User talk:Therequiembellishere/Archive 4

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Ex officio and the heads of state list

It is Latin for "from the office." So any extra position that one receives from the obtaining an office is ex officio. See, Andorra does not hold an election for Prince, nor does the archbishop appoint his coregent. Instead, whomever is in possession of the Presidency of France becomes Prince of Andorra. It is because he holds the office of President of France that he becomes Prince of Andorra. That is ex officio, please see the President of France article.

As to the continuous entry of Elizabeth's II inclusion of sixteen nations, it has been discussed. While you might not like it, you are in the minority and you yourself can not override the opinions of everyone else. Queen of Her Commonwealth realms was the decided wording by consensus, and it is rather inappropriate and rude for you to change it with such a dismissive tone. The list is to demonstrate net worths, it is not meant as a list of full titles or biographies. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 01:16, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

There is a source that says Carter's worth was -$1 million. Please read the definition of net worth before you continue removing the information. Also, a hard figure means exact, while a soft figure is rounded. The figure is hard. Another thing, if you have issue with a source, you answer your talk page or add it to the discussion page. You do not discuss it by editing and placing it in the comments. [tk] XANDERLIPTAK 22:56, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Constitutive Treaty

Hey, about your notes page, the wiki article indicates that Brazil, Chile and Uruguay have ratified. Therequiembellishere (talk) 23:59, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Great, thanks! —Nightstallion 09:56, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

erroneous block

My apologies for blocking you without adequately reviewing your edit history. I changed it to a one-minute block, which should have expired by now. If for some reason the unblock has not taken hold, please contact me, or if I do not respond within a few minutes, another admin. kwami (talk) 09:46, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Kwami, the unblock has not taken effect. I can't contact you directly on you talk. Please respond. (I won't care as soon as it goes away, btw.) Therequiembellishere (talk) 09:54, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm afraid I don't immediately see how to unblock you; the expiry time of one minute should have unblocked you... I'll look into it more in a few hours, when I have more time. —Nightstallion 10:06, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

When I just tried to unblock you via this, it stated that the block could not be found, so you should already have been unblocked by now. —Nightstallion 12:19, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm afraid I still am... Therequiembellishere (talk) 21:02, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

I am really sorry about this, Therequiembellishere. After the 1 minute block expired, I tried unblocking you again, just to be sure, and it said the block did not exist. I just now reblocked for 1 sec to try and clear it, as well as unblocking and searching WP:Blocked IP addresses and usernames, which says you're not blocked. I'll contact s.o. who is a bit less clueless than I am. kwami (talk) 23:50, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Posted requests for help at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#can.27t_unblock and Wikipedia_talk:Special:BlockList#can.27t_unblock. kwami (talk) 00:06, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi Therquiembellishere,

Two suggestions:

Silly but simple suggestion: purge your cache. It's conceivable you aren't actually blocked, but the old page is still being displayed, making you think you are. No idea why this might work, but it's the equivalent to rebooting your system when Windows crashes.
More likely to work: Might be a more-complicated-than-normal autoblock. Read the block message carefully, and follow the directions exactly, so an admin can find the autoblock.

Good luck. --Floquenbeam (talk) 00:26, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

It's all better now. Thanks for all your help! Therequiembellishere (talk) 01:55, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Ivo Josipovic

Was born in what was then Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia, People's Republic of Croatia. This was the name(s) of the entities in which he was born. In 1963 the names changed to Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and Socialist Republic of Croatia, but in 1957 it was as I have explained. See the articles and appropriate data. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.201.207.46 (talk) 22:56, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Can you edit now?

