User talk:Berks105/Archive2

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Patricia Routledge

Re: the change you made to this entry, to say she was "born Katherine Patricia Routledge" is NOT misleading, it's correct Wikipedia formatting. I was taught the article is supposed to start with the name by which she commonly is known, and show the birth name (if different) with birthdate in parentheses afterward. (Please refer to Ellen Burstyn as an example.) Thank you. TOM 13:49, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- Why would Kittybrewster and Proteus be responding to messages I sent to you unless you're all the same person???!!! TOM 19:01, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - That's how YOU escape the three reverts rule . . . by reverting under other identities. Please stop harassing me or I'll send this matter to mediation. Thank you. TOM 19:27, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please note I have no objection to calling Patricia Routledge English as I put her in the English category myself- she is certainly quintessentially English. However, many people have strong genetic and cultural ties to other states and they prefer to be called British rather than English. Arniep 20:16, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I have been asked to put on my admin hat and try to help you all to resolve this dispute. Please take a look at my suggestions at Talk:Patricia_Routledge#Content_dispute. --BrownHairedGirl ^{(talk) • (contribs)} 21:06, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sockpuppetry

Hi, following up on the comments by User:SFTVLGUY2, I have made some suggestions at Talk:Patricia Routledge#sockpuppetry, which I hope may be helpful to all involved. --BrownHairedGirl ^{(talk) • (contribs)} 13:10, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Paola Doimi de Frankopan

Hi! I received your message regarding Paola Doimi de Frankopan. Being new to Wiki, I an uncertain how to reply. Some advice is much needed! Anyway, I trust this will reach you.

Paola di Doimi Delupis was born on 7 August 1969. This information can be verified from a number of sources, including her birth certificate, alumni lists from Gonville and Caius College, Cambridge, and her registration at Companies House. Paola was born in London. Her birth was registered in the Westminster district.

I have information to add to this article but I do not always wish to cite sources. If this is “your” article and you would prefer me not to add anything further shall respect your wishes.

I would like to point out an ongoing error. Several newspapers, including The Times and The Daily Mail have stated that the marriage will be the first British Royal Wedding to take place at the Vatican for 400 years. Neither paper has stated whose wedding this was. To the best of my knowledge, there has never been a British Royal Wedding in Rome.

Regards,

(LadyinSable 14:09, 23 October 2006 (UTC)LadyinSable)[reply]

Sorry for disturbing you, but should it not be called Lady Paola Windsor instead of Lady Nicholas Windsor? I am not so very familiar with the matter, but can not imagine nevertheless that her Christian name changes after the marriage. Greetings ~~ Phoe _talk 18:17, 28 October 2006 (UTC) ~~ [reply]

Ah, - has been settled: I found something that has explained it to me. I'm a stupid boy :-) Thanks ~~ Phoe. _talk 18:17, 28 October 2006 (UTC) ~~ [reply]

One really must get used to it, but it even can be that this was usual in Germany sometime once, too. ~~ Phoe. Thanks four your answer._talk 11:21, 29 October 2006 (UTC) ~~ [reply]

Lord Nicholas Windsor

We are the official spokesman of Lord Nicholas Windsor (www.eligo.net) and we have been asked to remove the reference as it is not the case that Lord Nicholas in a Patron of the Group. I am grateful for you bringing their website to our attention. User:ELIGOINTERNATIONAL 11:31, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Good Life - please discuss

Hello, you reverted my edit to the TV programme and I would like to discuss it, preferably on the talk page, not here. But I don't want to start an unnecessary edit war. I'm not really sure of the best way of doing this. So, I will wait 24 hours for you to justify your change on the relevant talk page, and if I hear nothing from you, I will revert the edit myself. BrainyBabe 17:32, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lady Nicholas Windsor of Kent, Princess de Frankopan

Dear user,

Thank you for your message I recieved this evening. In response to your letter, Here is my answer. Lord Nicholas Windsor is the son of the Duke of KENT. Correct? YES. He is NOT a Lord of some other designation than KENT. He is Lord Nicholas Windsor of Kent, nothing else. This thusly makes his wife, Lady Nicholas Windsor. In regards to her title, people may call it not legal, and thusly so, but I think that all that matters, is that they are of the Frankopan lineage, even though it is through the female line. In some cultures, maybe not European, but in other continents and countries, the female line descendants of a ruler are entitled to a title. I understand that the family adopted the Frankopan name and thusly use the title; Prince or Princess de Frankopan, but I accept it as it is. Her father is an Austrian noble, which I am trying to find what noble he is. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eapos (talk • contribs) 7:50, 5 November 2006

