Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:35, 4 May 2006

Welcome!

Hello, Choess/Archive1, and welcome to Misplaced Pages! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Misplaced Pages
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Misplaced Pages:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  -- Infrogmation 04:41, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Hey Choess, thanks for your help with 62.78. I just wanted to mention, it's not necessary to wiki-link every date - if (for example) "1191" appears a dozen times, just link it the first time. Adam Bishop 05:45, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hallo Choess, thanks for your translation at Henry (VII). Actually, I was planning to do it myself, but you jumped in and saved me a lot of work, so thanks again. You can see the result now on the Henry (VII) of Germany page. Str1977 30 June 2005 01:02 (UTC)

Hey Choess thanks for separating out the Counts of Ponthieu for me, hadn't got round to doing that. User:Amatire (talk) 14:41 10 Nov 2005 (UTC)

NJ map

I decided to go with the company that built the line, and not deal with branches, as it's pretty much impossible to ensure I have all of them. commons:New Jersey railroad map has the map and legend. I don't have all short lines labeled yet. --SPUI (talk) 2 July 2005 00:38 (UTC)

Succession box

The succession box template is definitely a better place to discuss it - the naming conventions page is technically for page titles only, and in any case is a mess at the moment. In terms of Valencia, I would suggest that, really, all the crowns of Aragon were permanently united after the 13th century, and there's no real need to have multiple boxes for any of them. Up to 1162, the Counts of Barcelona should obviously have their own boxes. john k 19:08, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

Alexandra

Are you claiming that "Alexandra Fedorovna" was NOT her pre-marital name?? Otherwise, your written reason for your opinion cannot be understood. 217.140.193.123 23:48, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

fabrication, or resembling, is not encouraged in talk pages

It is not recommendable to change what others have written (or signed) in talk pages. I am not accepting any of your actions in that regard. 217.140.193.123 23:50, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

Serbia

Well i'm from Serbia and Montenegro, not from Russia. You make mistake and i don't know anything about Russian tsarinas and something like that. --Sasa Stefanovic 18:11, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

SM&B

Do you know the details on the SM&B's charter? Did it go all the way to Boston Corners (or beyond to Northampton), or was it chartered as other companies beyond Campbell Hall, that were at the time allied with the SM&B? --SPUI (talk) 21:20, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the info. I'm not convinced, but sometimes you need to... well, you know. I love the "literacy" comment. Deb 23:10, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

I know, it just appealed to my sense of humour, the idea of our friend holding down a job as a diplomat! Deb 17:53, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

Middle Ages Wikiproject

Hey Choess, I'm not sure if I ever told about the Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Middle Ages...there is also a list of new articles there, so if you write something new, you might want to add it there as well. Adam Bishop 00:08, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

I specifically want to transfer him to his ordinal. Try yourself, see how it succeeds. Arrigo 13:13, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Not edit history (it is short, only one, see yourself), there is some other tech glitch. I fear it will not be only F. to oppose - bsides, F. at this time clearly hates me, thus he may call upon yet some others... How about you put it to RM, "P III, D of B". Arrigo 13:38, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

The Grand Chancellor

Hi, Choess. The note you place on John Kenney's talk page was prophetic; the Poidimani faction (of one)<g> has continued to elaborate Dom Rosario Saxe Coburg Gotha Bragança. Current comments/voting are under way at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Dom Rosario Saxe Coburg Gotha Bragança; your comments might help reassure those who are voting to keep under the illusion that this is a serious or important pretender. - Nunh-huh 21:09, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Elkton and Middletown Railroad

Thanks for the correction - I just realized I was wrong and went to fix it, but found it had already been fixed! --SPUI (talk) 02:10, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Charles Augustus Ellis, 6th Baron Howard de Walden

Hi Choess! Thanks for your clean-up job on Charles Augustus Ellis, 6th Baron Howard de Walden - you did a far better job than me! Here, have a barnstar! ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 10:27, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Anglo-French peerages

Someone (me, I guess) should take a look in Complete Peerage. I really don't know. john k 22:32, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Translit

Hey Choess, Basically there are two ways to transliterate Armenian names, in Western Armenian or Eastern Armenian. The difference is how certain letters are pronounced. For example in Western B is usually a P. Since Eastern Armenian is the language of Armenia and most books published are in Eastern Armenian I believe this is the proper way. The spelling of the names hasn't changed since Cilician times.

Here's a list: Ruben Constantine Toros (the T here is 'T, like in tank or tea, this is the Armenian form and short for Theodore/Theodoric) Levon (Armeanized Leon) Mleh Zabel (Armenian form and short for Isabelle) Philip Hetoum Smbat Oshin Petros (Armenian form of Peter) Stepan (Armenian form of Stephen) Mariam (Armenian form of Marie)