Per WP:ANI#can't unblock, there was an autoblock affecting your editing that has now been lifted. Can you edit freely now? Throwaway85 (talk) 03:41, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

[1]. --Floquenbeam (talk) 03:52, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Muy bueno. I'll close the AN/I then. Throwaway85 (talk) 05:14, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Aires Ali

Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: Aires Ali. Our verifiability policy requires that all content be cited to a reliable source. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --LaraBot (talk) 00:10, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

This is against MOS sections FLAGS

Ah, I did not know that! :) I did search though, obviously in the wrong places. Thanks for the update. Cheers! --Neon Sky (talk) 20:05, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced BLPs

Hello Therequiembellishere! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 3 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 935 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:

Emmanuelle Mignon - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Christian Frémont - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Edward Jurith - Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Thanks!--DASHBot (talk) 04:09, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Hamid Karzai

Your this edit contains errors. Ahmad Zia Massoud is the former vise president of Afghanistan and you keep re-adding this. The current vice presidents of Afghanistan are Mohammad Fahim and Karim Khalili, why are you removing them? Karz is a tiny village on the edge of Kandahar City and inside the Kandahar Province, it comes within the limits of Kandahar City. Karzai preceeded Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar and Burhanuddin Rabbani so both should be mentioned. Please review this information and stop vandalising the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 119.73.15.27 (talk) 23:12, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of List of East Asian and Southeast Asian countries by population

An article that you have been involved in editing, List of East Asian and Southeast Asian countries by population, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of East Asian and Southeast Asian countries by population. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Thegreyanomaly (talk) 22:37, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

TB

You are the first to mention that Viktor Yushchenko was a member of People's Democratic Party (Ukraine). Where did you get this info from? Please explain at the articles talkpage. — Mariah-Yulia • Talk to me! 00:57, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

ITN: Girija Prasad Koirala

On 21 March 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Girija Prasad Koirala, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

-- tariqabjotu 18:27, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Michel Roger

Hi! It seems you recently created an unreferenced biography of a living person: Michel Roger. Our verifiability policy requires that all content be cited to a reliable source. Please add references as soon as possible. Thanks! --LaraBot (talk) 00:14, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Michel Roger

The article Michel Roger has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010 must have references.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided reliable sources, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide sources within 7 days, you may request the article be undeleted when you have sources. NW (Talk) 00:35, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Muhammad Ali Jinnah

You have added that Quaid-e-Azam attended Tehran University. Can you provide source that Muhammad Ali Jinnah attended Tehran University. I think it is wrong statement and it will be reverted. AlphaGamma1991 (talk) 21:30, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

It was already in the infobox, I just let it be seen. I assumed it was correct. Therequiembellishere (talk) 21:31, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Kyrgyz changes

Hi, could you please hold off on making certain edits to Kyrgyzstan-related articles during this difficult time in which things are changing fast and nobody is very sure of anything? For example, Rosa Otunbaeva is not the president of the country and there is no official confirmation that Daniar Usenov has resigned as Prime Minister. Verifiable information belongs on Wikipedia; unverified rumors do not. Thanks. -- Hux (talk) 21:54, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Komorowski

You should be aware of the three-revert rule - you've already broken it, so you would be blocked if someone reported you. But mroe improtantly, it harms Wikipedia to introduce false information into an article. As you yourself say in your edit summaries, we follow what sources say, and no source (as far as I know) says that Komorowski is president of Poland. He's acting president, which is very different. I hope you won't make any more reverts at that article.--Kotniski (talk) 14:22, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

What u dudes talkin bout? HP rocks and u knows it! l8tr!!!

Titles

Could you please stop debolding "Sir" and removing it from infoboxes. People who have been knighted from then on always take the pretitle, which then becomes part of their name (hence the bolding). Edit summaries would be nice too. Thank you. -- Necrothesp (talk) 14:21, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Harry Potter: Evanna Lynch

WikiProject Harry Potter has been rather inactive recently. I've been working on the Evanna Lynch article lately, and have based it off the featured article Emma Watson. I thought I'd ask if you would like to collaborate on the article, as part of a possible WikiProject revival. Leave your response at the article's talk page. Thanks! Alex Douglas (talk) 11:35, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Paul Murphy

Hello. Please discuss changes to the infobox on Paul Murphy on the talk page, Talk:Paul Murphy. Repeatedly reverting changes is edit warring: please don't do it. Thanks, --h2g2bob (talk) 21:37, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

World Leaders

Could you explain your thinking behind the deletion of my contribution to the page World Leaders of 2010 concerning the leaders of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Why are the leaders of the Isle of Man, Jersey and Guernsey included but you feel that the leaders of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland should not be included? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwhite148 (talk • contribs) 15:19, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

