User talk:DBD/Archive 26

Archives

Archive 1 (July 2005 – July 2006)
Archive 2 (August 2006)
Archive 3 (September – October 2006)
Archive 4 (November 2006 – Jan 2007)
Archive 5 (February – April 2007)
Archive 6 (May 2007)
Archive 7 (June – July 2007)
Archive 8 (August – December 2007)
Archive 9 (January – March 2008)
Archive 10 (April – June 2008)
Archive 11 (July – September 2008)
Archive 12 (October – November 2008)
Archive 13 (Dec 2008 – May 2009)
Archive 14 (June 2009 – May 2010)
Archive 15 (June 2010 – January 2011)
Archive 16 (February – July 2011)
Archive 17 (August – November 2011)
Archive 18 (Dec 2011 – January 2012)
Archive 19 (February – March 2012)
Archive 20 (April – July 2012)
Archive 21 (August – October 2012)
Archive 22 (Nov 2012 – March 2013)
Archive 23 (April – July 2013)
Archive 24 (August – November 2013)
Archive 25 (Dec 2013 – April 2014)
Archive 26 (May – October 2014)
Archive 27 (Nov 2014 – May 2015)
Archive 28 (June – October 2015)
Archive 29 (Nov 2015 – April 2016)
Archive 30 (May – November 2016)
Archive 31 (Dec 2016 – July 2017)
Archive 32 (August – October 2017)
Archive 33 (Nov 2017 – July 2018)
Archive 34 (August 2018 – May 2019)
Archive 35 (June – November 2019)
Archive 36 (Dec 2019 – June 2020)
Archive 37 (Sep 2020 – Aug 2021)
Archive 38 (Sep 2021 – June 2022)

May–October 2014

Disambiguation link notification for May 1[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Diocese of Norwich (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Reepham

Diocese of Oxford (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added a link pointing to Bishop of Dorchester

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:42, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, DBD. You have new messages at Scrivener-uki's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talk:Marie of Romania/GA1[edit]

This user helped promote Marie of Romania to good article status.

Marie of Romania, an article to which you have contributed, has been listed as a Good Article. Keep up the good work! SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 10:10, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

May 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Diocese of Oxford may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

| archdeacons = [[Karen Gorham]], [Archdeacon of Buckingham]]<br />[[Martin Gorick]], [[List of Archdeacons of Oxford|Archdeacon of Oxford]]<br />Hedley

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 13:38, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 25[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Archdeacon of Northampton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Santi Marcellino e Pietro (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:50, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback[edit]

Hello, DBD. You have new messages at Scrivener-uki's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

House of Plantagenet[edit]

You added some women to the familiy tree which in itself was a good idea but you also added an error e.g. Beauforts were decendents from John rather than Edmund. If you were editing in this space and felt like it the Beaufort descent to Henry VII is probably useful. Norfolkbigfish (talk) 06:18, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I have fixed that. Whoops! DBD 08:38, 8 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

B/I topic ban[edit]

Howdy DBD. Would you & Steven Zhang, please consider lifting my B/I topic ban? I'm no longer interested in political battles on those articles. PS: I've noticed that it's been deleted from WP:Editing Restrictions (April 4, 2014), but not certain why. GoodDay (talk) 20:01, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Have I offended you, DBD? GoodDay (talk) 17:42, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all. Sorry, just been busy. This section makes me wonder a little whether lifting restrictions might not be the wrong message right now. I wonder what Steve thinks? I am tempted to say ask again in two months. DBD 20:56, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There was no 'hidden agenda' from me, at that RM. I was rather looking for a compromise for both sides. It likely wasn't going to get traction & I had no intentions of pushing for it. GoodDay (talk) 21:20, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I accepted IIO's advice & chose to 'delete' my posts at the RM-in-queston, thus removing myself from it. In the past (before the Site Ban), I most likely would've lost my temper with IIO. GoodDay (talk) 21:26, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay all. I'd have to agree with DBD at this stage (I was surprised to hear your site ban was lifted, welcome back) but at this stage I wouldn't agree with lifting the topic ban. Too soon. Steven Zhang ^{Help resolve disputes!} 01:14, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A tad dissapointed (after 2+ yrs), but atleast I tried :) GoodDay (talk) 01:59, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that you & Steven are in error. According to WP:RESTRICT, my B/I topic-ban expired on April 3, 2014. GoodDay (talk) 13:09, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Thanks for both your help in reforming my behaviour at those articles. It feels good to have one less restriction on my head :) GoodDay (talk) 22:39, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 1[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Anglican Church of Australia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Archbishop of Melbourne (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:59, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for July 28[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Dean and Chapter of Westminster

added links pointing to Christ Church Cathedral, John Wynne, Bishop of Calcutta and Edward Willes

Sub-Dean

added a link pointing to Minister

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:52, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 4[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Archdeacon of Oxford, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bishop of Dorchester. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:35, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

August 2014[edit]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Albany County, New York may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

| named for = Prince James, [[Duke of York]] and [[Duke of Albany|of Albany]] (later [[James II of England|King James VII of Scotland & II of England]]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 22:59, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Herbert Croft (bishop) may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

of the [[New York]] colony appointed by the [[Duke of York]] and [[Duke of Albany|of Albany]] (later King [[James II of England|James II & VII]].<ref>She was also the great granddaughter of