I think that's it. --Eupator 16:54, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Glad to help. Adam remains Adam. The Armenian form of Thomas is Tovmas. Djoffry (is this the same as Jeffrey?) has to be different, I just don't know it. Kyr-Anna is a weird name and as far as I know it was only used by Cilicians. Vasil (Slavic Vasiliy, Basil/Basileus-Greek original) is a special case. The Armenian form is Barsegh. I know it sounds weird but Barsegh=Vasil. It must have originally been Ba*sel* but then most L's in Armenian turned into GH after the Middle Ages, like in Yerusaghem (Jerusalem). I'm not sure which original Armenian phrase are you referring to but i'm guesing it's horseback. Soldiers on horses=hetselazor. Smbat would have been a hetsyal (hetsaylner plural). Although what you're referring to might as well be knighting, I have to see the Armenian text. But sparapet isn't a knight. Aspet means knight. Sparapet means general, very few had that title. There were also hazarapet's (commanders of a thousand), haryurapet's(commanders of a hundred) etc. Btw where I can find Rüdt-Collenberg's work?--Eupator 00:55, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Template:Succession Box

Choess, the old template never worked to produce interwiki dates either. I already tried to fix the problem but since half the templates have dates and half do not, and since half those with dates are hand-Wikied, so if you autowiki the template, that half will get double wikied which will look something like this: ]. Also, while most are written in a two date format (eg 1780-1812) others may only have one (eg 1873) or have written out dates (eg 12 November 1776). Written out dates require two separate Interwiki links while single dates require only one. The level of complication grows. While I could make a system for future succession boxes, changing the already established one would have to be done individually to correspond to anything new. We can keep discussing this, but the system currently in place I think is the only option that will work.
-Whaleyland 19:58, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

I am not positive about the phase-out of the other succession forms. I definitely plan to replace all the HTML succession forms, a project I have already begun, however the replacement of the standard Template:Succession box I do not see as necessary. I already replaced the inner workings of those with my templates so I am fine with that one. Most of the minor ones (AKA Template:Succession two to one, &c.) need to go, though. They are just worthless. I am still working with some other issues but whatever the succession form is, I just am trying to make it look standarised.
-Whaleyland 20:53, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Geoffrey of Villehardouin

Thank you, as you can see in the history of William II Villehardouin I corrected it just before you did. Please check William of Champlitte. I believe I have the correct Geoffrey there. If not, please correct it.--FocalPoint 21:28, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Peers dates, and so forth

Hello. I don't think that the PeerNavBox needs to be gotten rid of in articles it's already in just because of dates - dates can easily be added into it. But I tend not to use it, not only for that reason, but also because it is not possible to use it to deal with multiple titles, and so forth.

As to the issue of full dates, and such, I personally think that it's better to just give years - the purpose of the succession box is not to tell you everything about the person, just to give you the basic sense. I'm not sure what is meant by "interwiki-ing" dates...does he mean wikifying? If so, I see no especial reason to change the format on that grounds. Those years will almost certainly have already been mentioned and linked in the article text, or in an infobox, for instance. john k 21:43, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Choess, I beg to permit me into your conversation since it regards certain aspects of my templates I would be very willing to reform. When I reworked the old templates to conform to a better style, I did so to try to keep everyone in sync. The issue with dates has always been one divergent between people. I have never supported complete dates in the actual succession title fields despite the Russian tsars all having them. However, I did always prefer them to be wikified, although I am not sure why. Most of the time those dates could be found elsewhere in the entry, but many times they were not or at least never noted clearly. Now if you are referring to the Template:s-hou that I am only just now beginning to spread around, then now would be a good time to resolve problems with that. I created that to summarize the person's family origin and birth/death dates, therefore making it necessary to place dates as well. In all of these cases, wikifying the dates is still not resolved and, in some cases, are beyond resolution unless we schedule a major sweep of all tens of thousands of succession fields in wikipedia. Almost half the boxes I come across have wiified dates.

So let's work this out before I spread chaos in areas that don't need to be chaotic. It's good working with fellow succession box fiends. 'tis life!

Whaleyland 04:02, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Fair enough and I agree. Ah, if only someone created a true standardized rule for biographies; then we would not have to worry if all the information is included in the text above, or where that information is hidden. Nevertheless, I will remove the auto-links from the Template:s-hou and discontinue wikifying dates within the succession boxes, unless those dates have absolutely no where else to be wikified. I will try to revert some of my edits elsewhere on individual biographies, but its taken so much time to just convert them to templates from messy CSS that it will be a very gradual process. Thanks for the dialogue, I am glad we worked this out.
–Whaleyland 18:50, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Pembroke

I would just say to do the years of their lifespan as the disambiguator. john k 17:56, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

John of Gaunt

John was created Duke of Lancaster in 1362, following the death of his father-in-law Henry of Grosmont, 1st Duke of Lancaster. He received half of Henry's lands, the title Earl of Lancaster, and the distinction as the greatest landowner in the north of England, because of his first marriage to his cousin, Blanche of Lancaster (1359), heiress to the Palatinate of Lancaster. John received the rest of the inheritance only when Blanche's sister, Maud (married to William of Hainault, Count of Holland and Zealand), died in 1361.
Gaunt received the title "Duke of Lancaster" from Edward III on November 13, 1382. John was by then well-established as a fabulously wealthy prince, owning at least thirty castles and vast estates across England and France. His household was comparable in scale and organisation to that of a monarch.