Dear Mwhite148, the rationale behind the inclusion of the crown dependencies and the exclusion of the countries of the UK (Scotland, Wales, N Ireland) is that the former are not part of the UK, therefore the UK Prime Minister is not their head of government. However the devolved governments of the Scotland, Wales and N Ireland are only the next level of government. So this question is not about whether those leaders are "worth" including in the list, but rather about theoretical considerations. If the Welsh, Scottish and N Ireland chief ministers were included than for the sake of consistency the leaders of all 16 German states and all the US governors would have to be included too, because they are in a similar constitutional position. And then the list would become unmanageably long. ZBukov (talk) 15:48, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

I see your point, but American or German states are not commonly reffered to as countries, whereas Scotland, Wales and N. Ireland are. I still see no explanation behind not including the leaders of these countries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwhite148 (talk • contribs) 16:15, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

1) You seem to be contradicting yourself within two sentences: "I see your point" followed by "I still see no explanation". So do you get my reasoning or not?

2) Why is the word country crucial? The constituent units of Germany and the US are called states. Is an administrative unit called "country" more independent by virtue of the name than a "state"?

3) Are the people whose inclusion you advocate leaders of a) an independent country or b) a colony or c) a territory with an unusual status within the state? No, they are not. But the list is made up only of these categories of people. ZBukov (talk) 19:44, 6 May 2010 (UTC)

1) I don't 'get' your reasoning whatsoever and can still see absolutely no logic to your claims at all. It was condescension for which I apologise.

2) The word country is very crucial, yes. As Germany, the United States, China, Australia, ect. are divided into many states, it would be impractical to include the leaders of all of them on the wikipedia page but as I am attempting to put the leaders of only 3 extra countries to the page, I fail to see why it is essential they are deleted.

3) The three countries, although not independent states, are reffered to as countries around the world which is why I think they deserve inclusion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mwhite148 (talk • contribs) 15:44, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

In point 2) you start by saying that the word country is crucial, however your argument is that it would be impractical to include others who are in a similar position. So you would include your people on theoretical grounds but you'd exclude his peers on practical grounds. And you "fail to see why it is essential that they are deleted". I would say because of consistency. I think it's a fair expectation that the same criteria should be used for the leaders of all countries on the list. Let me turn this question around: How would you explain if the leaders of the next level of government were included for the UK but not for Germany? Because it would be impractical? Then why were the UK leaders put in in the first place? Or what if the German ministers-president were included but UK chief ministers were excluded? Wouldn't it be consipcuously inconsistent?

In point 3) you just repeated your opinion that by virtue of being referred to as "countries" their leaders should be included. However you failed to reply to my question in my point 2) above: Why do leaders of a sub-national "country" deserve inclusion more that those of a sub-national "state"?

So if you "still see absolutely no logic" in my reasoning than maybe it would be helpful if you replied to points 2) and 3) in my previous message. ZBukov (talk) 10:20, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Important to supply comments describing your edits.

Ben, it is important to describe your edits in the edit summary box so that people viewing article history can see what is happening without being forced to look at each undocumented change by clicking on it, which is very tedious and wastes time.

Your edit history shows that very often you don't bother to include this necessary description. The "Edit summary for all major edits" statement shows you only included a description 61% of the time since 2006; in other words, you didn't bother 39% of the time. The red portions of the history graphs demonstrate vividly that in the past couple of years you failed to include a description about 50% of the time.

That is an unfortunate record, Ben, and very ironic for someone with Wikipedia barnstars, and it is a particular difficulty because of the many thousands of undocumented edits you have performed all over this encyclopaedia. Please help to make Wikipedia better for everyone with this one, small effort. --174.16.36.202 (talk) 16:55, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Order of office

Greetings. I saw you removed the order of office from the infobox of Goodluck Jonathan. May I ask your reasons for this? The order of office is frequently used (case in point, Barack Obama). HonouraryMix (talk) 20:50, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Bump. HonouraryMix (talk) 13:57, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Changes to list of leaders

Hey, if you have a sec, would you please consider giving your opinion on proposed alternative methods in the List of state leaders by date? Thanks! Night w (talk) 16:56, 15 May 2010 (UTC)

