User talk:Piratesswoop/Archive 5

Happy Birthday

Armbrust Talk Contribs 00:25, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am joining these wishes. I enjoy following your contributions to the global knowledge base. Keep up the good work! Happy138 (talk) 05:58, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Line of succession

Policy is to align the list to the line of succession listed on the official British web site and Leopold and Albert Windsor are both included in the official line of succession with the title Hon. The rule appears to be that children are included in the line of succession unless and until they make the decision themselves to be confirmed as Catholic when they are teenagers. Confirmation is the adult profession of faith and membership in the church. Mere baptism as Catholics doesn't qualify. The same appears to apply to their first cousins, who were in the line of succession until they were confirmed Catholic. The youngest child in the family, Amelia, is still in the line of succession but she probably is too young to undergo confirmation. All three of those children appear to have been raised Catholic. --Bookworm857158367 (talk) 02:51, 29 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Morhange's Day!

Morhange has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
so I've officially declared today as Morhange's Day!
For being a great person and awesome Wikipedian,
enjoy being the star of the day, Morhange!

Signed, Neutralhomer

A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, click here. Have a Great Day...Neutralhomer • Talk • 06:05, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, nice! Much success in your new university. What are you studying there? Happy138 (talk) 16:37, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Danish royal babies with no name

Thanks, Morhange, for taking care of that issue at Mary, Crown Princess of Denmark and her royal husband, Frederik, Crown Prince of Denmark‎. My edits prior to yours were intended to get away from the cryptic abbreviation "NN," which could mean anything (even some Danish hierarchical title, for all I knew). I also contended that since this is a special case, where newborns in the royal family have no name in the public eye—although I hope that their parents have the smarts to at least call them something until the official release date!—we need to have a clear way of describing this to a first-time reader. In Wikipedia, there are usually set rules for abbreviations, and we are currently working on a way to handle this issue at Template talk:Danish Royal Family. This is a discussion which I prompted by objecting similarly to the use of "NN" in that template. You can see the template in the right-hand column of the above royal personnages.

If you have anything to add to our discussion at Template talk:Danish Royal Family, relating to the issue of what to place in the blank space until a name crops up, please feel free to do so. Thanks again for your solution of "Unnamed twin son and daughter (b. 2011)." No wonder you are an Awesome Wikipedian!

BTW, "Did You Know" about the town of Morhange, in France? Is that whence you got your registered Wiki handle?
--Skol fir (talk) 18:12, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Message from BMSprint

I'm contacting you because I wanted to talk to you about your 'monarchist' userbox. We can talk back and forth, edit my user talk page here I am just curious about the different reasons people identify as monarchists! —Preceding undated comment added 19:50, 25 February 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Live Scores

Wikipedia is not a live news source. Please do not add live score updates to articles pertaining to sporting events. Thank you. Sir Sputnik (talk) 20:19, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Sidneygoodwin.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Sidneygoodwin.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 08:32, 22 March 2011 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 08:32, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Ruthbecker.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Ruthbecker.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 02:50, 7 April 2011 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 02:50, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Prince Aristidis-Stavros of Greece and Denmark for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Prince Aristidis-Stavros of Greece and Denmark is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prince Aristidis-Stavros of Greece and Denmark until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Hans Adler 12:48, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hi Morhange! I noticed that you occasionally revert vandalism, and I was surprised to see that your account does not have rollback rights. Would you be interested in having them to help you revert vandalism? Acalamari 09:41, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