This is the first section after the TOC.--BirgitteSB 04:56, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing thae article I didn't know which was correct based on the Talk page. One more question, I just noticed at Henry of Grosmont, 1st Duke of Lancaster in comparing the bottomm info boxes it says the title Duke of Lancaster became extint. Should it instead say surrendered to the crown. I don't pretend to know what is right so I thought I would bring it to your attention.--BirgitteSB 20:56, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Re:Jerusalem line

I realized, after reading the line to Elisabeth of Urach, that my calculations were wrong and she is a more senior heir. My error was that I did not notice Henry de Matignon's daughter Charlotte had issue (I went past her and went to the younger Catherine). You can look here to see the messup. --Matjlav 02:09, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Philip VI

Hey Choess, nice additional info on Philip VI. I did the original clean up although I added little in the way of further info but it's good to see some more on there. Thanks again.--Shadow007 13:19, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Ferrers/Boteler

I'm not really sure how to deal with it. Did either of them enjoy a peerage title in their own right? john k 19:39, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

No ordinals, birth and death dates, would seem to be the thing to do. john k 20:24, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Maturity vs Majority

"Majority" is the legal term for coming of age; please don't change it to "maturity". Choess 06:47, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I stand corrected. I was not aware that majority had a double meaning. Thanks for taking the time to point it out.169.231.23.208 07:28, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Non illegitimi carborundum

Haha, thanks :) Adam Bishop 20:42, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Manuel I

You could ask User:Bigdaddy1204 about that, he's written most of that article. I'll check, but perhaps there is also some confusion with Raymond III of Tripoli, who also attacked Cyprus (although not until the 1160s). Adam Bishop 18:51, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

Rosario again

Hi! Vote here please: Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Rosario Poidimani (3 nomination). Its the 3rd time!!!!! Is this guy playing us for fools? muriel@pt 13:20, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Schunemunk

I see you've finally started a long-needed article. Pretty good. Are you planning to add anything about the rockslide a couple of years ago that killed a hiker? If not, I'll look it up and do it.

I should also finish the infobox for you.

And it could use a picture, although I've been waiting for some time for the opportunity to take what would be the best one: from the eastbound lanes of I-84 a couple of miles east of the bridge, right where it curves between the prisons. You're not really supposed to stop there, but if you could do it quick not only would you have an opportunity for a great shot of Fishkill Correctional Facility, you'd get Schunemunk in a way in which the summit is obvious (it's not from closer up) and it looks imposing, with Newburgh in the foreground.

Best to do that in the morning, on a really clear day, to get the light behind you and a clear blue sky behind the peak. Daniel Case 04:56, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Parliamentary Constituencies

Thanks for your rather large edit to Arundel (UK Parliament constituency), your work is much appreciated. If you are interested in UK electoral politics more generally, you might want to consider joining the WikiProject on Parliamentary constituencies which tries to co-ordinate the hundreds of articles on the subject.

AfD

Based on what I've seen from you on AfD, I think that you might have something to add to the discussion at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Cart00ney. I'd appreciate you weighing in on the matter in either direction. Savidan 18:28, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Clean safe nuclear energy AfD

Given the discovery that these four words have their roots in the Lobbying group NEI and that they have been previously ruled false and misleading by the BBB, I'd like to ask you to reconsider your recomendation that the article be deleted. Thanks, Benjamin Gatti 03:51, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

Amazing Racist speedy delete

I replaced your {{db}} with a {{prod}}, since "non-notable website" does not appear to be a speedy delete criteria. I'll keep a watch on it and submit it for AfD if the author removes the {{prod}} tag. Vslashg (talk) 06:11, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Nerve agents

Why are you adding cat:Amines and cat:Esters to the various nerve agent pages? The majority of them are neither... – ClockworkSoul 18:27, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

• I stand corrected then. Here I am, thinking only of 1° amines, and entirely not even considering 3°. Not sure what I was thinking. :) – ClockworkSoul 19:45, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Deep Vole Brook

Apparently Deep Brook was originally called 'Deep Vole Brook', but somehow the 'Vole' got dropped. If one were to visit the the public library in Hawthorne, NJ and request access to the town's history archive, one could find a map (I believe it is from the '60s, but I would have to check) that shows all the brooks/streams in the town, including 'Deep Vole Brook'. I do plan on returning to Hawthorne's library at some point in the future, and hopefully I can get permission to make a copy of the map and post it on Misplaced Pages. In the meantime, if you would like to take the Deep Vole name off the article, that would probably be satisfactory, seeing as I cannot directly give physcial proof of this name for at least the next four months (as I'm currently stuck in Florida for the moment).

• lithium6ion 22:44, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Prodding articles

You really ought to put {{prod}} or some such in the edit summary, to make a major edit more public. I also would like to suggest that you notify the creator of the article when you propose an article for deletion. As prod is intended only for uncontroversial deletions, its important that we don't sidestep controversy by under-publicizing the process. Just a suggestion. Thanks. NickelShoe 02:01, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Your watchful eye

It took you just one minute to find the Tom Rapp page I created today! Just lucky? Paul 03:46, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

(moved from User:)

Which sciences are you studying? Jerry picker 14:32, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Lord Henry Lennox

As a note, it's been my understanding that holders of courtesey peerages do not get the definite article ("the"). Mackensen (talk) 18:47, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

My understanding is that they do. Mackensen (talk) 18:54, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Railroad expert

As the resident railroad expert, is there a chance you want to add information on the RR mentioned in the article Jay Gould? Do you come from a RR family? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 20:26, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Are you a New Jersey person? Its a shame when people get discouraged here. You have to have thick skin and be able to take the bullying. Usually the person who wins editing wars is the person who can devote the most time, and not the most scholarly person. I still find Misplaced Pages to be the best source of information, I just always confirm once I find the information. I have come across a few well written vandalisms that passed as biographical information. I am still amazed how, despite no adult supervision, the site has not become Lord of the Flies.