About your reversion of my edit

You reverted my edit when I added the HK by-elections that are currently taking place. Judging by the edit summary it looks like a rollback. However, it was not vandalism. As I am ignorant of the scope of the list, I may have violated the notability guidelines; however, you should have undone my edit with an explanation and (ideally) put a message on my user talk page. Please reply here and put a talkback on my talk page. Thanks for reading this comment. Kayau Voting IS evil 10:46, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

I see that you also seem to have rolled back this, this and this. They are not blatant vandalism - you should provide an explanation why you reverted the edits before you undo them. By reverting the first one you have also reverted a good-faith sentence underneath. In case I am mistaken, though, then I apologise in advance. Kayau Voting IS evil 11:05, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

You can see from remarks above in section Important to supply comments describing your edits that user Therequiembellishere consistently fails to document or justify his activity, leaving himself wide open to accusations of arbitrary actions.

Wikipedia policy on edit summaries:

If reverting other editors' changes, be sure to indicate your reasons...This can be done in the edit summary and/or talk page. Reverting without giving good reasons is more likely to be perceived as combative. Remember that reverting "throws away" the work done by the other editor; consider working to improve on the other editor's text, or discussing it with them, rather than simply undoing their changes.

This Wikipedia policy is ignored by Therequiembellishere --174.16.39.249 (talk) 21:28, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure why Therequiembellishere isn't responding, but the reason is that by-elections are normally not included at that article. I've added it back with a note about why it is not a normal situation, but I am not going to defend the edit. If you want to, be my guest. -Rrius (talk) 00:34, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

I guess he is ashamed of rolling back clumsily. If he does not do it again I won't mind. BTW, no I'm not going to defend my edit as you've pointed out the reason why it was not included. Kayau Voting IS evil 10:45, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

The Silence of Therequiembellishere: Therequiembellishere has failed to respond on this Talk page to anything posted here since 12 January 2010, in the erroneous block section, above. That was five months ago. 174.16.29.141 (talk) 07:41, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Honestly, are you on crack? I respond when I can respond and on their talk page, like a normal person. I'm really sick and tired of seeing this over-dramatized shit constantly splayed all over my page by you. I don't respond as expediently here as I used to because of a combination of these issues:

Unlike when I was twelve and got home at 2:00PM, I tend to get home at 4:00PM (on a good day, at most 10:00PM) after being at an school since 6:00AM
Five to six AP classes worth of homework
Work
Generally two shows to rehearse, one play and one musical
Organize all the funds for the school's ITS troupe
Going to a movie, a party, or just hanging out with friends or my boyfriend
Going to a vocal lesson

At those are the run-of-the-mill reasons that I might not respond. There have been three weddings this semester and two university graduations of either a friend or family member I had to go to, two theatre conferences to audition for college, the SAT, Subject SATs, Bright Futures, and exams. Now that the year is almost over, I'm part of the senior's commencement, I have friends to say goodbye to, a senior project to cut, college applications to fill out, trips to take out of town, still work, still two shows (still a play and a musical) to rehearse during the summer, an AP class online, still vocal lessons, and still parties and hanging out with my friends/boyfriend. So before you come to my page again and periodically bitch at me for not responding to, frankly, rather innocuous queries for an entire month try getting a damn life instead of worrying about whether or not I've responded to people who aren't even talking to you or whether I put edit summaries after formatting a damn infobox! I know policy quite well in the four years I've edited here and what you seem to fail to grasp is that "policies" are not rules, they are guidelines. Unlike you, I don't pompously strut onto other users' talk pages and respond to their issues because I don't think for a second that I'm God's gift to Wikipedia but I'll be damned if someone who's apparently edited for one month is going to try and tell me what to do. Please, you're giving me an eyesore every time I check messages and see another one of these damn prods. So there. This is the response you have been waiting an entire month for, I hope you're bloody happy about it because I don't want to be doing this shit again. Therequiembellishere (talk) 14:40, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Oh, and Kayau, there was no non-response because of "shame" because if you read Rrius's reply, he proved I was correct in my reversion; you were just wrong. Therequiembellishere (talk) 14:42, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I see you're not quite the novice I thought you were, you didn't have the balls to use your actual user name, Odea, and logged out whenever you attacked me. So even through an username on the internet you felt the need to masquerade your identity, and poorly, to prod at me. You're clever. Therequiembellishere (talk) 17:11, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

