User talk:DBD/Archive 27

November 2014–May 2015

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bishop 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) 13:28, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

George James Cholomondeley

Hi DBD,

With uncanny precision you have exposed the one large gap in my Clergy List/Crockford's access. I have a CD of all clergy ordained in 1864, 1908 and 1929 plus books for 48,52,60,68,76, 82, 88, 01 and 09. Portsmouth Central Library have Clergy Lists for 1841, 1864, 1884, 1901, 1917, 1913, 1933, 1941 and 1956: it is inscribed in each of these that someone at the library in 1960 opted to keep only every 5th one; so a lot were either dumped or sold! So the venerable gentleman was not appointed by 1884 and had died by 1908. The 1901 would have had it, which is why every so often you will see I update my lists as I keep a running list of possible gaps: it costs £3.70 return on the train from where I live. To think I used to work 2 mins from that Library (1986-91)

All the best,

Basher

Bashereyre (talk) 17:29, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Crikey. DBD 17:33, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Archdeacon of Rochester, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rochester. 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) 15:38, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WHH

Please see my note at Talk:William Holden Hutton. Please use WP:RM to move the article in future. Thanks. Solomon7968 15:12, 28 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

List of bishops in the Church of England

Hi DBD. You reverted in the List of bishops regarding Nicholas Baines. I think its not true what you are saying. There is no reason why the seniority of Baines as Bishop of Bradford should not count. I am of this opinion since he retired as Bishop of Bradford but did not do any changes because I had no source for it. But now it seems that the House of Lords is of the same opinion then I am:[1] There are other examples too, when seniority continues as the diocese changes. Kind Regards --Dangermouse600 (talk) 22:19, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies; I did not see that source. It has rather surprised me, though, since Lords Spiritual are reckoned on seniority of continuous service in mainland diocesan sees and Baines was not in any see from 20 April til 8 June and thereby went to the back of the queue. (Something his new diocese were keen should happen, so that they would not 'lose him' to Lords duties soon.) I am rather inclined to think that whoever updates parliament.uk has made a mistake and overlooked this, but I'm not 100%. I guess I'll be convinced when I see Hansard record his Introduction to that Chamber. DBD 00:32, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, House of Lord often isn't easy to understand. But parliament.uk was always correct when something was published. Nicholas Baines seemed to be aware of what was coming since July:[2] You mention Hansard. Do you know where to get Hansard-records newer than 2005 online? --Dangermouse600 (talk) 01:55, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Recent Hansard is here: [3] I'm less convinced Baines 'went to the back of the queue' now, since the most authoritative source for 'how it works', the Bishoprics Act 1878, $5 could certainly be interpreted several ways. I'll un-revert on the strength of the parliament.uk source. Sorry about that. DBD 10:38, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Archdeacon of Stoke, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sandon. 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) 10:15, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays

Happy Holidays
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. - Ealdgyth - Talk 15:01, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Bishop articles

Please stop redirecting these articles in ways which are contrary to the Manual of Style. You already know what it says on this matter so respect it. Afterwriting (talk) 15:12, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Jim Leftwich

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Jim Leftwich requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. James (T • C) • 12:04 PM • 01:04, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete declined. BencherliteTalk 01:16, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Francis and Clement

User talk:Bashereyre#Frederick Halliwell

Brother Michael

Hi. I've noticed you've moved Reginald Fisher (bishop) to Brother Michael, but I think it may be better to move the page to Michael Fisher (bishop). If you take a look at Basil Hume's page, you'll see he was born as George Haliburton Hume, but when he joined Order of Saint Benedict he took the religious name Basil. When Hume was created a cardinal, he was commonly known as Cardinal Hume, but his Wikipedia page is titled "Basil Hume" not "Cardinal Hume". So it is with Michael Fisher, who was born as Reginald Lindsay Fisher, but when he joined the Society of Saint Francis he took the religious name Michael. So although Fisher was commonly known "Brother Michael", his Wikipedia page should include his religious name and his surname. Scrivener-uki (talk) 17:43, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is a funny sort of mash-up though, since Franciscans are generally called "Brother John" with no surname. I'm just wondering whether Michael was ever (let alone commonly) called "Michael Fisher". If not, then we could be straying into synthesis... DBD 18:46, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
He published his memoirs in 1993, titled For the Time Being, and as the author his is called Michael Fisher, S.S.F. I don't think we can be any more clear than that for his common-name. Scrivener-uki (talk) 19:55, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, nice one. We certainly can't. I'll 'action' that then. DBD 20:47, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I did a thing. If you're cool with it as it is (just take a look at my contribs), then great; if not, please do have a fiddle. DBD 21:16, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, DBD. You have new messages at Scrivener-uki's talk page.
Message added 18:29, 28 March 2015 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Apostolic Vicariate of Natal, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages OSB and OMI. 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) 08:55, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Honorfics

