User talk:Lord Emsworth/Archive 7

Welcome back

We missed you :) →Raul654 23:00, Feb 12, 2005 (UTC)

Indeed. I would welcome your comments at Talk:List of Earls. john k 16:49, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Your namesake article

Now that you've returned from wikibreak, I thought I might interest you in the article on Clarence Threepwood, 9th Earl of Emsworth, which is sorely lacking in detail. I haven't read enough of the Blandings books to expand the article myself, though I've been working on various other Wodehousian topics. — Dan | Talk 02:03, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

French nobles

When their names are just listed, it's standard to use lower case (in French, at least). In Wikipedia article titles, it remains unclear. In terms of usage of the French titles in English sentences, the grammatical rules of English would indicate that what is done for English nobles should be done for French ones. It looks odd to see "Duke of Marlborough" and "duc de Vendome," doesn't it? john k 23:48, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I don't think so. It is odd because the inconsistent capitalization is weird. If we use "duc de Vendome," we should use "duke of Marlborough". And vice versa. john k 00:32, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Your contribution count

You have made 22732 undeleted edits. If it's you who is repeatedly abusing the databases servers by asking for a list of 25,000 edits by you in one chunk, please stop. We have that 500 at a time limit and paging in steps of 500 for a reason. Jamesday 14:55, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I posted that after seeing the database servers getting many queries for a page containing 25,000 contributions by you at the busiest time of the day. Usually it's the work of the person whose contributions are being retrieved. In the case of that many contributions, the query takes so long to run on the database servers that it's unlikely to be complete before the web server or cache server timeouts expire and deliver an error message instead of results, making it unlikely that the operation will succeed except at quiet times of the day. Since it wasn't you, I'll address it in a different way (more strict time limit on the contributions query and/or enforcing a limit on how many can be retrieved at once) to limit the harm potential and make unlikely to succeed queries less likely. Longer term there's some work being done on making this query faster and hence less problematic. Jamesday 07:33, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Bbsrock

User:Bbsrock seems to be on quite a purge of en-dashes ([1]). Will have to revert, I fear.

James F. (talk) 01:10, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Congrats

Congratulations on the mentions in Wired magazine. →Raul654 00:06, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)

New peer article

Hi. I've just made Anthony Ashley Cooper, 10th Earl of Shaftesbury. I'm not sure what the pages on his father (who was the son of the 9th, and had the same personal name), and his son (who has the same personal name) should go. Any suggestions? Thanks, Morwen - Talk 19:19, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

The courtesy title is probably "Lord Ashley". But Anthony Ashley Cooper, Lord Ashley ought to be a disambig, since in addition to those two, probably every Earl of Shaftesbury has also been, at some point Anthony Ashley Cooper, Lord Ashley. If there are to be individual articles, probably best to use lifespan dates. john k 00:30, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Inquiry about Duke of Manchester

We had a phone call today from a person claiming to be the Duke of Manchester, which is of course entirely possible though a bit curious, and also claiming that we've got his name wrong. He says that he is "Alexander" and not "Andrew". His son's name appears to be "Alexander" and so, well, I guess we should confirm. The problem for me is that I don't know the area well enough to really even know at all how to confirm it.

I do notice that the "son and heir" bit on the page was added by an anonymous user here.

I wonder if you could be so kind as to review your sources and let me know if this was in fact in error. The reason I ask is that I do have the phone number of the purported Duke, and if it does turn out that we had an error, I would like to call him and tell him that we've fixed it. Or, if it turns out that we do not have an error, I would like to laugh at the skill of the hoaxer in getting me to ask you. :-)

--Jimbo Wales 23:31, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

According to [2], which is normally pretty reliable, his name is, indeed, Alexander - Alexander Charles David Drogo, specifically. His son is also Alexander. john k 00:01, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Also confirmed here - I've made the change :) -- sannse (talk) 00:15, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Queen Anne

I'm not intimately conversant on the royal succession bills - but what I gather from your comment is that under the Bill of Rights and Act of Settlement, even (theoretically) if James II had remarried and had male issue, that would not have defeated Princess Anne's claim to the throne? Ellsworth 00:02, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Queen Elizabeth II's other domestic titles

your the one to talk to!!!

Queen Elizabeth II is also queen of many other countries and that is very well documented. However, I have not yet found a list of other titles she holds... such as 'Countess of Chester' ect. Prince Charles I know is Prince of Wales, Duke of Cornwall and many others. I did find a list of her titles as they appear in other countires, and her military ranks.. but no other titles within her gift. Can you help me find this?

Thanx much...

I am new to wikipedia and love it!

Drachenfyre

Prince Charles is Earl of Chester, not the queen. The queen is sometimes called "Duke of Lancaster" and "Duke of Normandy" but there is no official warrant for either of these titles - she has control over the Duchy of Lancaster, but there is no reason to believe that the title of "Duke of Lancaster" itself did not merge in the crown in 1413, while the title of "Duke of Normandy" was renounced in 1259 and has never been officially use since. john k 05:45, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

A personal message

My Dread Lord Emsworth,

Greetings from the hallowed halls of Oxford, UK. I'll give you one guess as to who I am (especially with a username such as this). Its been a while since we caught up. If you want to drop me a message, feel free to post one on my talk page as I probably will forget to check here. We've missed on the forums in the last couple of months; Return soon.

--New Progressive 15:17, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Bismarck

I've left lengthy comments on the FAC page for Bismarck. I think it's quite a good article, but I had a number of issues with it, so your attention would be appreciated. Thanks. john k 20:47, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Just to note, in spite of my criticisms, I don't think the Bismarck article is too far from FA status. it's just something I happen to know a lot about, so I had a lot of comments. I apologize if it seemed overwhelming. john k 22:31, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

That is no matter at all. I acknowledge that the article has too many flaws to merit promotion at this stage.

Tables

Please use Template:PeerNavbox instead of Template:Succession box for peerage succession tables. Cheers, ugen64 03:56, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Wired Article

If you could IM me at Sciguy99, I could keep your id secret from our classmates if you wished

Wait a minute, this has to be Suri! Man, we sit at the same lunch table. Comrade!