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:55, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to John Gauden may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

his execution. In 1693 further correspondence between Gauden, Clarendon, the [[Duke of York]] (later [[James II of England|James II & VII]], and Sir [[Edward Nicholas]] was published by [[

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 21:52, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

New templates[edit]

I have nominated some of your recent creations for deletion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2014 August 12#Single dukes. Per Wikipedia:Navigation templates#Properties, navboxes should not be too small. Generally, templates with four links or less are deleted because typically all the articles on the navbox are already linked in the text of each article or can easily be placed in "See also". DrKiernan (talk) 07:11, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, fair enough. No worries. DBD 10:25, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You might've let me know about the proposed Glos & Ed moves. DBD 10:32, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 12[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Prince William, Duke of Gloucester and Edinburgh (father), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Prince William, Duke of Gloucester and Edinburgh. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:18, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Recent royal duke moves[edit]

You recently moved the articles on the Dukes of Gloucester and Edinburgh on the grounds that they were both called "Prince William" rather than their full names "Prince William Henry" and "Prince William Frederick". And yet you've split off new articles on the dukedoms of York and Albany, Kent and Strathearn, Cumberland and Teviotdale, Clarence and Avondale, etc - despite the fact that their holders were called Duke of York, Kent, Cumberland, Clarence, etc, rather than by their full titles. Seems a bit of an inconsistent approach to me. Opera hat (talk) 00:07, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Along similar lines, you have moved (for example) the Dukes of Gloucester and Edinburgh to their own newly-created page of that name, and off the page for Duke of Edinburgh etc. You do know, don't you, that such people were never created Duke of "Gloucester and Edinburgh," but rather were simultaneously created "Duke of Gloucester" and "Duke of Edinburgh."

I'm only marginally around, but I would have advised against this move if I had seen you consulting the community before making such sweeping changes. Did you do so? --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 04:11, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies. I was too WP:BOLD. Having gone back to primary sources (the Gazette), I now see that whether each had one or two dukedoms is not completely clear. I'll start a discussion (probably at Talk:Royal dukedoms in the United Kingdom?) soon so we can all reach a consensus. DBD 13:00, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I very much appreciate the enthusiasm behind your WP:BOLDness, and I even more appreciate the humility in this reply. Thank you for your work to improve Wikipedia on this topic. --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 13:33, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Email received[edit]

Not strange, merely forethought for the inevitable. Thanks. Hope your studies go well. DrKiernan (talk) 14:08, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 19[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Diocese of Chichester, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Diocese of Portsmouth. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for August 26[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Diocese of Winchester, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Whitchurch. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for September 6[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Joseph Butler, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Talbot. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

W H Painter - challenge to your recent move[edit]

Hi, I'm afraid I'm not a sufficiently experienced Wikipedian to know the protocols for making or, more especially, challenging page moves. I would like to disagree with the change you made today in moving William_Hunt_Painter to Hunt_Painter, and query the basis on which this was done, if I may? I'm not quite sure how best to present the evidence to you for this challenge, or whether it's best done here or on the Talk page. Perhaps you could advise. As a reknowned botanist, W.H.Painter is known by those initials, as his herbarium labels and title page to his 1889 "A contribution to The Flora of Derbyshire" by THE REV. W.H.PAINTER, 1889, both demonstrate. (His capital letters, not mine) Now, I do accept he put his name as "W.HUNT PAINTER" at the bottom of his preface to that book, but having referred to it myself continuously over the last 20 years whilst preparing to publish a brand new Flora of Derbyshire (containing quite a large biography of Painter) it's something I only actually noticed today after seeing your change! It was quite a suprise. But his is not a double-barrelled surname, and I have never seen him referred to just as Hunt Painter before. (I note that name is used within the article, but it was certainly not used by me when I first created the page on Painter) The Stirchley Church website uses Painter's full name, too (http://stirchleychurchandrectorysalop.jimdo.com/the-rectors/), as do the online herbaria websites containing his specimens (http://herbariaunited.org/wiki/William_Hunt_Painter)

Whilst Painter may well have used his middle name Hunt in preference to William, I don't feel there is sufficient evidence of him being widely known as Hunt Painter to support your change. It's akin to the page on UK botanist Arthur_Roy_Clapham being changed to Roy_Clapham when all botanists who knew him understood that he preferred to be called 'Roy'. Despite that, all references to his publications - and indeed all those of Painter, always use both initials. I believe the change you have made is misleading, and I would like to request its re-instatement. Parkywiki (talk) 23:41, 6 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pity there is no reply. I do know that you are an expert on this guy and less expert sources like Google agree that the first word he used in his name was William. I see there is a ref to a "Hunt Painter" at Oxford Reference but he lived several thousand years earlier. I intend to revert. Victuallers (talk) 18:53, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, whoa. Victualers: I am not obliged to reply immediately to any posts, thank you. Parkywiki: There is no need to request anything. If you know better – and it seems like you do – then revert the move yourself. DBD 19:01, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 19[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Colin James (bishop)

added a link pointing to Producer

William James (bishop)

added a link pointing to Durham

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:58, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Brooke Westcott[edit]

DBD, I have read the 1911 Encyclopaedia text which seems largely to have been copied across without giving it a more NPOV. If you go to my user page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Bashereyre there is an e-mail link in a user box which you could use to be a bit more specific about exactly which parts you would like me to consider revising.Bashereyre (talk) 17:07, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't personally think it requires revision – it's just that it's been hatnote'd. DBD 17:35, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]