User talk:Alistair Wettin

Alistair Wettin, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Alistair Wettin! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Dathus (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 17:22, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clothilde Courau

I have removed your insertions of "Princess of Piedmont" from Clothilde Courau's page because I am not convinced by the written evidence referred to on Wikipedia thus far that she is referred to by that title on a consistent or significant basis. While I personally consider that the dynastic wife of the heir of a royal pretender shares his title, Wikipedia has higher standards than I have: there must be some objective evidence that this title is in actual use. This woman is famous in Europe, so there are plenty of printed sources which mention her. Professionally, she continues to use her maiden name, so theatrical and cinematic references to her don't support the "Piedmont" title. The Italian Republic does not recognize any titles, whether borne under the monarchy or claimed by members of the deposed House of Savoy, and the French Republic does not recognize foreign titles of pretence, so governmental references to her do not support "Piedmont". Few, if any, academic or reputable research studies on politics, history, royalism, genealogy, heraldry etc. can be found which refer to Courau at all (aside from the theatre/cinema) even when they mention her father-in-law or husband. When they have referred to her by a royal title, it is "Princess of Savoy" or "Princess of Venice". That leaves two possible sources for the printed references that English Wikipedia accepts as reliable citations: royalist or journalistic literature. Again the result is the same: Few or no newspapers, news websites or popular magazines refer to Clothilde Courau as "Princess of Venice and Piedmont" or "Princess of Piedmont". Within the purely monarchist context, while I do not doubt that among her husband's family, social circle and retainers, she may be addressed by the Piedmont title, given the dissent from, lack of advocacy for, and/or non-recognition of her father-in-law's and husband's claims to current dynastic headship of the House of Savoy and of Italian monarchists, it is neither apparent nor independently well-documented that she is actually referred to as "Princess of Piedmont" by any significant audience. Under that circumstance, Wikipedia's responsibility is to remain neutral, and not attribute to claimants or their families titles and styles for which there is too little evidence that we are following -- rather than encouraging -- the public in according disputed styles. I have yet to even see evidence that Clothilde Courau considers herself "the Princess of Piedmont". I do not doubt that in circles in which you may travel, such usage occurs, and courtesy in those circumstances may indeed call for such usage: you show gentlemanly instincts! But for such usage to be recorded in Wikipedia, it needs also to be utilized in print somewhere else than in Prince Victor Emmanuele's household or by an isolated club or two of restorationists. English Wikipedia does not attribute dynastic titles to the Duke of Loulé or imperial titles to Prince Karl Emich of Leiningen, although there are certainly some advocates for their claims, respectively, to the defunct thrones of Portugal and Russia. I abide by Wikipedia's cautious restraint in such cases, although if a groundswell for either starts manifesting itself in ink not initiated or echoed merely by they themselves, I think their status could change and Wikipedia should acknowledge that (e.g. David Bagration of Mukhrani). Nor, in fairness, do I think that Wikipedia should accord the titles "Duke of Savoy" to Prince Amedeo, Duke of Aosta or "Duke of Aosta" to Prince Aimone, Duke of Apulia", because there is not sufficient evidence in print yet that these titles are used by a significant portion of the public beyond their own faction. We have, instead, the option of referring to these persons according to the well-known, neutral and long-established editorial practice of Justes Perthe's Almanach de Gotha and its reputable successors, utilizing the titles traditionally borne by deposed royalty or recognized by dynastic heads in compliance with their current family consensus and/or historic house laws: we don't have to make up new rules or arbitrarily take sides in rivalries. BTW, I do not agree that a woman wed to royalty may not use his princely prefix coupled with her own given name -- except in the UK and other Commonwealth Realms. That practice is firmly and legitimately established there, but imposing it on Continental royalty is anglocentric (she may be unversally known to English speakers as "Princess Andrew of Greece and Denmark", but in the Kingdoms of Greece and of Denmark, and throughout the rest of Europe, she was known as Princess Alice). I hope this explains my edits. FactStraight (talk) 08:51, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sep

Hello. This is nice - does it just drop in whatever separator you specify? I hadn't seen it before. Cheers DBaK (talk) 11:53, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nice one, thanks for the information. Best wishes DBaK (talk) 12:00, 21 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

January 2016

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Duke of Rothesay 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:

{refimprove|date=July 2015}}]

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 14:45, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 11

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Louis Spencer, Viscount Althorp, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Earl Spencer. 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) 09:06, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge

Hi, at Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge we're striving to bring about 10,000 article improvements and creations for the UK and Ireland and inspire others to create more content. In order to achieve this we need diversity of content, in all parts of the UK and Ireland on all topics. Eventually a regional contest will be held for all parts of the British Isles, like they were for Wales and the Wedt Country. We currently have just over 1900 articles and need contributors! If you think you'd be interested in collaborating on this and helping reach the target quicker, please sign up and begin listing your entries there as soon as possible! Thanks.♦ --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:40, 28 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Europe 10,000 Challenge invite

Hi. The Wikipedia:WikiProject Europe/The 10,000 Challenge has recently started, based on the UK/Ireland Wikipedia:The 10,000 Challenge. The idea is not to record every minor edit, but to create a momentum to motivate editors to produce good content improvements and creations and inspire people to work on more countries than they might otherwise work on. There's also the possibility of establishing smaller country or regional challenges for places like Germany, Italy, the Benelux countries, Iberian Peninsula, Romania, Slovenia etc, much like Wikipedia:The 1000 Challenge (Nordic). For this to really work we need diversity and exciting content and editors from a broad range of countries regularly contributing. If you would like to see masses of articles being improved for Europe and your specialist country like Wikipedia:WikiProject Africa/The Africa Destubathon, sign up today and once the challenge starts a contest can be organized. This is a way we can target every country of Europe, and steadily vastly improve the encyclopedia. We need numbers to make this work so consider signing up as a participant and also sign under any country sub challenge on the page that you might contribute to! Thank you. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 02:03, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Alistair Wettin. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Women in Red/The World Contest

Hi. This month The Women in Red World Contest is being held to try to produce new articles for as many countries worldwide and occupations as possible. There is over £3000 in prizes to win, including Amazon vouchers and paid subscriptions. Wikimedia UK is putting up £250 specifically for editors who produce the most quality new women bios for British women, with special consideration given to missing notable biographies from the Oxford Dictionary of Biography and Welsh Dictionary of Biography. If you're not interested in prize money yourself but are willing to participate independently this is also fine, but please add any articles created to the bottom of the main contest page even if not competing. Your participation in the contest and contributing articles on British women from your area or wherever would we much appreciated. Thanks.