User talk:DBD/Archive 23

Archives

Archive 1 (July 2005 – July 2006)
Archive 2 (August 2006)
Archive 3 (September – October 2006)
Archive 4 (November 2006 – Jan 2007)
Archive 5 (February – April 2007)
Archive 6 (May 2007)
Archive 7 (June – July 2007)
Archive 8 (August – December 2007)
Archive 9 (January – March 2008)
Archive 10 (April – June 2008)
Archive 11 (July – September 2008)
Archive 12 (October – November 2008)
Archive 13 (Dec 2008 – May 2009)
Archive 14 (June 2009 – May 2010)
Archive 15 (June 2010 – January 2011)
Archive 16 (February – July 2011)
Archive 17 (August – November 2011)
Archive 18 (Dec 2011 – January 2012)
Archive 19 (February – March 2012)
Archive 20 (April – July 2012)
Archive 21 (August – October 2012)
Archive 22 (Nov 2012 – March 2013)
Archive 23 (April – July 2013)
Archive 24 (August – November 2013)
Archive 25 (Dec 2013 – April 2014)
Archive 26 (May – October 2014)
Archive 27 (Nov 2014 – May 2015)
Archive 28 (June – October 2015)
Archive 29 (Nov 2015 – April 2016)
Archive 30 (May – November 2016)
Archive 31 (Dec 2016 – July 2017)
Archive 32 (August – October 2017)
Archive 33 (Nov 2017 – July 2018)
Archive 34 (August 2018 – May 2019)
Archive 35 (June – November 2019)
Archive 36 (Dec 2019 – June 2020)
Archive 37 (Sep 2020 – Aug 2021)
Archive 38 (Sep 2021 – June 2022)

April–July 2013

GoodDay topic ban reinstated

Hi DBD, please see for more info. Cheers, Steven Zhang ^{Help resolve disputes!} 16:18, 3 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

RFAR amendment request

Hi DBD. Please be advised I have filed an amendment request at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Clarification_and_Amendment#Amendment_request:_GoodDay that requires your attention. Thanks. Steven Zhang ^{Help resolve disputes!} 14:53, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

George Washington Doane

I added a source and some information. Bearian (talk) 19:13, 16 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration amendment request

An Arbitration amendment request in which you were named as a party has been closed and a motion passed, you can view the final amendment request and motion here. The Abirtration Committee has resolved to ban User:GoodDay from the English Wikipedia for a period of no less than one year. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:37, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to be in touch again

No, it says quite clearly that they were Archdeacon of Bristol, then North Wilts: I think it was a precursor of the Archdeaconry of Swindon, which now seems to be Malmesbury. Bashereyre (talk) 17:47, 29 April 2013 (UTC) And thank you for being politer than You know who![reply]

Our less than polite co-editor

Has been in past. Let's just say he is known to have an interest in Anglicanism (I've always assumed he is a he) Bashereyre (talk) 18:00, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for May 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Archdeacon of the East Riding, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Malet Lambert (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) 13:16, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday!

Just a happy Birthday message to you, DBD, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee!
Have a great day! AutomaticStrikeout ? 18:47, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

June 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Hugh Foliot 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.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 18:06, 2 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day 2024

Happy First Edit Day, DBD, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great day! Vatsan34 (talk) 16:54, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Southend Archdeaconry

Redirects for baby X

Can you explain why you created over 100 redirects for a baby who is not yet born? Most of these are not even something anybody would type, e.g. "Prince/ss X of England". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.232.61.43 (talk) 06:29, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

- Some of the redirects are for titles that don't exist, Prince/ss of England, Cambridge and Wales are not titles that they child will hold at birth. Certainly Prince/ss of the United Kingdom (of Great Britain and Northern Ireland) and also HRH Lord/Lady X Marquess/Marquess of Cambridge (as a courtesy title from HRH The Duke of Cambridge).

Karl Stephens (talk) 08:25, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some are indeed redirects from incorrect titles – because I credit people at large with about as much knowledge about royal styles and titles as you have just displayed. HRH Lord Bob Marquess of Cambridge? Wtf is that?! HRH does not go with Lord, Lord is not the title for this child (who has already been granted HRH and Prince/ss), Princes don't use courtesy titles from their fathers like peers' elder sons do, and the Marquessate of Cambridge is 32 years extinct, let alone held by Prince William. D B D 12:27, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was illustrating a point that you did comprehend at least In part and ignoring your sarcasm you've answered my enquiry on why you created redirects for invalid titles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sinesurfer (talk • contribs) 13:29, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

TemplateData is here

Hey DBD

I'm sending you this because you've made quite a few edits to the template namespace in the past couple of months. If I've got this wrong, or if I haven't but you're not interested in my request, don't worry; this is the only notice I'm sending out on the subject :).