The Bonnie Lass o' Fyvie

Thanks for the link ! Can you help me with the other complicated words in the poem :) ? I never thought that a folk song article would be so difficult when I started. I am starting on the sections for the history and the meaning of the song. I have no clues if embedded motifs exist in the song, as they do with most folk songs. Pradiptaray 21:18, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks again ! I will look you up once more when I finish the article. I am a slow compiler with research deadlines ahead, so it could take me a while. I know of three famous renditions - Simon and Garfunkel, Bob Dylan and Grateful Dead - which look like independent adaptations. And forgive my curiosity, but you seem to have encyclopaedic knowledge about the Scottish dialect and folk songs for a molecular biology student in the United States (?). Cheers. Pradiptaray 22:07, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

A Case of Identity, I presume ? Anyway, I have finished the article to the best of my ability - as it is a folk song, I did not concentrate too much on the written form, especially inclusion on stage. I also put in a Simon and Garfunkel clip. Pradiptaray 15:46, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Henry VI, Part 2

Sorry to be bothering you with this message. I originally came here to ask if you would fix the links broken by this edit. However I've checked it out myself and there was only one broken link which I've just fixed. Nothing to do and sorry to have bothered you. AndyJones 10:57, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

Coca tea

Sorry to disagree, but Veyklevar is not correct. He vandalized the coca tea page several times (removed entire blocks of text) and has not added anything positive to it. He also posted personal information about me in the discussion section and made false statements about me, such as the link to perutea.com "did not have any useful information", and "Joestieg was not willing to let this article be anything other than a fluffy unqualified endorsement of coca tea use." I had no problem with other people adding or changing text on this page. I also don't mind having an intelligent discussion, but Veyklevar's main interest was to delete entire sections on the page and post lies about me. Please do not revert his comments on the coca tea discussion page. Thanks for your time.

Choess, I'm not sure what the convention for formatting responses to conversations on user talk pages is, but I already responded to you on my page.

Joestieg, I gave reasons in the edit summaries for all the edits I initially made on the page. You simply repeatedly accuse me of vandalism as if I has not. I did not post any private information about you. You chose the username "Joestieg". You chose to link to "perutea.com." You chose to list yourself as the administrative contact for perutea.com in the publicly available domain registration databse. All I did was speculate that you were the same Joe. You just confirmed that for the first time that I was right. I could have listed your email address, postal address and phone number, but I didn't, and I won't. (Although that's just politeness on my part, because you made the information publicly available to anyone who wants it.) I tried to have a discussion with you, but you delete every comment I make on your page. And yes, your website could not have any useful additional information when the text was nearly identical to the article you created. -- Veyklevar 03:51, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

for fixing Kapp Putsch. Since I got sysopped I have had zero time for working on that encyclopaedia people keep talking about, this evening was my first decent stretch of actual article-space editing in ages. It feels good to know that somebody noticed :-) Just zis Guy you know? 22:31, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

Yellow Avens

I believe Yellow Avens grow in the Arctic. Would you be willing to expand this article, it was written to be included in Category:Arctic plants Cordially SirIsaacBrock 03:06, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

I used Yellow Aven as I read on an Arctic Plant/Flora webpage; however, I would not personally know a lillypad from a watermellon :) SirIsaacBrock 03:28, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

(taxobox)

Hi, we meet again so soon :) If you are good with the taxoboxes go here to find several new articles, that require them Category:Arctic freshwater fish. Cordially SirIsaacBrock 03:25, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

The Earls of Stradbroke

Thanks for the cleanup and extra info about the Earls of Stradbroke (particularly the incumbent!)

Blarneytherinosaur 04:01, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

More coca tea

Hello, Choess.

So what do you make of this? After joestieg (talk • contribs) and I agree to debate at your urging, and after the Coca tea article is merged into the Coca article, he comes up with a new variation of the same article, this time called Coca herbal tea, and this time under the username Ukiemob (talk • contribs), and proceeds to link to it from various articles. And apparently before he was joestieg, he was advertising as 24.61.27.114 (talk • contribs). And it seems he may be 69.79.138.210 (talk • contribs) as well. I don't know what, if anything, I'm supposed to do about it. -- Veyklevar 20:28, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

I am not the original author of coca tea (you can see that I have a different ip address) and I have re-written this article in accordance to all the rules and regulations of this site. Veyklevar needs to stop vandalizing the coca tea page based on his own personal discrimination against the coca plant. Ukiemob 9:28, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

there was any doubt. -- Veyklevar 02:06, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Choess. I saw that it was confirmed that Ukiemob=Joestieg=24.61.27.114, if you haven't noticed already. -- Veyklevar 06:43, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if you're still interested in this issue, but would you believe another account has emerged? -- Veyklevar 01:44, 13 March 2006 (UTC)

