Victorian Legislative Assembly is the lower house of the Victorian Parliament; the upper house is the Victorian Legislative Council. Members of these chambers have the postnominals MLA and MLC respectively. The only House of Representatives in Australia is the lower house of the Federal Parliament, which sits in Canberra. -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 08:58, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

I stand corrected on the technicalities - I've clearly been living out of the state for too long :b - that'll teach me not to double check before posting. Notwithstanding, the essence of my point still remains, ie that there are a variety of different postnominals in use depending upon which house/chamber of which parliament. AusTerrapin (talk) 01:01, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

FRAS

What about FRAS (Fellow of the Royal Astronomical Society)? and the lower orders of the other professional institutions? Modest Genius ^talk 19:05, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

2 or more in one Order

If one is awarded membership in an order, say, as a Commander, and then subsequently is "promoted" to a Knight Commander, for instance, do you get to use both post-noms, or just the highest? 209.92.136.131 21:22, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Although there are a few anomalies, for example I think if you are awarded the Royal Victorian Medal and subsequently made a member of the Royal Victorian Order they are considered seperate awards, and you keep both. I think the same used to go for the British Empire Medal before the statues were changed to allow full status to those holding the medal. Usually however, member in an order is not just an "award"...it is a position within a group. To use the Royal Victorian example, those holding the medals hold a decoration, while those who are in the order hold an appointment in the group. You cannot hold more than one position in the Order at the same time. For example, when Elizabeth II succeeded she stopped being a Knight of the Garter, and became Sovereign of the Garter. When Adrienne Clarkson was made Governor General of Canada she held the rank of Officer in the Order of Canada. When she was installed GG she was made a supernumerary (not counting towards the quota) Companion of the Order, and simultaneously held the status of "Chancellor" of the Order. When she was replaced, Michaelle Jean became Chancellor, but Clarkson remained a Companion. In the 70's Princess Anne was made a Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order. She held this status until very recently when The Queen appointed her the position "Grand Master" of the Order. As such, she is still holder of a Grand Cross, but now has a higher position than others in the order. So, basically...the answer is no. If you are a lower rank in an order and are subsequently promoted you must surrender your previous appointment before receiving you higher appointment. Dowew 22:01, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

You'll sometimes see multiple awards in the same order appended as separate postnominals, e.g. in death notices for senior people, where it might appear as "Gerald Smith MBE OBE CBE". This is quite wrong; the only correct reference would be "Gerald Smith CBE". Showing all the ones they acquired along the way is the equivalent of referring to a general who came up through the ranks as "Private Sergeant Lieutenant Major Colonel General Jones". -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 09:04, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Republic of Mauritius

will add them later [8] Dowew 22:03, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Nursing titles overload!!

Is there a need to have every nursing title down? I suggest one line with "Nursing titles" and examples such as RGN, SRN, RNA etc Panthro 01:57, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

IEEE, IntPE, CNP - International? U.S.A.?

The IEEE has no post-nominal rights in the UK. Post-nominal letters arise through a royal charter / privy council. You cannot just make up an organization and add your own post-nominals otherwise it would be meaningless. Anyone putting MIEEE / FIEEE after their name is misrepresenting their status. Alas there doesn't appear to be anyone able to stop this deceptive practice. AtomBoy

Thanks for removing that! I thought that this was strange, very strange. I never heard of IEEE members getting post-nominals in the UK or anywhere else! -RobertBlacknut 02:44, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

The U.S.A. doesn't have a royal family and, as far as I know, isn't a colony, anymore!

What are the rules for post-nominals in the U.S.A.?

Matter of fact, there is no section, and nothing listed, for the U.S.A.

Why?

The USA government does authorize a few post-nominals (by law). Some of these (very few as far as I know) are:

P.E. -- Professional Engineer

L.L.S. -- Licensed Land Surveyor

R.N. -- Registered Nurse

C.P.A. -- Certified Public Accountant

?? -- running out of legally authorized post-nominals!?