British Line

You are entirely correct with respect to this page. However the page has been hijacked by people who misuse arguments to reduce the knowledge. I am writing from the view of a person who has never made an edit to add any person (other than reverting) although I have helped with formatting and indeed shortening the article. My total edits have reduced the length of the article).The page has existed for 8 years, and the majority of that time has had more than 1000 names. There was no consensus to decimate this collection of material. Unfortunately the page was frozen in the short version and not the long version given the appearance that the status quo was the short version. Every argument made has been countered - except perhaps one - and that is the length - but the editors have hidden behind others things. These editors have used words like "guess", "wonder", "interpretation" and speculation - one said: "is purely speculative as the question will never realistically be asked" - another said: "At a guess, once you go beyond Prince Andrew" ...another: "One wonders whether the Kent's prospects" - my point is that the creation of the article did not involve this - it is a proper collation from reliable sources - the Original Research Rule prohibits these things which those editors suggest. One of these editors also commented that if we go back further the list could go into the millions. This is most frustrating because it means he did not even read the first few lines of the article, where it indicates the article is finite - and effectively complete just before it was reduced in size. Another person stating that it must remain inaccurate because statistically with births and deaths there needed to be about 4 edits a week. But again they are focussing entirely on the wrong point and missing the purpose of Wikipedia. We are not supposed to engage in original research - edits are only made reliable sources are found that impact the article. If there is no such reliable resource then no change is to be made. The article must be out of date even if there is well known personal knowledge of a birth or death – because all entries are to be made and in fact were made from reliable resources. These editors have tried to attack the resources without success, so they moved onto other arguments. One most interesting attempt was to call the resource a geological site; or criticise it because it did not discount Catholics. But synthesis allows this:

Only add a person if a reliable resources states a person was born from another person on the list, and there is a reliable resource that the person was married at the time. No research there (let alone original). Only delete a person if there is a reliable resource about the person’s death – or a reliable resource that says the person became catholic or married a catholic. No research there, just using a resource that says so. There have been spurious arguments relating to how this is to be interpreted – but no interpretation is involved – it has always been the application of a reliable resources, I was also personally attacked, - which in itself is an indication that their arguments were failing. In the end, it is a minor matter that I have left; just like walking away from a bully.

You are absolutely right; Wikipedia has lost this knowledge because these editors play games rather than have the interests of Wikipedia at heart. Ail my comments on the page assumed good faith. But that it not possible any longer. I tried to suggest arbitration, but that is not available, apparently. The statement that each entry must have an authority for that position either shows ignorance or intentionally is spurious. Any site which states that would need to be constantly kept up to date with births and deaths – and the Wikipedia site would be a mere copy. Lists right throughout Wikipedia insert entries from various sources. In the end, just click “Random article” from the front page to look at the breadth and extent of article, many with no work. Putting together from the sources this (1) the sources; (2) sources births deaths and Catholicism (and nothing else) is precisely what occurred before the decimation of the site. Again, well done by you. Alan Davidson (talk) 07:06, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your latest edit at (08:23, 6 June 2011) is precisely correct; but the dissenting editors have made up their minds not to accept it. I am sure they will do something like "see I told you there was no source". You and I understand the very simple logic that a person properly sourced in postion 40 becomes 41 on the properly sourced birth of someone beforehand (like Savannah Phillips at positon 12). But they will argue illogically against this for my reasons stated above. I hope you don't mind me writing like this - I have all but given up on Wikipedia because of this type of decimation. Alan Davidson (talk) 08:46, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well done on your last two entries. You can see precisely the spurious approach taken by these dissenters, and the really curious logic they attempt to use. A couple are so interested in the argument, more than the actual article, they have continued on my talk page without any invitation. All arguments have been answered, so they keep recycling them on the basis that repetition wins over reason. And it has. I am just a fan of the site, I have no more interest in debating on the article's talk page. It really isn't that important. Unfortunately this all proves Williamb correct. All the best. Alan Davidson (talk) 07:58, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that your referenced additions were removed shows that the dissenters aren't interested in their own words or "stated" reasons. Alas, I am not surprised. But good luck - you have more pateince with them than I. All the best. Alan Davidson (talk) 13:49, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Message on Alan Davidson's talk page

Hi, I left a message for both you and Alan on his talk page. Mlm42 (talk) 16:55, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File source problem with File:Sigismund.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Sigismund.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the page from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of the website's terms of use of its content. If the original copyright holder is a party unaffiliated with the website, that author should also be credited. Please add this information by editing the image description page.

If the necessary information is not added within the next days, the image will be deleted. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem.