190X vs 194X maps

I agree with you that the topo lines on 194X maps are more accurate. They were drawn from stereo ortho photos, and the mapmakers drew what they saw. The 190X maps have nothing unexpected. Unless it was a feature at the time, it didn't get drawn. Railbeds that were only 40 years old were left off the map. In my experience (but I may be wrong) they didn't draw cuts and fills on those maps unless they went with an existing feature. Oh, and according to XYDEXX there was indeed a trestle across Crom Pond. And according to Chris Tompkins you can still see remains of the grade. w00t! RussNelson 17:31, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Railroads of New York database

I'm still not quite sure how to represent the routes. Currently the names of the files holding the separate routes are fairly arbitrary. Mostly they're taken from the maps I traced them from. I think the best thing to do is label each section of track with the attributes it should have. In effect, every bit of track which is separately describable gets its own entry in the database. We should also cooperate with Charles Woolever's Existing Stations. If we can capture lat/lon of each station, it should be fairly straightforward to point to his database. RussNelson 17:31, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Lord Lieutenant of Buckinghamshire

What reference do you have that the position was vacant between 1593 and 1607? I work in the same building as the Lieutenancy and even they don't know the full details prior to 1607. -- Francs2000 12:17, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

I thought I had taken care of thyat at the top of the page with the comment that earlier records have been lost so a complete list is not possible. Perhaps I should have plced a date on that statement. -- Francs2000 19:57, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

J. R. R. Tolkien

Hi! My name is Mike, and I wanted to let you know that this article is up for Featured Article Status! It is SOOO CLOSE! And as someone who has worked on this article a lot in the past (having checked the history) I thought you could help me fix the inline citations. As I have none of the books in question, I am out of luck, but thought real enthusiasts might be able to help. So, please help, or get those who you know can to help make Tolkien a featured article! Thanks much! Judgesurreal777 18:08, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

-- Sorry about that, I meant to edit it to say that "you seemed like someone who, from discussions I had seen of people I was assembling to help out with Featured article status, you seemed like someone knowledgable about JRR Tolkien"

Anyway, could you help me out with fixing the article, or just voting on it's candidacy? Thanks much! Mike Judgesurreal777 20:54, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Great job!

Hiya Choess, I just wanted to say great job on filling in some gaps for Lord-Lieutenancies and adding the succession templates to the holders where most of us didn't have the info to complete them (you're work isn't going unnoticed :-) - keep up the good work! Craigy (talk) 11:11, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Watercress Darter

Thanks for the box on the Watercress Darter. I had just created the article for Watercress Darter National Wildlife Refuge and figured I should put a stub for the fish itself. However, I know nothing about biology so I didn't want to mess up the box. Thanks again! ClarkBHM 22:43, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Tiarella articles

Thanks for stepping in. I'm by no means knowledgeable on this subject -- I created the stub and redirects as part of the missing articles project. It's nice to have people that know the material well enough to write good articles on it. Thanks again! - CorbinSimpson 07:23, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Succession Boxes

Before I show you my fixes, I noted that you didn't see one of the options available for s-ttl. I made it so you can enter in an assembly district by doing the following:

{{start}} {{s-par}} {{s-bef|before=]}} {{s-ttl|title=]|district=]|years=1847–1852}} {{s-aft|after=]}} {{end}}

Which looks like:

I could probably make a condensed version of this like succesion box if you'd like, but I prefer to use the deepest templates when I use them to avoid problems later.

Okay, so regarding your request, what I did was added if/then options to s-reg and s-hon. After typing <nowkiki>{{s-reg</nowiki> type |1}} and it will bring up the following caption:

This works in s-hon as well. I am considering doing a similar thing for various parliaments on the s-par template, but I am going to decline at the moment. If you think I should, please speak up. The s-reg and s-hon I made available for the UK (1), England (2), Scotland (3), Ireland (4), France (5), and Spain (6). I want to make a better system but I doubt it will work as effectively for the moment. Hope that helps!
–Whaleyland 22:00, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry Choess, this is just not working. Either I am getting rusty at creating templates or this system is messing with me again. It doesn't want to remove the giant gap at the bottom of each template or recognize 'uk' and such for titles. I will have to work on it sometime later this week, I don't have the time now. Sorry, all the stuff will be in the s-reg template behind a noinclude if you want to try it out.
–Whaleyland 22:03, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