Of course, educational post-nominals are used in the USA (like Ph.D., M.D., D.D.S., J.D., and others) but these are educational and not legally protected or regulated by the government -- as far as I know (please correct me here if someone knows otherwise). In the case of the US, there may need to be a distinction made between post-nominals are that legally authorized and regulated by the government itself and those which are not (like educational degrees). The government does protect the post-nominals that it authorizes (one can get convicted of a crime and fined for using a government-authorized post-nominal without the proper permission by the government) but I am not aware of any legal or protective oversight for non-government post-nominals -- like the various educational post-nominals that are seen out there. -RobertBlacknut 00:10, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I was also surprised that there is completely no mention of the United States on this page. At the very least, there should be a brief description and a pointer to Suffix (name) -- Alan 11:57, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

IntPE (International Professional Engineer) isn't listed

(see http://www.engc.org.uk/International/About_International_Register.aspx )

CNP (Certified Network Professional) isn't listed

(see http://www.cnp.org/ )

University alumni and degrees

A few problems here:

1). Do the universities all have any official post nominal style to identify the institution? "Exon" and "Ebor" strike me as simply copying the local Bishop's style after "Dunelm" for "Durham" (whereas "Oxon" is the bishop copying the university). And other ones in circulation seem curious - I've read that "Cantuar" is similarly the style for Kent but never seen this myself, and "Cantuar" just means "Canterbury", not "Kent" or "Kent at Canterbury" (the university's original name).

(And if it's based on the bishop then some of the university's newer campuses are under the Bishops of Rochester (Roffen) and Gibraltar in Europe (who doesn't appear to have a style). Putting "BSc (Guildford)" after a Surrey graduate would be especially silly!)

2). The exact order for listing degrees causes a lot of confusion, particularly when one holds degrees from multiple institutions or with the same names (e.g. someone who holds both an Oxbridge MA and a real MA) or even those who've returned to their first institution for a third degree or studied out of order. Plus do Certificates and Diplomas come between the relevant degrees, before, after or not at all?

3). I don't think the Associateships are actual degrees, and for that matter the other Imperial associateships aren't listed.

4). "Legal Qualifications", "Medical Qualifications" and "Teaching Qualifications" contain a lot of academic awards - should they be separated out or appear alongside the academic ones? Timrollpickering 15:17, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Well reading OU literature gives the full post nominal as BA (Open), BSC (Open) etc. --Blowdart 18:53, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Does any graduate of Worcester University stick (Wigorn) after his or her degree, or is this surmise? It puts me in mind of the story about a Bishop of Worcester (Philip Goodrich, I guess, because Peter Selby reverted to the Latin) who when asked by his Chaplain why he didn't sign with the Latin version of the name of his see replied that he preferred to "let Wigorns be Wigorns". Kranf (talk) 14:16, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Worcester's only had degree awarding powers since 1997 and full university status since 2005, and it takes even longer for the degrees to come online (existing students have the legal default of one from the previous degree awarding body as that is what they signed up for). So it's rare to actually encounter anybody who has a Worcester degree and includes the institution in writing. (Also isn't "Wigorn" usually used for the county, not the city?) And for those who do I suspect it would be derived from the English or copied from a list they've seen. (University prospectuses that list the staff's degrees are often full of inconsistencies, suggesting the individual academics or departmental staff have been trying to work these out themselves.) Timrollpickering (talk) 14:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

This document, OXFORD UNIVERSITY CALENDAR: NOTES ON STYLE, gives some rather sensible advice which ought to clear up several questions raised here. Some of my own observations:

1. I'm sure the post-nominal abbreviation for the university has nothing to do with the bishop. Universities are mostly secular institutions and are not under episcopal oversight. The point of the abbreviation is to say from which university the degree issues. 'BA (Roffen)' would suggest to me a pretentious graduate of the University of Rochester, not a graduate of the University of Kent campus in the diocese of Rochester. Furthermore, what about dioceses which have more than one university? 'Oxon', for example, could not refer to both Oxford and Oxford Brookes. The link with the bishops seems to be a pretentious attempt to Latinise all university names. Some are well established, such as Oxon, Cantab, Dunelm, and perhaps Londin; Ebor and Exon are perfectly understandable. I imagine that 'Wigorn' for Worcester would probably have most people stumped so would be best avoided. The point is to be clear, not rich in historical connotation.

2. As a rule, as pointed out in the Oxford guide, the degrees should be listed in ascending order by order of the most junior degree from each institution: BA PhD Newcastle, MA London. By the way, I don't see why you insist on distinguishing between Oxbridge MAs and real MAs. How 'real' a degree is has nothing to do with the work one has to do in order to be awarded it. Degrees are awarded for all sorts of reasons. Many people at Oxford, Cambridge, and Dublin are admitted to degrees of those universities by incorporation of their degrees held in the other universities, or they are admitted to the degree of Master of Arts on taking up an office within the university or a college of the university. These are all real degrees. There are people at Oxford, say, who are MA PhD Cantab [educated at Cambridge], MA DPhil Oxon [incorporated on taking up a job at Oxford]. They are still real Oxford MAs and DPhils.