I only accidentally stumbled across this thread just now, and realised you replied. I am going to make it very clear that I am not 174.16. The IP geolocates to the states, and I haven't even been there. Kayau Voting IS evil 05:16, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Shah Mahmud Khan

Hello, Therequiembellishere. You have new messages at Talk:Shah Mahmud Khan.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Vssun (talk) 12:01, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: edits to Noynoy Aquino article

Please stop adding the title "President of the Philippines" to the Noynoy Aquino article, yet. We all know that he is the forerunner in the recent elections but wait until Congress OFFICIALLY proclaims him the winner. Don't rush things, just wait until it is official. Thanks. -WayKurat (talk) 18:22, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Proposal to add order of office to Goodluck Jonathan

Greetings. With regards to the dispute over adding the order of office to Goodluck Jonathan, I've now started up a discussion on the talk page, and have invited various editors, and informed various WikiProjects. Please feel free to contribute: Talk:Goodluck Jonathan#Order of office proposal. HonouraryMix (talk) 12:36, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Kurmanbek Bakiyev

The line "|term_end = 15 April 2010<br><small>Acting until 15 August 2005</small>" If it says his term ends in 2010, how is it that he's only acting until 2005? Unless I'm not understanding something... Sorafune +1 13:35, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

He was Acting President from 25 March 2005 to 15 August 2005, at which point he got full presidential power until he resigned on 15 April 2010 (in reality, until 7 April 2010 but that's a different story). Therequiembellishere (talk) 20:42, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Böhrnsen for president

Hey,

I am confident your edits to the German presidency story have been made with the best of intentions, but Böhrnsen is really not the current president, he is a substitute. I was fine with the term "acting president", but giving it some additional thought I think even this is a too euphemistic way to put it, and "acting head of state" fits much better. What is definitely outruled is calling him "president", which would not be in line with the constitution. I thus reverted your edit to Germany and hope you don't mind.

Regards

Skäpperöd (talk) 17:08, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Japanese names

Hi! Please do not create piped link to Japanese people pre Meiji. Please see MOS:JP#Names. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 10:30, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

Reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. –xeno^talk 16:31, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Dependent Territoris table

Regarding your edit summary in removing the Dependant territories table, I will say I was only "editing along" as someone else had already added it without a proper consensus. I think it's mentioned in the bottom catagory on the talk page discussing whether or not the dependent territories should be included. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 19:37, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Governors general

Per my edits at List of elected or appointed female heads of state: I don't know about other Commonwealth realms with a governor general, but the Prime Minister of Canada not long ago stated that the monarch of Canada is head of state, not the governor general (I left a link regarding this at the article's talk page; there's more information available). Admittedly, there are some in the country who argue the governor general is indeed the head of state, but theirs obviously goes against the official government opinion. Even absent that edict from the prime minister's office, I question the practice of presenting one side of an argument as though it is the correct one; for instance, there is a debate in Australia over who is head of state: the Queen or the governor general. Perhaps something needs to be done at List of elected or appointed female heads of state to accommodate these unique cases. --Ħ MIESIANIACAL 00:33, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Deputy Leader of Labour

I'm a little mystified about this right now. Is Harriet Harman simultaneously Acting Leader, Deputy Leader and Party Chair right now (if so, that seems ridiculous as her husband is Party Treasurer too)? Or is Jack Straw Acting Deputy Leader? I'm wondering this because I just found out about his Shadow Cabinet post of "Acting Shadow Deputy Prime Minister" which places him directly under Harman here and seems to be the same as calling him "Acting Deputy Leader of the Opposition" or William Hague's "Senior Member". If Harman remains Deputy Leader as of now, does that mean she'll retain this after the leadership election later this month or will she have to renew her mandate too? Therequiembellishere (talk) 23:44, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I am not sure. Jack Straw's title of "Acting Shadow Deputy Prime Minister" may just be an indication that he is shadowing Nick Clegg and perhaps has no bearing on his status in the Labour party. As a comparison the people shadowing Prescott (DPM & FSoS) and Mandelson (FSoS) weren't automatically the second most senior people in the Conservative party. Straw would be the obvious choice for shadowing Clegg's constitutional reform brief as that was part of his Justice Minister portfolio.

