User talk:Therequiembellishere/Archive 6
 | 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 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | Archive 7 | Archive 8 | → | Archive 10 |
Guinea Bissaru
do you have A SOURCE for your edits? if not its OR/SYNTHESIS. Furthermore use an edit summary otherwise its easily constured as vandalism when repeatedly done.(Lihaas (talk) 12:51, 10 January 2012 (UTC)).
- He was not acting he was INTERIM...that is a fundamental differnce as i wrote and discussed in a few places. thats a fundamental difference if he was not sworn in and so far there is NOT ONE source to say he has been...the source says he will continue in his role. its not a war if stuff is removed without a source or discussion and reverted, all the while that i DID discussi(Lihaas (talk) 21:12, 16 January 2012 (UTC)).
Hi, why did you revert my change? It would be nice to at least explain in the edit summary... Thanks, SPQRobin (talk) 17:18, 19 January 2012 (UTC) Now I understand you referred to the article Ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon. It links to the votes, and if I understand correctly they indeed have to hold a vote *twice* so apparently Belgium is even more overly complicated than I knew :-/ SPQRobin (talk) 17:44, 19 January 2012 (UTC)
Harry Potter Accolades
Spooky. I was literally JUST about to post to ask someone to do edit the new nominations in when I refreshed the page and saw you had done that! Thanks for saving me the trouble.--Count3D (talk) 20:16, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
Janša not PM yet
Janša is currently Prime Minister-designate and will become Prime Minister on 10 February 2012, if his cabinet is confirmed.[1] --Eleassar my talk 16:02, 29 January 2012 (UTC)
Federal Judges
I have noticed that on Federal Judge articles, in the infobox section, you have been e9changing the fields from appointer to nominator and changing6rerrer the target article from "List of federal judges appointed by President so & so" to "President so & so". It would only be correct to use the "nominator" field while the judge is awaiting the advice and consent of the Senate. However, once the Senate grants advice and consent, the President "appoints" the individual to office, thus "appointer" is the correct field to use for federal judges that have actually taken office. This is the usage that prevails among federal judicial articles and there is no reason at all to change it. There does not seem to be any reason to change the target link from the "list of judges appointed by" to the main Presidential articles. I would also point out that the very fact that we have articles entitled "List of federal judges appointed by Barack Obama" is primae facie evidence that "appointer" is the correct term. Safiel (talk) 16:39, 30 January 2012 (UTC)
Advice
Hey, I could use your advice on something. On (for example) this list or others of its kind, is it people or offices being listed? I'm having trouble on this list, where a user believes Elizabeth should be listed once; to which I countered that Elizabeth wasn't what was being listed, but rather the Queen of x... Do you have any thoughts or ideas? Nightw 07:34, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Republic of China
It's always best to leave an explanatory edit summary, so that users watching this page do not have to spend more time verifying the credibility of the editor making the change. Thank you! — Nearly Headless Nick {C} 16:04, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
For now Mihai Răzvan Ungureanu does not hold any office. The laws, customs and context in Romania make him just a citizen with a task from the President. Unlike Spain, in Romania the President nominates a candidate and then the Parliament approves the cabinet he proposes or not. If he (the candidate) passes that vote, he then goes to the Presidential Palace, together with the Cabinet, and takes the oath of office. That might or might not happen tomorrow. So PLEASE BE PATIENT! I am sure that, as soon as appropriate, someone will make the necessary changes. --ES Vic (talk) 22:19, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification
Hi. When you recently edited Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Ayub Khan (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) 11:03, 11 February 2012 (UTC)
Brad Pitt
You asked why Brad Pitt was not included as one of the producers nominated for The Tree of Life (Best Picture). Please see the official press release [2] as well as Rule Seventeen. Cinematical (talk) 08:47, 13 February 2012 (UTC)
Formatting infobox/succession boxes
Hello! Can you please tell me the reason of removal of information from infoboxes of various articles? Thanks! --SMS Talk 20:30, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
- I viewed your edits at Nisar Ali Khan. I am not objecting to your edits in anyway now but just want to learn which guideline or policy you are following. And should we keep the discussion at one page if convenient to you. --SMS Talk 20:38, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Presidential candidacies and ppo succession boxes
This issue was discussed on the talk page in 2010 (Talk:Joachim_Gauck#Candidate_.3D_political_party_office.3F. The relevant precedent is, for example, Barack Obama. Josh Gorand (talk) 18:36, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
I see your point regarding more rigid nominations in the US, but actually, I started introducing such succession boxes and/or templates in a number of articles on German politicians in 2010 (Template:SPD presidential candidates). Josh Gorand (talk) 18:49, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
I never finished it for CDU/CSU, FDP candidates, but should they all be removed, or reinstated/completed? Josh Gorand (talk) 18:57, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Bernie Machen et al
Greetings, Gator fan.