As for certs and dips, I learned in my previous occupation that they don't count for anything as far as post-nominal letters are concerned. The Reverend John Smith, MA DipTh (Oxon) is apparently correctly the Revd John Smith, MA (Oxon). However, if you are listing somebody's credentials is makes sense to include them. If naming the universities I would put them after the degrees of a certain university, if not naming the universities then at the very end: (a) John Smith, BA PGCE Lond, MPhil Newc, or (b) John Smith, BA MPhil PGCE, or if the university for the PGCE doesn't matter, BA Lond, MPhil Newc, PGCE. I suppose if you have a BA from the University of East Croydon and a PGCE from Cambridge you might want to say, 'BA East Croydon, PGCE Cantab'. The certificate is just awarded by the institution, whereas the degree is a degree within the university hierarchy. When I say that I am an MA Lond I mean that I am an MA of the University of London, not that I have an MA of the University. This is a point lost on many people.

3.Interesting. AKC obviously used to be a college award as opposed to a university degree. I suppose now that King's awards degrees Associate of KCL seems to be rather like a degree within the college. I think it could be classed as a kind of diploma or a kind of office within the college. I suppose it is best described as an anomaly.

4. Agreed.

Open University: for some reason they are very keen on promoting the use of the word 'Open' after their degrees. It is not necessary to use it and I don't know why they make such a big thing of it. The degree in full is 'Bachelor of Arts of the Open University', which can be rendered 'BA' or 'BA Open' according to the situation.

--Oxonian2006 (talk) 14:42, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

I have noticed that a number of universities (2 in my area - University of Chester and Staffordshire University) are not listed here. Do they not have powers to use anything to identify where your degree has come from or are they missing from the list and need to be added? -Thanks Frognsausage (talk) 14:51, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

United States?

The US is conspicuously absent from the nation-by-nation list of letters. Should the intro point out that honors are unconstitutional in the US but that qualifications and sometimes academic degrees are used? [Oh, I see this is mentioned above]

--Dartmothian (talk) 17:08, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Post-nominals for Queen's Scouts

While an individual is created a Queen's Scout by Royal Warrent and is hence able to use the title publicly throughout life, I am not sure if the title enables the use of post-nominals. KS and QS were traditionally used for King's Sergeant and Queen's Sergeant but the Order of "Serjeants-at-law" was dissolved in 1877.

I have not found anything relating to Queen's Scouts being able to use QS after their name, "John Smith,Queen's Scout" would be aceptable be I cannot find any mention of QS. Hence I am removing them from the list and transfering them to the "titles" article. I intend to remove scout from the "titles" article as it is not a title, it is a position.

RIN

Perhaps the Royal Institute of Navigation post-nominals should be added? 128.86.155.140 (talk) 23:54, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Other meaning of S.J.?

In the following publications:

• JAMES W. MCBAIN and CARROLL M. O'SULLIVAN; “Development of an air-driven ultracentrifuge”; Journal of the American Chemical Society; American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C.; April 1935; 57 (4): pp. 780781.
• JAMES W. MCBAIN and CARROLL M. O'SULLIVAN; “The development of the air-driven spinning top as transparent ultracentrifuge”; Journal of the American Chemical Society; American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C.; December 1935; 57 (12): pp. 26312641.

The second author was listed in each original paper as "Carroll M. O'Sullivan, S.J.". Both authors were from the Stanford Dept. of Chemistry. It seems odd to mark an author as a Jesuit in a secular, scholarly journal. Is this the only possible interpretation? The only other idea I had was that it could be something in the law (related to 'juris').

—DIV (128.250.80.15 (talk) 08:19, 5 June 2008 (UTC))

It seems that he was indeed a Jesuit. See this obituary (the second one down), for instance. Proteus (Talk) 08:55, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Nicely cleared up! —DIV (128.250.80.15 (talk) 03:56, 20 June 2008 (UTC))

"EMT" a post-nominal in the US, or anywhere else?

As of this writing it is listed in the article, but I am dubious. While it is no proof, I have never seen it used, anywhere as a post-nominal - as a title: yes; as a post-nominal: no. Unless it can be cited to Wiki standards, I suggest it be removed. Shoreranger (talk) 17:53, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Nationally Registered EMTs can use "NREMT-B" "NREMT-I85" "NREMT-I99" and "NREMT-P" dependent on which level of EMT they are. http://www.nremt.org/downloads/Newsletter_2008.pdf (on the third page). SSaint04 (talk) 05:19, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