Lord Nicholas Windsor of Kent

Dear Berks105, I have read the oage you suggested, and as it CLEARLY states on the page, what the title of a younger son of a Duke shall use. OBVIOUSLY, you are not accustomed with the British Peerage System, because as it states in British law and on the page you provided to me, the younger sons of the Duke of Kent shall be titled; Lord (given name) Windsor of Kent, and of NOTHING else. Since Nicholas Windsor is Lord Nicholas Windsor of Kent, that would make his Princess Bride Lady Nicholas windsor of Kent, and in fact, in accordance with British law, if a Princess marries a Nobleman, she would acquire the title of her husband and thus keep her title as well, ONLY if it is a higher title than her husbands. And since Paola is Princess de Frankopan, her title would be; Her Excellency, Lady Nicholas Windsor of Kent, Princess de Frankopan. This case was the case with HRH Princess Margaret. After he marriage to the Earl of Snowdon, her title changed to; HRH Princess Margaret of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (and Imperial Princess of India), Countess of Snowdon. I hope that this could be of help to you.HRH Princess Elisabeth Vantar of The Lezu-lonkhot Tribe 16:13, 8 November 2006 (UTC) Eapos

I think this is a leg-pull. - Kittybrewster 16:24, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This IS NOT a "leg-pull", its JUST the truth! Lord Nicholas Windsor is of KENT, NO OTHER DESIGNATION! In BRITISH LAW, the son or dauhter of a Duke or Earl, lets say the hypothetical; Duke of Ravensforth, has a younger son, he would be titled Lord of Ravensforth! I consulted a British EXPERT on this matter, and they agree! Thank you for your time. I SUGGEST that you STOP dleting messages form your user talk page. Thank you for your time. Chow! HRH Princess Elisabeth Vantar of The Lezu-lonkhot TribeEapos 18:18, 12 Noveber 2006 (UTC)

Buxtons

Thanks for tidying up Thomas Fowell Buxton and his descendamts. === Vernon White (talk) 14:54, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

link to British

Hello, when you want to link to the article about something British, please do not link to British, as that is a disambiguation page (which nothing should be linked to). Instead link to the one of the options found on that page such as United Kingdom, Great Britain or British English by writing out [[United Kingdom|British]] or [[Great Britain|British]]. Regards, Jeff3000 01:48, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You linked to British in Tara Moran, and there is no way to know that if it is a one-off thing or not. I'm not going to search through your edits; I just try to educate people on not linking to disambiguation pages. -- Jeff3000 13:53, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, but I'm not going to check the history of every page and edit. I saw you make the edit to the page, and I mentioned on your talk page, just as I've done to many others in trying to make them more aware of disambiguation. -- Jeff3000 13:58, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Baron Torrington

Hi Berks, I would like to ask you whether you have something against it, if I change the article above (which you have written) to a redirect to the article about Thomas Newport, 1st Baron Torrington. Since there was only one Baron Torrington and since both articles contain the same informations, I think an extra article about the title is unnecessary. Greetings ~~ Phoe _talk 17:32, 20 November 2006 (UTC) ~~ [reply]

I understand your motive and it makes sense in these cases where enough information about the title is avaiable. On the other hand there are some cases where an article about the title will be always a stub of few lines and here a redirect would be a better choice. However I do not have any difficulty in letting the article at his place, since it conflicts with me generally to delete text. If you would like to start with a general discussion (I know peers where an article of their title don't exist yet), I would suggest you to do that on WP:PEER. Best wishes ~~ Phoe _talk 22:03, 20 November 2006 (UTC) ~~ [reply]

Christian Bale

Bravo! I have enjoyed our discussion on Bale's nationality. Although you haven't convinced me he is English, I now agree that describing him as Welsh is not correct. I still say calling him British is the way to go, but what do I know? Movementarian (Talk) 12:10, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

English reverts

In retaliation to this, i would like to note that Charles darwin was a famous briton, and should be noted as such. I find it unfair to classify those who represent a nation to be labelled as English, they are afterall, more accuartely described as british. As wikipedia is a factual enclycopeia, i thought it best to give it the most accurate and up to date facts. These people are famous britons, not englishmen. --Chickenfeed9 16:06, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

a good point, but still Im sure people will agree that Chrales darwin was a Briton. In certain circumstances it should be English/scottish, when the person is an advocate of the seperation. People like sean connery should be scottish, in certain circumstances --Chickenfeed9 18:47, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Hello, Berks105, I keep seeing your name around quite a few of the television pages, and just wanted to say keep up the good work! Have you considered joining WikiProject British TV shows? Bob talk 20:24, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Sorry for change Elizabeth II's infobox like that. I'm new to wikipedia, and learning the ropes. I apologise if I caused any annoyance. I would also like to thank you for your kind words pointing our my error Customs 22:29, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