I have reverted your recent edits to the Bernie Machen article. Rather than continuing a slow-motion edit-war, I thought I would drop by your talk page and explain. You may or may not be aware that there are Wikipedia biographies for all 16 men who have served as president of the University of Florida, and those articles are consistently written, ordered and formatted, including the following:
1. Use of Infobox Person rather than any other infobox(es).
2. All of the three-man before-and-after succession boxes were previously deleted. Instead, the articles utilize a much cleaner navbox that covers the entire 16-man succession, including full names and dates of service. This was also done consistently for the FSU, UCF and USF presidential successions, which overlap with the UF presidential succession.
3. Every article employs consistent internal spacing as permitted by WP:MOS.
4. The correct order of the standard end-of-article sections, per WP:MOS, is: (a) "See also"; (b) "References"; (c) "Bibliography"; and (d) "External links." Each of the 16 articles follows the standard section order per MOS.
Four of the 16 UF presidential articles have already undergone Good Article review and have achieved GA status. Another six are in the works, with the Sledd and Tigert article upgrades already in the works for Feature Article status. There is also a "list of" article regarding the 16 presidents that is linked in the "See also" sections and the UF president navbox. The substantive content of the Machen article, being the current and therefore most controversial subject in the sense of random IP users wanting to make random and often inappropriate additions, is a work in progress. Rather than attempting to reformat the Machen article to your personal preferences (and inconsistently with the other 15 articles and MOS), I would ask that you focus on editing the substance of the Machen article, which clearly needs work. Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 21:32, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Gauck/German presidential election
Hello Therequiembellishere,
There are no other candidates yet. You oversee that three parties in the electoral assembly (Left, NPD, Pirates) have declared they were considering own candidates. Therefore it is almost sure that Gauck will be elected, but an encyclopedia should not speculate on future events, even if the probability is more than 99%. Edit-warring on whether we add the stuff now or in four weeks is however ridiculous. Still I would like you to avoid WP:SHOUTing and re-reverting in the future, especially if you are not even right. --RJFF (talk) 21:39, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
Ichthus: January 2012
 |
ICHTHUS |
| January 2012 |
In this issue...
For submissions contact the Newsroom • To unsubscribe add yourself to the list here
Republic of China article
Since you mentioned about the Republic of China in your user page, I guess you are interested to share your insights at Talk:Republic of China#Requested Move (February 2012). Thanks for your attention. 61.18.170.6 (talk) 12:41, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
George Tupou V
please see talk instead of warring. ive explained there (incidentally just saw something was reverted but out of edit conflict...im just adding more and will review in abit). WP editors ARE not RS...if yu dont hae a source he is NOT king
- And control your temper(Lihaas (talk) 17:49, 18 March 2012 (UTC)).
- You haved been woarned to restrain your tongue and discuss content this is an NApa(Lihaas (talk) 18:50, 18 March 2012 (UTC)).