I am unclear about the Labour party rules for leadership elections. There are some sources online that say Harman is planning to stay on as Deputy Leader once the new leader is appointed, but an election could be forced if enough MPs want to rock the boat by nominating an opponent. Unfortunately the best sources I can locate at the moment are blogs. Road Wizard (talk) 00:27, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't think you can say Hague was his predecessor as Hague was never Shadow DPM.[2] There is also not normally a "deputy leader of the opposition" (and as far as I know there never has been) so there is no succession between "possible 2nd in command of the Labour Party in opposition" and "semi-official 2nd in command of the Conservative party in opposition". Road Wizard (talk) 00:39, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

But weren't Prescott and Mandelson's only shadows for their ETR and business briefs (respectively)? Another thing that makes me think that Straw's deputy-ship is more than just because of his judicial/constitutional expertise is that he isn't the outright Shadow Deputy Prime Minister like the other opposition ministers but the Acting Shadow Deputy Prime Minister. Therequiembellishere (talk) 01:47, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

The problem is that the source simply lists a title and we have to speculate the motivations behind that title. For example we could speculate that the Conservative's "Shadow secretary for the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister" title was an attempt to show who was shadowing Prescott while still distancing the party from the attitude of the public to a DPM role at that time. You may agree or disagree with my speculation, but we could never include it in the articles as it is my personal analysis of source material.

If we have a source that says Straw is the current official or unofficial deputy leader of the Labour Party then we could repeat that statement. We can't take a title (however intriguingly phrased) and draw a conclusion from it without supporting context. Road Wizard (talk) 18:08, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

I understand. Is there a way to get in contact with the party? Therequiembellishere (talk) 19:58, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

I've just got off the phone with the party's headquarters and was told that Straw is indeed Harman's acting deputy until she resumes her role as deputy leader after the leadership election. Is this official enough for me to insert this information on the relevant pages? Or is it possible to exude something more official from them? If so, I'll be unable to get it--I can only make international calls so many times before they become a major headache. Therequiembellishere (talk) 08:37, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Therequiembellishere. You have new messages at Talk:Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Message added 23:51, 1 July 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jens Böhrnsen

The user who constantly deletes head of state from the infobox continues to revert, even after my last comment on the talk page. I think what is going on there is extremely unproductive. Str deletes "head of state", some other person once again inserts "president", it gets deleted. It has been going on like this for a month in an endless cycle, due to Str's lack of cooperativeness. Josh Gorand (talk) 09:09, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

I know but I honestly don't have the time or the energy to fight things like this full-blown anymore. If a legitimate discussion seem to be taking place, I may drop in but I'm afraid I can't be any more help than that. Therequiembellishere (talk) 10:49, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

I fully understand. Josh Gorand (talk) 10:50, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Belated!

I've been going through my old talk page and I realized I never gave you a proper thank you for the the help you gave at the top of the year during my block debacle. So consider this that thank you and an apology for taking so long to do so! Therequiembellishere (talk) 10:44, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

That was still faster than I would usually get around to it! Glad it worked out. — kwami (talk) 17:22, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Christian Wulff

I suggested that we use Minister-President until there is a consensus. The reasoning is that Minister-President is the direct translation of Ministerpräsident. Kingjeff (talk) 00:02, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Peter Orszag

Hey Requiem, I left a note for Euclid77 on their talk page encouraging them to start discussing and stop reverting. Please have a look at their talk page to see what you think of the tone and content. But I would like to urge you also to stop reverting: while you may find their edits disruptive (and many might agree), they're not clear-cut vandalism, and 3RR is there before you know it. Later, Drmies (talk) 22:23, 18 July 2010 (UTC)

Re: Previous Message

Hello again Ben... sorry about past issues, but im ok... been converted to socialism, yes, and also catholicism. Im ok at the mo, but stay in touch. Georgereev118118 (talk) 15:42, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Noynoy Aquino

I just checked your edits in the talk page and how that anon fretted over them being "unauthorized." I couldn't help but laugh. An anon dictating who should and should not edit the president's article? Hah, like take a hike? --Eaglestorm (talk) 02:49, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Valdis Dombrovskis

What do you mean, "now Latvia"? Riga was the capital of Latvia also in 1971. Latvia was one of the 15 constituent republics (albeit occupied according to the international law) in the Soviet Union, so defined by the Soviet constitution. Even in the Soviet era, place of birth, death, etc., was defined by the republic. Analogy: politicians in the EU are identified by their respective countries, I have never seen one identified as born in Berlin/London/Amsterdam, the EU.