Please refer to the image use policy to learn what images you can or cannot upload on Wikipedia. Please also check any other files you have uploaded to make sure they are correctly tagged. Here is a list of your uploads. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 21:40, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This Flickr image

Maybe you should change the very restrictive flickr license here from 'All Rights Reserved' to 'Attribution-ShareAlike Creative Commons' or "CC BY SA Generic" so that it matches the license you gave this image at WikiCommons. If not, the image will be failed at Commons and someone may delete it. Just to let you know. After all, its the first flickr image you uploaded from your account and no one can be sure that you control this flickr account apart from your claim of "own work." Just to let you know. Thank You, --Leoboudv (talk) 09:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • No problem. I flickrpassed your image at WikiCommons now as a trusted user there. Normally an image which fails flickr review gets deleted within a day because so many uploaders pretend to be the flickr account owner...but in actual fact, they aren't. Here the problem is resolved. Best Regards from Canada, --Leoboudv (talk) 23:43, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Cheeeeks.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Cheeeeks.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. –Drilnoth (T/C) 13:51, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Come hang out with us!

Hi! I wanted to let you know that we have created an IRC channel for "countering systemic bias one new editor at a time", aka closing the gender gap! Come hang out at #wikimedia-gendergap. We hope this channel can serve as a safe haven to hang out, talk about Wiki, brainstorming, women in Wikimedia, article alerts and foster friendships. I hope you join us! (And if you need any IRC help, just let me know!) See you there! SarahStierch (talk) 20:05, 21 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

September 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The September 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 02:40, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Kermitbale.png

⚠
⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Kermitbale.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 05:55, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

December 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States

The December 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumioko (talk) 03:59, 12 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

January 2012 Newsletter for WikiProject United States and supported projects

The January 2012 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

 
--Kumi-Taskbot (talk) 18:22, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Louise Laroche for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Louise Laroche is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Louise Laroche until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Student7 (talk) 01:00, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Rory Fleming for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rory Fleming is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rory Fleming until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Mutt Lunker (talk) 14:33, 25 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ancestors of Sophie, Countess of Wessex

Hi Morhange! Can you help me about the ancestors of Sophie, Countess of Wessex? I just found 14 of them, those you added to her children articles, and I could not find more of them. She is a member of the royal family, so like the others we need the name of 30 ancestors of Sophie. Can you find the others and add them to her article? Keivan.fTalk 06:37, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There's no need. I completed her ancestry. Thank you. Keivan.fTalk 16:22, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

R&N Userbox

Hello, Morhange! You can add the new userbox for the Royalty & Nobility taskforce, {{User WikiProject Royalty and Nobility}}, to your userpage! - Presidentman talk · contribs Random Picture of the Day (Talkback) 11:54, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Daniel Carvajal for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Daniel Carvajal is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Carvajal (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Sir Sputnik (talk) 04:02, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Conventions of naming certain personages

Hello, thought I was correct in my moves per Wikipedia:Naming conventions (royalty and nobility) - the do not use styles bit; regardless of whether we should even list cousins twice-removed of Our Gracious at the tender age of two (notable for walking, perhaps); do not use styles, one should think, should allow one to remove such styles, as was done Regards Crusoe8181 (talk) 09:58, 19 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikiWomen's Collaborative

WikiWomen Unite!
Hi Piratesswoop! Women around the world who edit and contribute to Wikipedia are coming together to celebrate each other's work, support one another, and engage new women to also join in on the empowering experience of shaping the sum of all the world's knowledge - through the WikiWomen's Collaborative.

As a WikiWoman, we'd love to have you involved! You can do this by:

We can't wait to have you involved, and feel free to drop by our meta page (under construction) to see how else you can get involved!

Can't wait to have you involved! SarahStierch (talk) 04:43, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle

Decemmber 8 - Wikipedia Loves Libraries Seattle - You're invited
Seattle Public Library
  • Date Saturday, December 8, 2012
  • Time 10 a.m. – 3 p.m.
  • Location Seattle Public Library Meeting Room 1 on Level 4, Central Library, 1000 4th Avenue, Seattle WA, 98104
  • Event An editathon on Seattle-related Wikipedia articles with Wikipedia tutorials and Librarian assistance on hand.
  • Hashtag #wikiloveslib or #glamwiki.
  • Registration http://wll-seattle.eventbrite.com or use on-wiki regsistration.

Yours, Maximilianklein (talk) 04:26, 1 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

WikiWomen's Collaborative: Come join us (and check out our new website)!