Hi. Thanks for providing a reason for your removal of the length of his reign from Bhumibol Adulyadej. I've started a discussion at Talk:Bhumibol Adulyadej#Length of reign. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:35, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
- Hi. There seems to be a consensus on the Talk page for including the length of reign, so I've reinstated it. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:21, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
ANI
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lihaas (talk • contribs) 19:02, 18 March 2012
- Hello there, while I don't agree that there is anything actionable in the report to AN/I, edit summaries such as these two probably add to the problem rather than resolving it. I can see you were frustrated, but please try and keep things calm. Best wishes, Kim Dent-Brown (Talk) 08:19, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Governor articles infoboxes
Just some questions. I see you have been updating a lot of the governor info and succession boxes. I guess for cleanup. But I just was wondering why you felt the need to take out the birthname parameter from the infoboxes? Changing it to just name as you have done causes some of the infobox titles to be wrong. I can understand adding the name field, but please leave the birthname field in because it is a valid field that is used lower down in the infobox. It tends to be more important with female officeholders, I suppose, but wouldn't hurt to have it for male officeholders to list their full birth name, instead of just their commonly known name. Also, I thought infoboxes especially should have the URLs written out, not just shortened to "Official website". Seems pretty uninformative and somewhat redundant to see "Website: Official website" there. Thank you. -- JoannaSerah (talk) 17:35, 3 April 2012 (UTC)
WP Heroes
Wikipedia:WikiProject Heroes (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
Conversion to a task force is proposed and discussed in the talk page. Although I have no interest on the show, feel free. --George Ho (talk) 15:53, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Concerning the infobox, why do keep removing the fact tha President Banda has no vice president? You version suggests that the vice-presidency no longer exists, where's my version shows that the office does exist, but is merely vacant. GoodDay (talk) 06:50, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
List of heads of state & governments
We seem to keep bumping into each other & butting heads, don't we. GoodDay (talk) 22:30, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
- Also, if an addition has been made to the article and there is no policy against that addition, please use the talk page to try to persuade other editors that your change is needed. Please do not revert 'legal' additions or changes without first discussing it on the article's talk page, even if it is very minor. Thanks drs (talk) 13:37, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for adding all the awards into one table. Ive been trying it for a whilst and never been able to get it to align. Thanks again.Edinburgh Wanderer 18:37, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
Olivier Awards
You seem to have had the energy and resources to update about half of these. Any chance you could track down the rest:
- Template:OlivierAward Director 2001–2025
- Template:OlivierAward SpecialAward 2001–2025
- Template:OlivierAward Comedy 2001–2025
- Template:OlivierAward Entertainment 2001–2025--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:19, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
- I presume that by the Olivier Award space you mean catching the articles up to the templates?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:03, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
NBC's Must See TV
You are invited for the discussion about Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/NBC's Must See TV, intended for broadly shows in the Must See TV and Comedy Night Done Right lineups. --George Ho (talk) 19:21, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
Nick Clegg
Hey! I noticed you reverted one of my edits in Nick Clegg's page. I wouldn't be so sure and claim that his religious stance is inconsequential to his political career. That's simply your opinion (which you are entitled to have, of course). I can argue that the portion in the info box about his three sons is inconsequential, and not his religious beliefs. I may even dare to say that not having the religion portion might generate speculations, who knows. It doesn't hurt anyone to leave the portion there. Anyways, thanks for your time! ComputerJA (talk) 19:51, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
Minor note re: ITN candidate discussion
Just wanted to draw your attention to the fact that in this ITN discussion you registered an ambiguous vote of "Suppose", which should probably be clarified to "Support" or "Oppose" depending on which you meant. — Tyrannus Mundi 12:44, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Putin
Would you please engage at the article talkpage, instead of simply reverting? GoodDay (talk) 23:38, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
Reason
Hi - I am only attempting to remove the additions/removals of the User:Iloveandrea account and was attempting to replace any other beneficial additions - excuse me if I replaced a detrimental one - Youreallycan 19:28, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
Philippine WikiCon
You are invited to the 3rd Philippine Wiki Conference (WikiCon) on May 26, 2012 9am-1pm at the co.lab.exchange in Pasig City. Please fill this form should you signify interest. --Exec8 (talk) 17:45, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Tony Awards question
Hi, I noticed you went through the Tony Award for Best Actress in a Play list. I was wondering if it was a requirement that lists not be in alphabetical order? If so I'll remember that for future reference, thanks HesioneHushabye (talk) 20:53, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
Brezhnev
Stop fucking up!! Seriously ,why should Presidium not be linked? Huh? why? There is no fucking reason. THere is does not exist one fucking good reason to remove the links, no fucking good reason. Really... And why do you remove "of the Central Committee"? Why? There was no General Secretary of the CPSU, since, in theory, the Central Committee was the leadership of the party (or its leaders) and not the POlitburo.. There was no General Secretary of the CPSU; it never existed, because such a title would have been breach on collective leadership... Really, please, just stop. --TIAYN (talk) 19:14, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
Lee Myung-bak's birth place
Hello Therequiembellishere, I have a question on your recent edit in the Lee Myung-bak's birth place. I'm pretty sure it is a very tiny difference in style and like you said it is redundant, but in my humble opinion other South Korean presidents' infobox show they were born in the Empire of Japan (or Japanese Korea) explicitly. Please find the Kim_Dae-jung and Park Chung-hee. Or is Lee's case different from others since he was born in Osaka?
