I noticed you were new, and wanted to share some links I thought useful:
- M:Foundation issues
- Wikipedia:Cleanup resources
- Wikipedia:Help desk
- Wikipedia:Five pillars
For more information click here. You can sign your name by typing 4 tildes, like this: ~~~~.
Thanks. I need to read into that! Gerard von Hebel 03:13, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
- Wunderbar! Sam Spade 03:24, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
- 1 Reginald Vaughn Finley, Sr.
- 2 Line of succession to the Dutch throne
- 3 Princess Maria Adelgunde of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen
- 4 Your recent edits
- 5 Kingdom of the Netherlands
- 6 AfD nomination of Reginald Vaughn Finley, Sr.
- 7 Nomination of Government of the Dutch Republic in exile for deletion
- 8 4RR on Killing of Travis Alexander
- 9 Disambiguation link notification for May 1
- 10 Commonwealth realms
- 11 Map of French departments on the Belgium page
- 12 Talkback
- 13 Talk:Bradley Manning/October 2013 move request
- 14 Holy Roman Emperor
- 15 November 2013
- 16 December 2013
- 17 February 2014
- 18 Posting of personal details by IP editor
Reginald Vaughn Finley, Sr.
- You're welcome. Mr Stephen 08:27, 21 September 2006 (UTC)
You added to this article: "If and when HRH Princess Margriet should somehow succeed to the throne, the list of succession will include all of her children and grandchildren now excluded." But her sons Pieter-Christiaan and Floris have still married without seeking the parliament's approval. So they and their children would still be excluded, right? Or is there a rule regarding this that I'm not aware of? Mtcv (talk) 18:12, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
I suppose they would still be excluded. There are no additional rules and the whole thing is basically unchartered territory. It is imaginable however that the above situation might include people that have never been in line to the throne and had no reason or indeed no possibility to seek parliaments approval on their marriage but suddenly find themselves in line to the throne because a grandparent succeeds to the throne. In that case I suppose there would be no reason to exclude them. Would their situation be so different from Floris an Pieter-Christiaan and their offspring? One could think it's an entirely new entitlement for them then. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 21:00, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
- OK, thanks for the clarification. I was wondering what point you were making and thought it might be some rule I hadn't heard of. So it isn't, and the point you're making is the three degrees of kinship rule, and its consequence for people who are currently excluded. I changed the article now, to include that rule more explicitly, and moved your addition down, to where it was already mentioned slightly.
- Regarding Floris and Pieter-Christiaan and their children, I don't agree that it's unchartered territory; the Dutch Constitution is clear in article 28.2, where it says that if a person who can inherit the throne (lit. "kingship"), marries without consent, is excluded. It doesn't say how or via whom this person can inherit the throne, so that's irrelevant for the exclusion. I do agree with you that for the children of Maurits and Bernhard, the situation is more complicated: they're not in the line of succession currently, but could theoretically be in the future, so does that mean they can inherit the throne or not? Luckily it doesn't matter for now, until Anastasia turns 18 in 10 years time. Mtcv (talk) 14:25, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Hebel, an article I recently created, Princess Maria Adelgunde of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen, has been nominated for deletion here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess Maria Adelgunde of Hohenzollern-Sigmaringen. Given your attention to other Hohenzollern-related articles, please take the time to weigh in and stop its deletion. Thanks again for all your wonderful contributions to Wikipedia! --Caponer (talk) 13:26, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 16:53, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
I used the tildes but somehow it doesn't work right. I have now changed my preferences and unchecked a box that I think might be the problem there. See if it works. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 16:57, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Highfields, the two ministers plenipotentiary are not part of the Government of the Kingdom, only the Ministers appointed by the Crown are. The plenipotentiaries are a member of the Council of Ministers of the Kingdom but not of the Government of the Kingdom. That's the difference.Gerard von Hebel (talk) 16:52, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
- Indeed, thats what I originally thought, although I didn't know the details. But I trusted the explanation given to me by another editor. If you say your explanation is more accurate then I'm happy to accept that. Highfields (talk, contribs) 16:27, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
AfD nomination of Reginald Vaughn Finley, Sr.
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Reginald Vaughn Finley, Sr.. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reginald Vaughn Finley, Sr. (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.
Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:07, 2 April 2010 (UTC)
Nomination of Government of the Dutch Republic in exile for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Government of the Dutch Republic in exile is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Government of the Dutch Republic in exile until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.
4RR on Killing of Travis Alexander
I understand you're trying to help arrest the changes of another editor who you probably feel is taking things too far (clearly they've exceeded 3RR), but you've also exceeded 3RR yourself on the article (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th). Best to stop making reverts immediately as the situation has already been reported to AN:EW. You may even want to consider self-reverting your last revert before it's too late, as any admin reviewing that case may decide to hand out multiple blocks. Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 21:53, 15 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of heirs to the Dutch throne, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Prince Henry of the Netherlands (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.
Per this edit, the monarchies do have shared elements--the line of succession (though actually a separate line in each country kept identical to all the others) and the person of the monarch. There is not one throne for all; that went out with the Statute of Westminster in 1931. -- 18:01, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for sending me this message. I don't agree entirely. Although the monarch operates in sixteen different constitutional contexts, it is generally acknowledged that the monarchies of the CR's have a shared aspect as well. The Crown is shared AND separate in the CR's and the article about the Commonwealth Realms seems to imply that both aspects of this shared and separate Crown are taken into consideration. The Statute of Westminster speaks of "common allegiance to the Crown". And the royal title for all CR's is still the same (Queen of X and all other realms). I'm not saying that you're wrong necessarily, but I don't think I'm either. Gerard von Hebel (talk) 18:22, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
Map of French departments on the Belgium page
Greetings. Because you participated in the August 2013 move request regarding this subject, you may be interested in participating in the current discussion. This notice is provided pursuant to Wikipedia:Canvassing#Appropriate notification. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:32, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Holy Roman Emperor
- That's a bit overstated. I placed a query in the talk page a month ago and changed now. You reverted without meaningful comment (until I reverted again.) That's not edit warring! Gerard von Hebel (talk) 00:00, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
- Well, you started this when you reverted Illraute. De728631 (talk) 20:42, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Holy Roman Empire, you may be blocked from editing. Reverting vandalism of suspected sock puppet of User: Aoidh Sillsdorust (talk) 13:29, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
- I don't know and fail to understand what you're on about. The medieval Kingdom of Italy was clearly a part of the HRE until 1648. Also there was no area within that Empire where a substantial Turkish speaking minority was heard of. I am also definetly no sockpuppet of anyone! Please be carefull! Gerard von Hebel (talk) 14:52, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In the future, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, reduces edit conflicts, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thank you. Timothy Titus Talk To TT 00:51, 5 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Vecht (Utrecht) 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:
- town of [[Weesp]] and discharges into the [[IJmeer]] (Lake IJ), part of the former [[Zuiderzee]]) at [[Muiden]]. The Amsterdam-Rijnkanaal ([[Amsterdam-Rhine Canal]]) was dug in the Vecht basin.
Posting of personal details by IP editor
Hi. Yes, you're right that this should also be deleted, but because it combines the edits of several different editors it's a more complex issue that needs oversight attention. I suggest you contact the WP:OVERSIGHTers and ask them to handle this. -- The Anome (talk) 14:27, 19 September 2014 (UTC)