WikiWomen - We need you!
Hi Piratesswoop! The WikiWomen's Collaborative is a group of women from around the world who edit Wikipedia, contribute to its sister projects, and support the mission of free knowledge. We recently updated our website, created new volunteer positions, and more!

Get involved by:

  • Visiting our website for resources, events, and more
  • Meet other women and share your story in our profile space
  • Participate at and "like" our Facebook group
  • Join the conversation on our Twitter feed
  • Reading and writing for our blog channel
  • Volunteer to write for our blog, recruit blog writers, translate content, and co-run our Facebook and receive perks for volunteering
  • Already participating? Take our survey and share your experience!

Thanks for editing Wikipedia, and we look forward to you being a part of the Collaborative! -- EdwardsBot (talk) 01:45, 10 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday!

Michaelzeng7 (talk) 14:56, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Happy birthday from me too! Happy138 (talk) 20:06, 25 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

September 2013

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

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • On 29 November 2008, the Count of Paris announced the engagement of the Duke of Vendôme to [Maria Magdalena '''Philomena''' Juliana Johanna de Tornos y Steinhart, born in [[Vienna]] on 19

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 04:55, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Where We Are Tour (One Direction), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rose Bowl (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) 09:08, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

May 2014

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

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • Royal]], apparently escaped the haemophilia gene as it did not appear in any of her descendants (save for two of her grandsons, who inherited it through their mother Irene, Princess Alice's

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 03:28, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Marie of Romania/GA1

This user helped promote Marie of Romania to good article status.
Marie of Romania, an article to which you have contributed, has been listed as a Good Article. Keep up the good work! SilkTork ✔Tea time 10:09, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Prod warning

Proposed deletion of Princess Maria of Romania

The article Princess Maria of Romania has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Not notable, never really a princess as born after Romania became a republic, article content is mostly trivia.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. PatGallacher (talk) 16:28, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Passengers of the RMS Titanic

List articles are not eligible for Good Article listing. Lists go to Wikipedia:Featured lists. SilkTork ✔Tea time 15:52, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Passengers of the RMS Titanic

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Passengers of the RMS Titanic you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Acalycine -- Acalycine (talk) 07:01, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Passengers of the RMS Titanic

The article Passengers of the RMS Titanic you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Passengers of the RMS Titanic for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Acalycine -- Acalycine (talk) 07:21, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Passengers of the RMS Titanic casualties breakdown pictogram

Hi Morhange, Re your reversion of the pictogram, I've shrunk it, and added a link to it and a clear <br> to avoid it affecting the table below. Is that better? cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ 12:40, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Roger Federer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Telegraph. 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) 08:57, 3 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

Even if the tour was cancelled purely for recording reasons, they're relatively unknown outside Europe, so I can't imagine them selling out a North American tour. 80.111.184.146 (talk) 21:44, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

July 2014

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

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:
  • ' Princess Tessy, Princess of Luxembourg, Princess of Nassau, Princess of Bourbon-Parma.<ref>{http://www.monarchie.lu/fr/famille/princesse-tessy/index.html La Princesse Tessy]</ref>

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 23:12, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Frederic Bourdin

Hello.

he has four children, I'm following him in Facebook and I know that last year he got another baby with his wife and here is a french article that if you don't mind translate for truth's sake confirm that he has four kids...

Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).http://www.larepubliquedespyrenees.fr/2014/01/15/le-cameleon-a-change-de-peau,1174192.php

there is also this:

Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10204561143447712&set=exp.10204561144167730.unitary&type=1&theater


Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.130.124.43 (talk) 00:15, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I will change the article to reflect this new source. The one that was previously there indicated he only had three children. Morhange (talk) 00:44, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No, Thank you ! ;) 77.130.124.43 (talk) 02:03, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2008 Summer Olympics opening ceremony, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Constantine II. 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) 09:17, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Princess Irina of Romania

Shouldn't the page be renamed too seeing how most of media refer to her as Irina Walker or Romanian princess, a title she was striped off recently.--Killuminator (talk) 08:35, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I added an explanation in the template for Romanian princesses, but my choice of words is vague. If you can come up with a better sentence, I'll be very thankful :). --Killuminator (talk) 09:13, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]