I think that perhaps you misunderstand MOS:HONORIFIC. I believe it to mean that honorifics should not be used in article titles, which I agree with 100%, I don't think it wrong to include honorific titles that people were entitled to use in the body of the article. I would be interested to know why you think it is wrong to include honorifics in the body of the article, what harm does it do? Wayne Jayes (talk) 13:39, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps I do, but I did read carefully before starting on AWB: for a start, the first two words are "In general"; the Father Coughlin example would point to in-text references; "Mrs. Alfred Jones" reads similarly; finally "see [NAMING CONVENTIONS] for use in article titles." seems to suggest the entire section refers exclusively to in-text references. DBD 15:47, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Your continued removal of honorifics is unhelpful bordering on vandalism. In an article about a church and churchmen it matters if words are spoken by the leader of the church (archbishop) as opposed to just an ordinary member. Removing the honorifics in this stupid way reduces the value and meaning of the article. As I have said before your understanding of MOS:HONORIFIC is flawed. Wayne Jayes (talk) 08:57, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
As I hope you'll see from my edits just now at Anglican Church of Southern Africa, there are ways to get that information across which do not breach the MOS. If you'd prefer that Revds appear, then you should start a discussion about that portion of the MOS. I'll be quite happy to pause while that discussion occurs. DBD 17:19, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disruptive changing of bishop articles

Please stop your repeated disruptive changing of bishop article names contrary to the Manual of Style. Your respect for the MoS is highly selective. You insist on following it slavishly on some matters but deliberately violate it on others. I will be keeping a watch on this issue and all further such violations by you will be reverted. Afterwriting (talk) 23:32, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, discussions are ongoing: Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (clergy)/WP:BISHOP revision. Perhaps you will help to encourage their unbestallment? DBD 11:33, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Sir" Basher replying to {e.g. Dai Jones}, the Dukes of {e.g. Rees}

As I recall the link was already there for Sir Bob Reed, but as someone who listens fairly regularly to Radio 4 I always knew when they said Sir Bob Reid they were differentiating him from his predecessor as British Rail head, who was also Sir Robert Reid. Sir Bob Reid's own Who's Who entry (which is written by himself) has the by-line REID, Sir Robert Paul, (Sir Bob) But then again what about Screaming Lord Sutch? it's a minefield...Bashereyre (talk) 11:24, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comrade {e.g. Dai Rees Jones}, to Comrade Basher Eyre

Lol, brilliant! Does not Bob Reid (executive) (or some such) dab him sufficiently though? {e.g. Dai Rees Jones} (Comrade) 11:54, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Go ahead

Do the deed!Bashereyre (talk) 07:19, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Basher's Biog

That's the trouble, D. So far I've been far too modest. Read on

Sir Basher Eyre, VC, MP, DD, FRS was born in Dorset where his dad once had the priviledge of changing a car wheel for Elisabeth Frink. At school Basher had the honour to be bonked over the head with a hymn book by prefect Howard Drake. In his last year he had Simon Ings in his CCF platoon. At university he once queued up behind Phil Daniels at a sandwich bar near the hall of residence where he lived. Training as a teacher he had Stephen Kinnock in his first class. The next 34 years passed uneventfully until he edited an article on Chris Chivers. Sorry, just couldn't keep it up, I'm one of life's blender-innersBashereyre (talk) 13:15, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Archdeacon of West Cumberland, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Richard Pratt. 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) 08:56, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Archdeacon of Worcester, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Godfrey. 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) 09:21, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A big thank you

Apparently the old adage about "Painting the Fourth Bridge" is not actually true but you know what I mean. I, meanwhile, have had my very own article in The Sun [4] Bashereyre (talk) 17:31, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I do indeed. And, despite the pay wall, well done you. DBD 18:17, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
All my pupils came in brandishing paper copies!Bashereyre (talk) 16:28, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
That's one way to get young people interested in print media! DBD 16:31, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Archdeacon of Worcester, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bishop of Gibraltar. 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) 10:58, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Martin's big day

Is he now a bishop. I see he was born in Pompey. Top man!Bashereyre (talk) 13:54, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Happy birthday!