This is the English language Wikipedia, and no English speaking countries ever recognized Latvia as part of the Soviet Union. Neither did any other European countries, except Sweden. For English speaking Wikipedians this should be enough to establish Latvian primacy over the Soviet one. Another analogy: Lech Wałęsa was born in a German occupied village called Popowo, then technically (according to the contemporary German law) part of the Third Reich. Why then is Walesa's country of birth in Wikipedia listed as Poland? Please do not revert my edit again unless you are able to provide reasons with your reply. --Vihelik (talk) 04:14, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Kingdom of the Netherlands

Please stop deleting the three Ministers Plenipotentiary from the Kingdom of the Netherlands infobox. They are a vital part of the Kingdom government and are actually the persons that distinguish the Kingdom of the Netherlands from the Netherlands. Furthermore, the title of the Prime Minister when acting in Kingdom capacity is Chairman of the Council of Minister of the Kingdom (Voorzitter van de Rijksministerraad). Mark Rutte can be included on the article Netherlands, but I think we should wait until he is sworn in to include him on Kingdom of the Netherlands. Best, Fentener van Vlissingen (talk) 14:37, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

President of Brazil

Hi, Therequiembellishere/Archive 4. I saw that edit you made. In that box is written "succeeded". Could you show me the source that proves that the 'current' president of Brazil was "succeeded"? Thank you.” T_eLeS (PT @ L C G) 01:04, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Ministers

Hi, please do not change the titles of Federal Councillors to "Ministers of ...". That is not their official title. There are no ministers in the Swiss government. Their official title is "Head of the Federal Department of ..." (see here). Thanks, Sandstein 19:42, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

succession box headers

You've made a complete mess of the U.S. Cabinet members succession boxes. I"m going to have to go back and fix them all one by one. Their cabinet header was done correctly before you edited it. Please refrain from doing that again in the future.

John Boehner

Concerning the infobox, are you certain Boehner will be the next Speaker? GoodDay (talk) 22:13, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Of course not, that's why I've kept it hidden. It precludes people who don't read notes from putting him in as Speaker anyway but placates them because it can very easily be put in if and when he is elected early January. Therequiembellishere (talk) 22:26, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I figured so. Best you inform Politics1912 of this. GoodDay (talk) 22:30, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Will do. Therequiembellishere (talk) 22:31, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I think ya's are getting close to breaching 3RR. GoodDay (talk) 00:18, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Therefore I've requested a 24hr page protection for both articles. GoodDay (talk) 00:37, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I've checked Politics2012 contributions history & found that he's never responded to anybody as his talkpage. Now, I don't expect everybody to be as gabby as me, but honestly - his collaboration skills need adjustments. GoodDay (talk) 02:17, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I tend to be silent on my talk page unless I think it actually needs a response. Granted, I should think block warnings would warrant a response but I really think he just doesn't know--he's also only been editing for a month. He'll learn a lot just from this exchange alone, I'm guessing. Therequiembellishere (talk) 02:20, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

He's correct on one thing though, it's gotta be United States House of Representatives, which is consistant with the infoboxes of their predecessors. GoodDay (talk) 02:34, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

We do it here too: See Peter Milliken, the Speaker of the Canadian House of Commons. GoodDay (talk) 02:38, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

West Virginia Governor

Is Tomlin Governor & Lieutenant Governor concurrently? Or is it like Massachusetts, Lieutenant Governor-Acting Governor? GoodDay (talk) 23:40, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I actually don't know. I think he's called the acting governor but I have no idea if that means he'll stay lieutenant governor after a special election. Therequiembellishere (talk) 23:43, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm confused too. GoodDay (talk) 23:44, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Nevermind. This seems to say he's not acting governor as it says he's the 35th Governor of West Virginia. I don't think he's the lieutenant governor anymore. Therequiembellishere (talk) 23:46, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

