Talk:Tan Cheng Lock

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Malaysia High‑importance

	Malaysia portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Malaysia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Malaysia and Malaysia-related topics 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.MalaysiaWikipedia:WikiProject MalaysiaTemplate:WikiProject MalaysiaMalaysia
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

"In the end, Tan decided that only a Chinese party could safeguard the interests of his community and that multi-ethnic cooperation was more likely to be achieved through partnership with UMNO. With that, the MCA joined with UMNO to form the Alliance, the precursor to the Barisan Nasional. However some people do not agree that he acted in best interest of Malaysian Chinese as some felt that the marginalisation of Malaysian Chinese would not be so severe had the British rule until now citing Hong Kong as an example."

Source please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 161.142.24.130 (talk) 08:28, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Tan Cheng Lock. 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:

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) 07:47, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Form of address

@DervotNum4 According to Debrett's, "The most common confusion is first and last names. Knights, baronets and dames are formally addressed as follows: title-first name-last name, for example Dame Maggie Smith. If you were to meet her in person, you would address her as follows: "Good morning, Dame Maggie"". By the same token, Sir Cheng Lock Tan shall never be addressed "Sir Tan Cheng Lock".

Both the scholarship and the trust fund which are named in his honour bear his name with the correct title and form of address. To follow Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, while the title of the article is "Tan Cheng Lock", the lead section should be "Sir Cheng Lock Tan" (i.e. "While a commonly recognizable form of name is used as the title of a biographical article, fuller forms of name may be used in the introduction to the lead. For instance, in the article Paul McCartney, the text of the lead begins: "Sir James Paul McCartney ..."."). Thanks for your attention. --Clithering (talk) 18:08, 9 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My main concern is that "Tan Cheng Lock" is a Chinese name (specifically Malaysian Chinese) in which the surname comes first. It seems odd that the addition of "sir" at the start of the name would change the name to match that of an "English" name. I don't think what the Debretts article says matters much here as the article doesn't address names in which the surname comes first in the name and because I odn't think wikipedia tends to follow formal address.

Your points and the scholarship and trust fund are probably your strongest points, though I still think it would be odd to use British naming conventions for a Malaysia-primary topic person because they were made a knight by the British. DervotNum4 (talk) 02:24, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Cheng-lock is not the only Chinese knight in Malaysia, Singapore and Hong Kong. These places share a similar if not common British colonial past. All the Chinese knights follow the same rule to put their given name after the "Sir" title (e.g. Sir Han Hoe Lim and Sir Sze-yuen Chung, to name a few). Sir Cheng-lock was active in the British Malayan politics. He received a knighthood as a substantive appointment, he used his title and used it correctly during his life time and his title had never been forfeited. The article title has already style him as "Tan Cheng Lock" and a remark has already stated that his surname is "Tan". There is no point to disregard all the facts and rules and conventions just because of one's own views and sentiment. --Clithering (talk) 04:54, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I concede the point. Good talking to you. DervotNum4 (talk) 15:31, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your understanding. Though not directly related, I would like to share you a fun fact that the Parsee have even gone further to change the structure of their names in order to inherit baronetcies: "When Sir Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy was made a baronet, it was realised that the Parsee custom was for a change of names for each generation. This conflicted with the British tradition of using consistent surname for a particular baronetcy. In 1915, the Imperial Legislative Council passed the Sir Jamsetjee Jejeebhoy Baronetcy Act, providing that all the male heirs should take these names and no other. Similar provision was made for subsequent Parsee baronets. All holders of the title relinquish their own names and assume that of the first Baronet." Clithering (talk) 06:11, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]