It is quite common to see EMT-(B, I or P) used as a post-nominal in the bylines for professional journals and newsletters (I can't seem to find an online reference just off hand, however I see it fairly frequently in print.). It is also commonly used to list the license level of a person in a position which is not directly related to patient care (Member of a board or educator. etc) See: http://maine.gov/dps/ems/boards/ems_board/index.html and http://www.emsupdate.com/faculty.html

As noted above, NREMT can also be used, but in my experience is much less frequent, as NREMT tends to be something that doesn't really matter to EMTs, beyond getting or maintaining their state licenses. I do have an issue with listing EMT solely as a post-nominal, as it's quite rare to see EMT rather than EMT-B, EMT-I or EMT-P, however I'm concerned that splitting it out would be a little clunky. UnkieReamus (talk) 04:45, 29 November 2008 (UTC)

Post-nominals from more than one country

Is it good practice to list post-nominal military awards from countries other than the bearer's home nation? If so, presumably the 'home' honours take precedence over foreign honours. Are there rules/guidelines for such cases? The specific case I have in mind is John Cyril Porte, who, in addition to British honours, was awarded the Distinguished Service Medal (United States) posthumously.

The guidelines would differ from country to country - in Australia, unless the post-nominal is in the Australian Honours Order of Precedence, then the 'foreign' post-nominal is not used. Having said that, if the individual was being referred to in a country where he had earned a foreign post-nominal, then it may be used. For example: Peter Cosgrove AC, MC would be the format generally used, however in a New Zealand newspaper or media release, you may see him referred to as Peter Cosgrove AC, MC, CNZM. PalawanOz (talk) 07:16, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

PalawanOz, both Australia and New Zealand are Dominions, so the use of the post-nominal letters from one Dominion's honours system by a citizen from another Dominion is perfectly legitimate - (203.211.73.209 (talk) 01:55, 23 November 2009 (UTC))

Australia and New Zealand are now referred to as Commonwealth realms rather than dominions. Honours are awarded by the Sovereign, not the state, so they are recognised wherever the Queen is Sovereign.--Oxonian2006 (talk) 15:27, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

PalawanOz was correct about the use of post-nominals by Australians. CAG S548, 22 December 1997,Guidelines Concerning the Acceptance and Wearing of Foreign Honours and Awards by Australians explicitly states in sub-paragraph 9 that

"Foreign awards which provide for the use of post-nominals or titles in their country of origin may only be accepted on the understanding that the use of the post-nominals or honorary titles by Australians in Australia will not be recognised officially. Foreign awards are to be worn in accordance with The Order of Wearing Australian Honours and Awards."

Imperial awards granted prior to 05 October 1992 are considered Australian and so post-nominals may be used in these circumstances. The same is not true for awards post 05 October 1992. (See here and Michael Maton, The National Honours & Awards of Australia, ISBN 0 86417 679 1, Kangaroo Press, Sydney, 1995, pp 31, 33) Cheers, AusTerrapin (talk) 01:37, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Irish postnominal letters.

Is there any evidence for the first few, as the Republic of Ireland does not have an honours system in the strict sense of the word like the British Honours System? A link to Irish honours system should be linked, along with articles about Irish military decorations and medals to this article's page. - (203.211.73.209 (talk) 01:55, 23 November 2009 (UTC))

The first two are decorations from the Irish Defense Forces, the order of st. patrick is dorment and strickly speaking is Anglo-Irish. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.78.115.233 (talk) 05:09, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

List order within a section

I'm tidying up the order within the section: Fellowship or Membership of Professional Institutions But would like to flag up my approach for discussion:

The approach I'm taking is to list in alphabetical name of the 'body', so: 'Chartered Institute of XYZ' is listed before 'Institute of ABC' But then all the post-nominals for that organisation are listed together, in order of descending seniority, so:

Fellow of the Chartered Institute of XYZ - FCIXYZ Member of the Chartered Institute of XYZ - MCIXYZ Associate of the Chartered Institute of XYZ - ACIXYZ

This appears to generally follow other sections, and appears the best way, though most sections are fairly random, currently and that should be improved. If there is a better way to do this - please discuss.

User:adrest4 (talk) 13:13, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Proposed Split

The size of this article is getting to the point where it is a candidate to be split. I am thinking of a multiple split into the more sizeable country sections ie. Australia, UK and USA with the main page refering to the split off pages. Any thoughts? --Oliver Nouther (talk) 00:36, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Split done, still some work to do on the Talk pages. --Oliver Nouther (talk) 02:00, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Sounds sensible, the changes look good. I think that there is probably room to move a couple of the longer remaining lists to there own pages as well. Cheers, AusTerrapin (talk) 10:46, 22 June 2010 (UTC)