We are still having a problem in that only 1 can be accessed without having to place a ton of | in a row to get the correct subtemplate. We need to find out how to get the letter abbreviations working.
–Whaleyland 23:07, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I am a student still and was busy for the rest of the afternoon. I entirely forgot about the switch template that I used a while ago. I wish I had but I give you credit on a beautiful template idea. With switches, different names will come up with different countries which means we can make US Senator a catagory only applicable to the US Senate and so on. This is very cool. I think I may use it for another one of the head banners and for a few other things. I thought the s-ttl template was locked but I assume you are an administrator. I think I saw you on the application forums a while back. Thanks for the help, you did good. Just don't leave me out of the loop because the templates are my baby and I want to keep helping them thrive.
–Whaleyland 05:06, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for remembering that. That was the switch I was thinking about. However, I think keeping the "district" option will remain helpful for US systems (as opposed to UK). The bicameral legislature of the US would say "US Congress" at top (in the s-par) then would say in the s-ttl "Member of the House of Representatives" or "Member of the Senate" (or Sentator) then the district (or state) would still go below. This still means that the option may have to be motified in the s-ttl using a switch, but the distict option should remain in some form. S-par, however, can definitely use a subheading. That is what I was thinking when we began work on the s-reg and s-hon templates. On that note, remember to keep any changes in s-reg on s-hon as well because some British peerage titles are noble while others are honorary. They should still remain separate when possible. And also don't forget that many monarchs have noble titles as well and they are part of the peerage system for their own countries. You may want to reword the multiplicity switch so it says something other (or more specific) than "Titles of Nobility." Ponder that some, I am entirely up for discussion on it.–Whaleyland 10:58, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

Template:PeerNavbox

Hey, thanks for helping out with Template:PeerNavbox. -- Mackensen (talk) 17:36, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Have you considered becoming an administrator? Mackensen (talk) 17:39, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Gosh, isn't he one? (Couldn't help noticing the above message when I logged on to say thanks for sorting out the Seymour titles.) Deb 16:59, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

I did what you asked

Okay, previously you had asked me to create two specific articles on Schooley's Mtn. I'm done, so you can do what you wanted to do. SeanMD80 22:05, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Also, somebody renamed the "Schooley's Mountain, NJ" page to just "Schooley's Mountain" because of a misunderstanding. I reverted it back, but the history of the "town" article is stuck in the "geo-feature" article because of the rename. Does this matter? If it does, I can't fix it because I don't know how. Oh well. SeanMD80 22:29, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

B85whatsit article

I ... nuked the B85 article, adding some RNEP material to the B83 article. Technically it's a merge. Georgewilliamherbert 04:59, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Adding Photography

Choess,

Thanks for the welcome. I'll be adding mostly photos to all those articles on fish/plant species that do not currently have any photos. I will make sure to edit the classification boxes on each plant species I added eventually, as well as expand upon them. I just do not know how specific I should be with plants not commonly known outside of a small hobby?

Carlos

What Do I Do?

I found somebody, rather, a computer in a school, that persistantly vandalises pages. Their IP address is 66.121.167.12, but they're not a user. I want to warn them, but how do you tell a non-user? Their vandalism ranges from posting requests for help on articles to inserting blatant references to fake military leaders in Korea on major pages. SeanMD80 02:47, 6 April 2006 (UTC) OK, never mind, I found out. Thanks anyway. SeanMD80

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Misplaced Pages better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 03:54, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Attainder

"Maybe you can help me unravel an unusual case regarding the exact effects of acts of attainder (our current article is wretched, BTW)"

Ok I think this is reasonably straightforward and I agree the article is dreadful.

"but would not the attainder affect the Barony of Burghersh as well?"

No. If I read it correctly he inherited (legal fiction time) the Barony le Despencer from his father and the Burghersh Barony from his mother. The attainder would apply only to the titles held by or descending through the attainted person. So the wife's titles pass freely to the son even though his blood is tainted by the fathers crimes. Have a look at James_Scott,_1st_Duke_of_Monmouth their children inherited all the titles held by his wife but not those held by the father (until later restored - well the barony and earldom at least - the present duke could claim the Dukedom but I don't fancy his chances he has enough already!) As to the calling out only one title, I can't say for certain but I would not be shocked if someone with a title created between the two in abeyance objected to losing precedence so the called out only the younger title. see the fun over the Baron_Stourton Alci12 09:51, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

OK, there are a number of possibilities. If she was considered to have held the title in her own right - at the time not just by the modern fiction then the title would have been caught by the attainder at the moment of her death. If it's modern fiction then no one would have considered it as existing so no attainder implications. There is one other possibility, attainder is not always absolute, very occationally people are stipped of some titles - usually the higher titles - but other remain. If you could find the Act of attainder in this case it's just possible that all titles created for his father and his line were extinguised but those of his mothers left alone - again assuming she was a peer at the time.

Hmm actually assuming thepeerage is correct Mary fane had a frankly laughable claim to the title with many better placed co-heirs. In fact the solution to much of this is an old fashon stitchup. She was the rightful heir to the barony of bergavenny as daughter of the 4th baron however it was claimed by and granted to the grandson of the 2nd baron. She appears to have been 'found' a barony as a token rather than the strenght of her claims! The only thing that worries me is that site claims it's the 1264 title which may just be careless transcribingAlci12 14:12, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Well I can see you're having fun. My concern would be the sources to confirm it is the 1264 barony and not one of the others. There is a large problem with this in that when the Baron De Ros is female (as was the case recently) the premier baron of England is the oldest male barony and that was Lord Mowbray, Segrave, and Stourton (1283). If there was a second 1264 barony the holder would have been premier baron - unless its intended only to be the premier baron on the roll (Viscount_Falmouth being recorded under than title) however I doubt this. Atm wiki is hopeless as we have the '1264' barony listed on the Peerage_of_England#Barons_and_Baronesses_in_the_Peerage_of_England page but we have the extant peerage listed as the 1357 creation on Baron_le_Despencer and Viscount_Falmouth we must get a source Cracrofts/Burkes to back things up either way; unfortunately afaik only De Ros is accepted in 1264 and wonder if the 1604 revival has been misread/misunderstood in terms of the creation. Once that's all sorted we only have the fun of trying to add something to the articles that makes sense in a shorter length than war and peace!Alci12 15:56, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

