User talk:SGBailey
|
|
Harry's name is Prince Harry of Wales. Children of a prince of wales are called [Prince {name} of Wales], just as the children of a royal duke or earl are called [Prince/ss {name} of {title}]. Furthermore, his surname is not Windsor, nor is his father's, his brother's, the children of Prince Andrew and of Princess Anne. It is a commonly held mistake. The surnames of all the Queen's descendants (in the male line) is Mountbatten-Windsor and has been since an Order-in-Council in 1960. (The female line take the surname of their father.)
Wikipedia style is to never use the surname of a royal, but their title, for many reasons, not the least of which is that most royals do not have a surname, and those that do often have a surname that is different from the Royal House (eg, Mountbatten-Windsor of the House of Windsor). As people were constantly getting this wrong and coming up with at the very least wrong surnames, frequently absurd surnames that don't exist, a major debate occured on Wiki, through talk pages, history pages and the wiki list. An agreed consensus was arrived at; in fact it wasn't a consensus, it was unanimous, to use the correct title, never the surname, in article titles. Wiki members are currently in the process of changing all references to all royals to follow the clear rules as agreed, which in this case is Prince Harry of Wales. It involves as other examples, Prince Arthur of Connaught, Princess Beatrice of York, etc. The word 'prince' is not featured at the start of a name where a person has a clear title (eg., Andrew, Duke of York or where someone is a crown prince/ss. The title 'King', 'Queen', 'Prince', 'Grand Duke', etc is not used for a reigning monarch, or someone who has previously reigned, eg, Juan Carlos of Spain, etc.
Titles were clarified after consultation with Buckingham Palace and other international royal palace officials.
I hope this clarifies matters. JTD 23:47 Feb 6, 2003 (UTC)
- Makes sense - Thanks -- SGBailey
Thanks SGB. I'm rather passionate about Wiki so I want to try to get the styles correct. JTD 00:08 Feb 7, 2003 (UTC)
Re: your question in Wikipedia:Village pump about the comment inserted when a page is moved. The "Moved to new_article_name" comment is put on the newly-created redirect which bears the old title -- and is what will show up under the old title in recentchanges, watchlist, and user contribs (of the mover). "Moved from old_article_name" wouldn't be terribly helpful there, as it would repeat the same title and you'd have to follow the link to find out where it was moved to. Note that there is currently no note at all in the history of the page at its new location; this should probably be fixed, but an early proposal to simply duplicate the last version with a note in the comment field was rejected as wasteful. (I've answered here rather than at the pump as I'm currently using a Mac browser which cuts pages off at 32k.) --Brion 02:14 Feb 7, 2003 (UTC)
You asked me about the pronounciation of Fortuyn. Unfortunately, I could not give a very good answer, and someone has removed my SAMPA without stating a reason. Any idea what now? (Answer at my discussion page please). Andre Engels 19:07, 22 Sep 2003 (UTC)
| Contents |
|
1 Computer / Video games |
A test
Equals sign = in a heading
Computer / Video games
Hi SGBailey - in the past you've worked on the Computer game and Video game pages - if you're still interested, I'm looking at drafting a reorganisation at Talk:Computer game/Computer and video games. Take a look, and edit or comment! Mark Richards 18:09, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)
SGBailey, thanks for your phrasing corrections on the Prague Metro page! The text is much better now. Matt Borak 12:43, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Article Licensing
Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
- Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
- Multi-Licensing Guide
- Free the Rambot Articles Project
To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:
- Option 1
- I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
- {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}
OR
- Option 2
- I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
- {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}
Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Ram-Man&action=edit§ion=new)| talk)
Cantus
I noticed your comments on the talk page of Cantus's new Wikipedia:Images unsuitable for inline display. I'd also appreciate if you could look at my Template deletion proposal for his template:offensiveimage which he's been trying out lately on one or two articles.
The discussion is here.
--Tony Sidaway|Talk 19:10, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Image:1989meijen1.jpg
This image, which you uploaded two years ago, recently turned up on Wikipedia:Image sleuthing. We haven't yet been able to find its source; could you please comment? —Korath (Talk) 18:26, Mar 3, 2005 (UTC)
- Many thanks; I've removed the listing from WP:IS --Tagishsimon (talk)