So, as you know (or should know - we sent out a centralnotice and several watchlist notices) we're planning to deploy the VisualEditor on Monday, 1 July, as the default editor. For those of us who prefer markup editing, fear not; we'll still be able to use the markup editor, which isn't going anywhere.

What's important here, though, is that the VisualEditor features an interactive template inspector; you click an icon on a template and it shows you the parameters, the contents of those fields, and human-readable parameter names, along with descriptions of what each parameter does. Personally, I find this pretty awesome, and from Monday it's going to be heavily used, since, as said, the VisualEditor will become the default.

The thing that generates the human-readable names and descriptions is a small JSON data structure, loaded through an extension called TemplateData. I'm reaching out to you in the hopes that you'd be willing and able to put some time into adding TemplateData to high-profile templates. It's pretty easy to understand (heck, if I can write it, anyone can) and you can find a guide here, along with a list of prominent templates, although I suspect we can all hazard a guess as to high-profile templates that would benefit from this. Hopefully you're willing to give it a try; the more TemplateData sections get added, the better the interface can be. If you run into any problems, drop a note on the Feedback page.

Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 22:20, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Post-noms

On a different subject, thanks for sorting out post norms for the star of India and order of St. Patrick. Do you intend to migrate your changes the post-nominalistic/GBR data schema? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sinesurfer (talk • contribs) 13:29, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Sorry, migrate to what? D B D 13:48, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. All done. Have copied/migrated your additions of AsstChStJf, Barte, Bartgb, Barti, Bartns, Bte, Btgb, Bti, Btns, Btsse, Btssgb, Btssi, Btssns, DLi, DLni, DLs, DLw, FRSf, FRSh, FRSr & KB2 from template/GBR-cats into template/GBR and created a redirect for the missing page Honorary Knight Grand Commander of the Order of the Indian Empire to Order of the Indian Empire

Cheers.

Karl Stephens (talk) 04:07, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. I had deliberately omitted those ones because they are variants which only affect categorisation. What do you think? D B D 09:34, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! There is a DR/N request you may have interest in.

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! Elizium23 (talk) 04:54, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

DBD, just in case you don't know, your username was added by Elizium23 as one of the Users involved at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/Salvatore J. Cordileone. – Scrivener-uki (talk) 09:39, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

July 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Brympton d'Evercy 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:

to: "to prevail upon her daughter to cease molesting him with daily vituperative letters".<ref>[http://www.sothebys.com/liveauctions/sneak/archive/la_fulbeck_1002.html Fulbeck Hall, A

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:17, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Burial sites of European monarchs and consorts 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:

Kingdom from 1701–1918 (since 1871–1918 Prussian King was Emperor of German Reich (personal union). The Prussian

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:00, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Son of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge

I'm curious why you reverted my edits to the styles of the son of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge? It has been established by letters patent that the child's style will be His Royal Highness Prince XX, and by precedent that "of Cambridge" will be after his given name. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JamesReyes (talk • contribs) 20:15, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Because that is just it – it is only precedence. It is not yet fact. Patience. D B D 20:18, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but only the "of Cambridge" part is precedence. You completely reverted. --JamesReyes (talk) 20:21, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I did, because he hasn't been styled "HRH Prince NN" either. D B D 20:24, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your comment on my talk page and I'll accept it. I'll have patience. --217.129.92.218 (talk) 21:24, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please response to your post on my talk page regarding why this [1] is sufficant evidence that he will be called 'His Royal Highness Prince XX of Cambridge' Oddbodz (talk) 23:32, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Earl of Strathearn

I see you added a source from a press release on the website of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. It comes from an authoritative source so I will leave it at that. I'd still be curious for a more 'official' confirmation though, because press releases aren't always accurate when it comes to stuff like this. But thank you for adding them! Gerard von Hebel (talk) 13:22, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Prince of Cambridge

Hello, DBD. You have new messages at Trajanis's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Redirects for Prince George of Cambridge

You jumped the gun when your created most of these redirects. Almost all of them have absolutely no longterm encyclopedic value. There is no way you could have possibly thought that in 5 years that "Prince/ss Y" or "Prince/ss X of Cambridge" could possibly be searched for with the intention of finding Prince George of Cambridge. We knew we would find out the name of the royal baby within the week so it seems a bit silly to have created all of those just to have them deleted. Just thought I should let you know. Brightgalrs (/braɪtˈɡæl.ərˌɛs/)^[1] 18:29, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You have my thanks for "just letting me know". However, I never created those with the long-term in mind, just the very short-term madness. D B D 19:18, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Nicholas Holtam

The Bishop's minions note your comments and thank you for your advice and guidance! God bless. 217.158.234.161 (talk) 13:52, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]