You're a very experienced editor, and I respect your decision to remove the words in question. Hope you could enlighten me on the issue, and please understand that I'm not trying to be nationalistic: I just thought the previous version was consistent with other pages, and even though it's Japan-Korea related(?) topic, it is mostly value neutral. Many Thanks, --- PBJT (talk) 05:06, 26 May 2012 (UTC)
- Hello again, Therequiembellishere. I changed the Lee Myung-bak's birth place to the initial format: Osaka, Empire of Japan. Please let me know if you don't like my editing. Best, --- PBJT (talk) 05:56, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
June 2012
Your recent editing history at Baburam Bhattarai shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. SudoGhost 18:09, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
- The user has already broken WP:3RR, so this warning is not enough here.HunterSilver (talk) 22:27, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at Baburam Bhattarai, you may be blocked from editing. instead of contributing to the talk, what you have done so far is you have only reverted and broken WP:3RR. by now i am sure you know nothing about the political situation in nepal. so be wise and stop! HunterSilver (talk) 22:33, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia Help Survey
Hi there, my name's Peter Coombe and I'm a Wikimedia Community Fellow working on a project to improve Wikipedia's help system. At the moment I'm trying to learn more about how people use and find the current help pages. If you could help by filling out this brief survey about your experiences, I'd be very grateful. It should take less than 10 minutes, and your responses will not be tied to your username in any way.
Thank you for your time,
the wub (talk) 18:20, 14 June 2012 (UTC) (Delivered using Global message delivery)
Talkback
Message added 11:53, 21 June 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
SMS Talk 11:53, 21 June 2012 (UTC) Do you care to discuss this issue? --SMS Talk 17:08, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
I recommend you check the discussions at that article's talkpage, before you start an edit war. GoodDay (talk) 23:21, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Romanian representation to June 28-29 2012 Summit
Please modify the Romanian head of the delegation to this Summit from President Basescu to Prime-Minister Ponta according to the EU Council official site. http://www.european-council.europa.eu/media/750848/web_bce_28-29juin_2012.pdf
July 2012
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Hosni Mubarak, please cite a reliable source for your addition. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. See Wikipedia:Citing sources for how to cite sources, and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. This also applies to your edits made to Mohamed Morsi. Thank you. Trinitresque (talk) 16:45, 1 July 2012 (UTC)
"ins't a matter of "knowing Mexican politics" it's maths" [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mexico&diff=500368809&oldid=500368031 I don't see "maths" here, you removed the second and third most important politicians in Mexico, with no reason. If Calderon dies, who will enter as acting president, Poiré or Peña Nieto? It does matter knowing Mexican politics. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 19:17, 2 July 2012 (UTC)
Notice of Biographies of living persons noticeboard discussion
Hello, Therequiembellishere. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 22:06, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
Mexico's election
Hello. I'm not sure if you are aware of the Mexican law on elections. The Federal Electoral Institute (IFE) will declare a winner after the district recount and after declaring the election a valid one. After this, the IFE gives the winner a "constancia de mayoría" the official document that entitles somebody as the president-elect.