So according to West Virginia law, the Senate President is next in line to succeed the Governor should anything happen to the latter. There is no formal Office of the Lieutenant Governor, however, the Senate President is entitled to use the title of Lieutenant Governor (oddly). As Tomblin, as Senate President has assumed office as Governor and seems to have the full powers of the office, the Speaker of the House of Delegates (a Richard Thompson) is next in line. I'm mystified about whether Tomblin is to serve out the rest of Manchin's term or if a special election is to be held in order for Tomblin to return to his work as Senate President. He may legally be the full Governor, but may still plan on being an Acting Governor.

But then there's this weird thing that says "I will spend my time as Governor running the executive branch of government. I do not plan on presiding over or voting in the Senate. Our Senate rules contemplate that when the Senate President is unavailable, the President Pro Tempore presides over the senate." So I dunno if he's still Senate President or not! I think an email to the Governor's Office will be the best way to clear this up. Therequiembellishere (talk) 23:56, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Also, if Farnsworth was governor? Why not Tomblin? GoodDay (talk) 23:59, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Bitmapped argues that Tomblin is only Acting Governor & says he's got the State Constitution to back it. GoodDay (talk) 00:00, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm not following you on the first question. And if the state constitution say so, then that's pretty big evidence. I'm not expert. I still think an email would solve a lot though. Therequiembellishere (talk) 00:02, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

My point on Farnworth is, he too was an un-elected W.Va Governor. GoodDay (talk) 00:08, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Hmm. I really couldn't tell you. Sorry! Therequiembellishere (talk) 00:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Nancy Pelosi and John Boehner

Hello. Please stop modifying the office infoboxes of Politicians. They need to be the way they are now. Please stop. Thank You! [tk] Politics2012 07:53, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

User:Politics2012

For his sake, I'm thinking I may get a CU ran on him tomorrow. Somebody suspects he's a sock of a banned editor & it's not good to have such doubts around oneself. GoodDay (talk) 05:05, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

That sounds like a good idea. I hope it's not true. He's not malicious, just a novice. Therequiembellishere (talk) 05:20, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm AGF too. GoodDay (talk) 05:23, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I wouldn't pound the gavel prematurely either. Therequiembellishere (talk) 05:25, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Attorney Generals

According to the Succession Box Standardization Guidelines, Attorney Generals should have a "Legal offices" header, not a "Political offices" header. The headers also only need to be posted once, regardless of chronological order. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Succession_Box_Standardization/Guidelines#Legal_offices_.28s-legal.29

Thismightbezach (talk) 06:27, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Succession boxes of out-going Governors

Howdy. I made some corrections to your changes. It's best we wait until the lame-duck Governors leave office. GoodDay (talk) 15:53, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Robert J. Bentley

Please don't change the infobox from Governor elect to Governor until the person actually takes office. Corvus cornix_talk 23:50, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Please check your edits for Skype intrusions

As in your recent edit Jim Doyle, for example. Philip Trueman (talk) 04:50, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

edit

Regarding this edit, I think that removing "Nevada" from the link makes it more difficult for the reader. Most people don't know which Sparks it is until they click the link, which means a new page to be loaded taking time. Now, I'm sure that you had a good reason that may outweigh my concerns, and I'd prefer to know why, as the edit (at a glance) doesn't make much sense. Spalds (talk) 17:08, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Um, second that. Please make sure the link isn't piped to remove the state name if you're also removing the state name. Thanks. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 16:16, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Re. List of Spells in Harry Potter.

In the movie 'Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Part One' Hermione definitely pronounces "Obliviate" on her parents. We see her image fade from photos, which matches the effects described for the <Obliteration> charm. Also, the wiki-article on Hermione states that she laid a "memory charm" on her parents, convincing them that they were someones else and have a life-long ambition to relocate to Australia.

So the text I wrote, or something very similar, should stand. C2equalA2plusB2 (talk) 01:13, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Governors elect

What part of making the dates sortable is objectionable? 75.204.2.119 (talk) 17:45, 31 December 2010 (UTC)