No I do agree the viscountcy would hide the entry on the roll - I just don't buy the 1264 dating - the le despencer barony should by your argument have been the premier barony during those times before the 1889 viscountcy when the de ros barony was abeyant or held by a female. I can't find any evidence that this was the case. Take as an example the 15th baron he should have been premier baron as the de ros barony was abeyant for 150 years at that time. As I understand it the premier baron in throughout was lord stourton (1448) In general I think as your quote showed the lords realised they had made a mess with their De Ros ruling and tried to prevent any similar decisions which I suspect is why the le despencr is not accepted as 1264Alci12 18:00, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Seemed worth a try posting there - was hoping certain specific people would reply who I trust would not be wrong.Alci12 12:01, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Succession Box WikiProject

Choess – I have created a new WikiProject for our succession box work located at Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Succession Box Standardization. Now we can discuss what needs to be fixed in a forum and make it into a larger project among Wikipedians. Not that I want too much infighting, but we all have had some disagreements and never know where to discuss them, so now we have a place. Come and join. Don't forget to sign the participant list if you want in. Thanks for all the help, Choess!
–Whaleyland 22:03, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

RE: Arms of the Duke of Bedford

Hiya Choess. In my junior years of Misplaced Pages at the start of last year I uploaded a few blazons from Bunel's heraldique europeenne (at a time when I was quite naive about copyright and the like), so I guess my source is from there but I didn't check them against any references. I've lately began to discover he hasn't perfected all of them (see User talk:AllanHainey). Anyhow, they all need deleting as I didn't contact him beforehand or add a source to the image pages. Slightly aside from that, I don't suppose you know where I can get Maire d'Armes (which I think Bunel has used)? Thanks Craigy (talk) 23:01, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Assuming royal arms

If one is descended from legitimate royal lines, does that entitle them to use a defaced version of the royal arms without penalty? Does it really matter if the dynasty is no longer around to contest another's usage of the arms? For instance, my ancestors through several female lines have been hereditary rulers of all the UK composite countries--just not all at once, of course. I know for certain that my ancestors used Capetian lilies, Richard the Lionheart's three leopards, William the Lion's lion rampant and more. But there is the point of the Irish harp, when I know the Celtic Irish monarchs did not use arms. Could I therefore, fashion my own versions? I really don't need permission from the College of Arms, or do I when concerning other nations such as France? What about Crusader states and defunct countries or monarchies? That would make myself independent of armorial jurisdiction in respect of those entities, correct? IP Address 09:44, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't know for certain in other countries but in the UK no. Illegitimate heirs are entitled to nothing and I suspect this is the same across Europe. There is a caveat, if illegitimate heirs are granted their own arms they are usually allowed to reference their paternal arms in some way. This may be quartering it with something of their own choice. However if they use the whole arms they must have a baton sinister and if they have quarters they may have the same or deface the arms in some manner. see http://hereditarytitles.com/Page48.html --Alci12 12:14, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

I am referencing legit female lines, not illegitimate of which I could not be certain. Here's the thing; I am descended from Edmund Crouchback, 1st Earl of Lancaster for sure and this is through his granddaughter Joan of Lancaster by his son Henry, 3rd Earl of Lancaster. When one has numerous noble or regal ancestors, how do they decide as to which arms they "co-opt"? IP Address 14:33, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

It would clarify things, if I knew of any coat of arms held by my paternal line. As it is, I just have a lot of female connections in high places. The female side doesn't count for much in heraldry or status, does it? IP Address 15:11, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

How do you think I should percieve descents in modern times, the specific case of marriage which carried this ancestry to myself dated to the Victorian era? At that point in time, descent carried no social weight? When is the cutoff in British history, for things of this nature to not have mattered anymore? My paternal line which married into the descent with children to show for it, had just lost our ancient estate through his own mother's family recieving possession. I assume this is just the realm of English gentry, some having to lose their estates to avoid poverty? The gentry have continually had extensive connections with the nobility, by nature this is correct? What does it mean when I find all the same non-titled bearers of surnames in marital relationships with nobility? For instance, I see many of my relatives' surnames on noble genealogy lists in intertwining ways a few centuries ago. That they still associate, carries some weight today? Do landed gentlemen have to have arms? IP Address 15:35, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

There are many 10s of thousands of people with arms and usually these are old families. As to any right you may have I'm v v doubtful. See the problem is almost certainly that the wives weren't heraldic heiresses and their husbands and more recent generations didn't have their own to arms so any theoretical transmission is null and void.Alci12 11:13, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. IP Address 13:14, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Sons of Earls

Just edited your entry for Stradbroke I don't know if you did a copy and paste and the source you used was wrong but the younger sons of all barons/Viscounts and Earls are styled Hon. (Honourable) not Lord as per your edit. Daughters are however correctly Lady. This is due to fairly strange precedence rules but that's another story.Alci12 15:40, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup Edits