Right now, there is no "president-elect" in Mexico. The electoral process is still going on. Mexican press refer to appearing leading candidate Enrique Peña as "the virtual president-elect", because of the above reasons. AlexCovarrubias ( Talk? ) 00:20, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello, it would be very nice if you could explain why the edit I did on this article is unnecessary. Thanks--Natsubee (talk) 08:54, 29 July 2012 (UTC)
Your edit request at Talk:Syria
Just wanted to let you know that the article is now semi-protected not protected, so you can make the edit you requested. FloBo A boat that can float! (watch me float!) 17:42, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Links
Please don't change [[Shadow Secretary of State for X]] links into [[Secretary of State for X|Shadow Secretary of State for X]] pipe links. I have been steadily creating these articles over the last year or so, and using redirects for articles that are likely to be created is perfectly valid. -Rrius (talk) 22:11, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
- I've been stuck on Overseas/International Development and Transport for a bit, but I'm sure I'll buckle down on sources soon. -Rrius (talk) 03:19, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for August 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Michael Baumgartner, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Washington (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) 11:29, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
Infobox Edits to Kurt Bills
Hello... why did you undo my edits to the infobox of Kurt Bills? His opponent, Amy Klobuchar, and many other politicians infoboxes contain those fields. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaw959 (talk • contribs) 15:06, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Why?
Hi there. I was visiting the article on Rob McKenna, and saw that the order of office was missing from the infobox, in contrast to a version I read a few weeks prior. In trying to find out who made the change and to understand the reasoning behind it, I noticed you've made that same change to many other articles too numerous to list. I won't claim to be an overly active editor, but I do try and keep up with agreed changes to infoboxes, and I haven't been able to find any community agreement saying that we should start not using the order of office in infoboxes where applicable. Therefore, I would like to ask you describe your reasoning for making these changes. Thank you. Redverton (talk) 12:53, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
- Sorry if it seems like I'm stalking you, but I checked your edits to see if you'd been online, and I find you've continued to remove the order of office from yet more articles. Again, I cannot see what basis you have for doing this, and I must stress that I desire some kind of an explanation. Needless to say, unilateral changes against consensus are not the way forward. At the risk of sounding draconian, if you wish to pursue this course of action further without discussion, I shall have to invite scrutiny from other editors. Therefore, I again stress that you please respond to my queries before carrying on. Redverton (talk) 13:36, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for November 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of current United States governors, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Washington (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) 12:55, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
Succession boxes for judicial nominees
Thank you for your efforts to improve articles concerning various public officials, including nominees for judicial positions. However, I do not believe it is customary to include succession boxes in the articles for individuals who are currently nominated for a judicial position, but have not yet been confirmed for the position. Including these boxes could inadvertently create the misleading impression that these individuals are currently serving, which is especially concerning given that we all know that not all nominees are eventually confirmed. I'd welcome your thoughts on this. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 02:10, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
- I actually was coming here to make a similar comment, so I will include it under the previous user's comment. In particular, relating to William L. Thomas and some other federal judge articles, you added lines to the infobox regarding succession, etc., that are not applicable at this time as this individual and the other individuals have NOT been confirmed by the Senate. I have made the appropriate correction to the William L. Thomas article and will correct the others. But you may want to double check in the future as to whether the individuals in question are merely "nominated and pending before the Senate" or have actually been "confirmed" by the Senate. Thanks. Otherwise, good work on the articles. Safiel (talk) 23:12, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for December 12
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.
- Robert Jemison, Jr. (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Georgia
- William Lowndes Yancey (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Georgia
- William M. Browne (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Georgia
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:18, 12 December 2012 (UTC)
Tim Scott
Is there a fire? Please wait until Scott succeeds DeMint & then we can use a succession box. Otherwise, open up a discussion at the proper WikiProject, so we can solve this continuing dispute of ours. GoodDay (talk) 00:15, 18 December 2012 (UTC)
Compromise
I believe there's a way we can use succession boxes for pending office holders: Howabout we do it this way?