First thing's first, just because somebody considers themselve English, does not make them English. If I decided to consider myself Latvian, would that make me Latvian? Christian Bale was born in Wales, so therefore he is Welsh. Also, don't talk to me about grammer, 'an England actor' was your edit I believe. Wiki119

Hello again

Listen sunshine, I don't like your patronising attitude, I don't know much about you exept that your a southern, probably privately educated person who knows nothing outside of his cushy world. Why do you get to decide what nationality Christian Bale is. You have a quote of him calling himself English, it means nothing! I could probably find a quote of him saying he is Welsh If I could be bothered to look. Also, I don't consider the Country someone is born in necessarily to be their nationality, but the fact of the matter is he is Welsh. If he was born in say France to British parents, then yes he could consider himself British, But to be born in a certain part of Britain to British parent's, and consider himself to be from another part of Britian is ridiculous. My problem is, why are you the one to decide he is English, when the logical nationality to put would be Welsh, as he was born in Wales. Wiki119

EIIR Article

Thanks for adding the source, I had tried a quick google news search, and missed that article :) Brian | (Talk) 20:40, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Signing

Hi. Thank you for letting me know about the signing policy. The thing is, I thought it was necessary for pages we work on to be signed because I was under the impression that the signature is a way for the work to be tracked for others, like yourself, who want to see who did what, in order to make comments, suggestions, etc. So I know now that it's not necessary. I suppose somehow the user IP address is still tracked without the signature? I won't sign pages anymore then and will make a good effort to remove signatures from pages where they have been added before, but this might take awhile, as I will have to scroll through my contributions. Thanks again. I appreciate the patience. --Ashley Rovira 17:37, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

Now that I see you are willing to reach a comprimise, I'm fine with the Christian Bale article calling him English, I will not interfere with it again. Wiki119

Re: Geoffrey Palmer move

Kia Ora,

Ummm, you should have given a longer time on moving the Geoffrey Palmer page. You waited 9 minutes for other users to give feedback etc. Given that you are presumably in a different time zone, you may not realise that it was in the small wee hours of the morning here in NZ (where most people likely to watch the Geoffrey Palmer page are likely to be). However, I do also accept that there had been an old message from an anon IP on it for a while. I will put a message on Wikipedia:New Zealand Wikipedians' notice board and see if anyone objects to the move, and if so, we can work something out. Personally, I feel that the old Geoffrey Palmer page being the NZ PM is correct as (well in my opinion, but I am sure many others disagree with me) Prime Ministers "outrank" actors and should get precedence. Hope all is well. --Midnighttonight (rendezvous) 22:22, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sorry, my mistake on the dates. Noticed it just after I had clicked on Save on your talk page (then my internet connection died grrrrrrrrrr). My mistake. Anyway, ultimately I'm not too concerned - he didn't really achieve much as PM. So, I'm happy. --Midnighttonight (rendezvous) 23:07, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Paul McCartney

You might like to contribute to this talk page, topic MBE if you have a view. - Kittybrewster 16:47, 24 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jennifer and All That Good Stuff

Look, we need to reach a consensus here. For now, let's leave the opening of Jennifer Saunders' page, BUT please leave the "Currently" paragraph intact. About the French and Saunders page and the image... Wikipedia tries to have a limit in regards to fair picture usage. I was going to take the Titanic picture and place it back on top, (where it originally was), leaving the page with ONE picture to meet Wiki standards. I decided against it knowing that you would have a hissy fit, which you did. The last comment I would make to you is that when there's a debate or an edit war, try asking people to meet in the TALK page to reach a good fair conclusion rather than just deleting what has been added. I say this because you removed A LOT of information and called it tidying. Not everything needed to be removed. Cleanup is always a plus but please remember, no one owns a Wikipedia page and we have to try and work together. 68.82.82.248 15:56, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About User 68.82.82.248

Hi! Where and how can you report someone? User 68.82.82.248 got numerous vandalism warnings but he keeps on vandalising pages. He keeps on deleting Madonna's AKA on her article. All the other editors have no problem with it, I have an official source and it's pertinent information. He also deleted other things on Madonna's page. He deleted the word trendsetter and someone -Fritte- had to put it again. Just log on his User:Talk page to see all the warnings he's still getting. He got some [once again] today! Israell 17:17, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]