I'm not sure why you've edited Princess_Margaret_of_the_United_Kingdom|Princess Margaret to Princess Margaret of the United Kingdom|Princess Margaret as it makes no visible or linking difference. It doesn't mater eitherway but would seem to just give you more work :-)Alci12 16:55, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

You're doing a great job with those boxes - which I really must start adding - I just seem to forget when quickly trying to edit obvious errors. It's very rare I have time to actually start new articles from scratch when adding boxes really is so much more obvious.Alci12 17:31, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

William_Davison,_1st_Baron_Broughshane

Seccession boxes here seem odd imo. Regnal is used afaik for monarchs or princes not peers. Think that needs some other labelAlci12 15:37, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

I rather meant removing Regnal Titles and replacing it with Peerage of the United Kingdom. It's the incongruity of reigning - whatever peers do they don't reign. Just a suggestion but feel free to argue for the way it is :)Alci12 17:21, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: Henry VII of Germany

Yes, his medical history is interesting. One wonders if it was a factor in his rebellion, if he suspected he might not live long enough to succeed his father naturally? It certainly seems a likely factor in his suicide - and possibly (besides his rebelliousness) in his seclusion in his last years. Baldwin IV seems to have been unique as a leper who never retreated from public office and the public eye in the Middle Ages.

The only point I'd challenge in Fornaciari's article is the reference to Robert I of Scots as another leper. His diagnosis is very questionable, as it's based on a 19C cast of the skull and some muddled 19C reports: modern dermatologists and dentists lean more towards the damage on his face as traumatic (an eye surgeon I know said it looked like a kick in the face from a horse). Unlike Henry, there seem to have been no indications of bone absorption in the limbs and extremities. Silverwhistle 14:54, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Since Henry was already known to be lame because of a leg injury (confirmed by the skeletal examination), it would not have drawn too much attention when his feet started to be affected. It often starts in the extremities and moves later. (For a good few years, Baldwin IV just had a crippled arm, before it spread further in his body.) Presumably he was locked up as soon as his face began to develop the familiar 'leonine' look, with the collapsed nose. Silverwhistle 10:29, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Military ranks

There is no hard and fast rule as yet, but in general we assume that senior ranks (Major, Lieutenant-Commander, Squadron Leader etc and up) can be used in the first line. It really depends on the individual, though. General and flag ranks would almost always be used - more junior ranks vary depending on whether the individual was known to use his rank or not. If he always used it then it makes sense to add it. -- Necrothesp 17:58, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

I wouldn't use reserve ranks unless the person themself uses them outside the forces, no matter how senior. Richard Holmes, for instance, has never used his rank of Brigadier outside the TA, so I wouldn't use it in his article. -- Necrothesp 20:42, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Custodes Rotulorum

Ah, I take it that's in regard to the Earl of Harewood article I created. I totally forgot about your previous comment on my talk page and although I didn't reply, I planned to follow it so, yes, I think it should just be L/L of Nonsuch after the posts were amalgamated. Thanks Craigy (talk) 20:12, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Veyklaver

Greetings! If you think it's worthwhile, go ahead and list Veyklaver (talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log) along with the other sockpuppets at Misplaced Pages:Requests for Checkuser. Glancing at the history of the others, I can't really tell (I don't have checkuser.) Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 04:11, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Checkuser is as good a place as any to start to get help. I'd suggest posting on any Wikiprojects which have the main conflict articles within their domain; you can also open a WP:RFC, especially if there is at least one other editor (Veyklevar?) you've been working with who is familiar with the dispute (since you need a co-signer). Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 05:37, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Arthur_Wellesley,_1st_Duke_of_Wellington#Trivia

Any chance you can look at this. I can't decide if it's just the historian in me getting exasperated, it seems full of unsubstanciated/unsourced comments and bloatedAlci12 14:01, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

RE: Le Despencer

Burke's notes the abeyance but on its termination in 1856, the 11th Baroness Wentworth was considered de jure Despencer as the neice of the previous Baron Wentworth. Burke's stops listing the Wentworth's as de jure Despencers at the point where it merged with the Earls of Lytton but I've included it at Baron Wentworth as I'm not sure why it would have stopped there. Is this what you mean? Craigy (talk) 18:24, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

User:Glue548

You added your vandalism warning to User:Glue548 this user's user page. If you add it to the user's talk page instead, they'll see a message waiting for them when they go to their next Misplaced Pages page while logged in. Thank you,

~Kylu (u|t) 04:43, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Honorific vandalism

The user Le baron is still presisting in puting honorifics into biographical articles, see his edit! He is asking to be blocked, what arrogance! --DelftUser 17:50, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Rationales to impeach George W. Bush (2nd nomination)

You are invited to vote at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Rationales to impeach George W. Bush (2nd nomination). All this is is ramblings/blog/rants about Bush. Not encyclopedic, should've been deleted long ago. Happy editing! Morton devonshire 20:26, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

*** Important - Your input requested ASAP ***

Please see this Misplaced Pages:Deletion review#Rationales_to_impeach_George_W._Bush.

Merecat 00:35, 4 May 2006 (UTC)