After Scott is sworn-in, I can modify it to an incumbent succession box. GoodDay (talk) 03:09, 19 December 2012 (UTC)
Co-Princes of Andorra
Hi, I just noted your changes in Josep Maria Mauri. Some thoughts: the two coprinces of Andorra are referred to as the "episcopal coprince" (i.e. Bishop of Urgell) and the "french coprince" (i.e. President of France) - see for example both of their websites. Therefore to call the personal representative of the Bishop of Urgell in his function as head of state of Andorra as "Spanish representative of Andorra" seems to me misleading. Furthermore, he is not representing Andorra but the Co-Prince. I changed the wording to: "Representativ of the Episcopal Co-Prince of Andorra". I hope you don't mind. Gugganij (talk) 08:19, 22 December 2012 (UTC)
mmmm
I didn't feel like those links were needed. I don't have them like that on the other pages. You're obviously a theatre queen like me. Cheers! HesioneHushabye (talk) 20:05, 23 December 2012 (UTC)
Website in infobox
Where a website is listed in an infobox, such as klobuchar.senate.gov, the actual name of the website should be displayed (this, not the link, is the point of including it in the infobox in the first place. Changing the display text to something generic like "Government website" is unhelpful. -Rrius (talk) 19:26, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
Your edits
As you're aware, I disagree with your formatting of politicians infoboxes to ween out information I find essential to their articles. On Antonio Villaraigosa's, you claimed: "His wife and child aren't major parts of his political life nor is his residence permanent or relevant to it" as the rationale for deleting information. I feel I should tell you that these aren't just politicians, they're people, and their personal lives are in conjunction with their political ones. I know you have been busy, doing this to many articles, but I feel that this is wrong, so please tell me your side of it. Best, Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 21:33, 24 December 2012 (UTC)
- Again, I request your reasoning for your edits. You're deleting vital BLP info from articles with the only explanation as "Formatting infobox". I would either like to try to understand how you can justify these edits by Wiki standards, or to get an arbiter to decide if they're right. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 00:37, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
- Well it's understandable not wanting the infobox to be overfilled with info. As for the family, spouses and children have around as much impact on decisions as religion, so why include that? And for politicians, most of them are married and have kids, so it would do well to include this info either for all, or just the few that are divorced or single. And as for the "alma mater" section, I believe it's essential to display what degree(s) they earned, as alma mater is just what schools were attended, and could confuse readers. I hope we can compromise on this. Grammarxxx (What'd I do this time?) 01:45, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for December 27
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.
- Cuthbert Sebastian (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Edmund Lawrence
- Denzil Douglas (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Edmund Lawrence
- List of current heads of state and government (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Edmund Lawrence
- List of current state leaders by date of assumption of office (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Edmund Lawrence
- List of heads of state by diplomatic precedence (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Edmund Lawrence
- Saint Kitts and Nevis (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
- added a link pointing to Edmund Lawrence
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:23, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
Follow-up
Hey again. I'm sure you saw my post earlier entitled 'Why?'. I posted it coming up to two months ago, and when a response wasn't forthcoming, I added a reminder. I presumed you lead a busy life, which is why I allowed such a long amount of time for you to respond to a concern that your edits weren't following established consensus. However, I feel I have given enough time for a response, and I am disappointed you failed to give it. In order to try to understand your lack of explanation for edits were are seemingly against what the community agreed to on the format of infoboxes, I explored some of your edits and talk page. In some ways, maybe a discussion between us two was never going to resolve this, as it is clear concerns have been raised with your infobox edits for sometime now, and I doubt that could have been solved through the interaction of two people. So, what now? As I see it, you have been making comprehensive changes to the infoboxes of various articles; changes which in part have elicited concerns from other editors for a period of years, such as the removal of the order of office, for which you have received no consensus to do. I did not join Wikipedia to police other editors, but considering the scope (covering numerous articles) and the length of time you have been doing it despite concerns raised, I feel I have to report all this to a admin so s/he may look over this situation. I shall leave you a link to the relevant admin when I'm done. As for me, I feel this is unambigiously a case of you editing without concensus, so if I see you have made such comprehensive changes to an infobox elsewhere, I shall restore it back to its approved format. I'm sorry for whatever inquisitorial tone this post may have, but I feel I have no alternative but to speak this way. Redverton (talk) 08:49, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
- I left a note at User talk:Wifione. Redverton (talk) 09:07, 31 December 2012 (UTC)