Loading AI tools
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:The Emperor's New Spy. 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. |
| Archive 15 | ← | Archive 17 | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 |
I like your new handle. —Tamfang (talk) 20:39, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
- Me too. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 21:18, 22 July 2012 (UTC)
I am guessing you are talking about my name change. Thanks.--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 06:17, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello!
Couldn't you explain me, for what you removed sorting keys in the articles about Dukes of Wellington and other nobility (for example: here)? -- Worobiew (talk) 10:42, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
- I could. There is absolutely no point in sorting the dukes in that matter or anybody for that matter. See this. No one has gotten around to fixing it and all such sortings should be removed. What is the purpose of having them in order when that is what the list is for? My question is why are you defending it.--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 00:09, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
Hey Emperor's Spy,
Sure, who do you have in mind?
Best, ClarkSui
Hello,
I'm back from my holiday. I'll add the articles you asked about to my to-do list.
Kind regards, HansM (talk) 15:13, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
I am posting this notice here to advise that on the talk page of an article to which you have made substantial edits I have asked a question concerning the validity of the article. The question has been there for some time but received no replies so I am giving my question wider distribution by notifying selected editors who have been involved with the article and giving them an opportunity to respond. Please do not reply here on your talk page or on my talk page but on the talk page of the article where other editors can easily see your comments so that hopefully we can have a constructive debate. The article is List of English monarchs. Thank you. Cottonshirtτ 06:41, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello, I've added some more text to Otto of Bavaria, including a list of his publications and more footnotes. -- HansM (talk) 12:04, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
I have added the pages you mentioned to my to-do list. -- HansM (talk) 08:45, 16 August 2012 (UTC)
Hey there! Long time no... talk. :) I created an article on the 8th Duke earlier this year, but don't have immediate plans to create articles on his successors. Time is going to be an issue with me for a while (holiday right now, then my graduate school semester starts up after that). Hopefully I'll eventually create them, but if not, you are of course more than welcome to do so. Regards, Ruby 2010/2013 22:46, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Can you specify which pages need further translation from the Chinese articles? There are quite a few pages on the list, and I'd rather not have to sort through them all. szupie (talk) 14:35, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
Greetings, Spy, I am Miha. You can help me, if you want. Please, what is the most important when working with articles about Chinese kings?--Miha (talk) 08:28, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Hi there. As you might have gathered from the previous message I left on your talk page, I declined the speedy deletion of Xavier, Duke of Parma. I think that because the discussion took place two years ago, and because some of the participants were against the move then, it would be better to discuss it via a requested move than to move it first and cause unnecessary argument. Let me know if there is more recent discussion that I have missed, though. Best — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 10:45, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
Hello The Emperor's New Spy,
in answer to the question on the ReferenceDesk: The contract of Retrocession went into effect at the beginning of the fical year of 1832/33. The source states no date, but that information can be dug up somewhere I'm certain. Your --Abracus (talk) 18:31, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
- Hi, this is a mass-produced message which means it may duplicate a message already on your Talk:page. As a result of the lack of reference to specific sources or guidelines such as WP:SOVEREIGN, User:Qwyrxian closed the RM at Talk:Peter III of Portugal but said a new RM could be started if new evidence was presented. This I have done after discussion with Qwyrxian and User:Lecen. This means that your previous support or oppose will not be counted, and must be resubmitted. However please note Qwyrxian's request that support/oppose be made with reference to specific arguments guidelines or sources, and (quote) especially recommend that people don't do the "Support per person X and Y", as such comments are close to useless, (unquote). Thanks for your time. Best regards. In ictu oculi (talk) 01:35, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
Hello, The Emperor's New Spy. When you changed Maria Josepha of Saxony from a redirect into a disambiguation page, you may have overlooked WP:FIXDABLINKS, which says:
- A code of honor for creating disambiguation pages is to fix all resulting mis-directed links.
- Before moving an article to a qualified name (in order to create a disambiguation page at the base name, to move an existing disambiguation page to that name, or to redirect that name to a disambiguation page), click on What links here to find all of the incoming links. Repair all of those incoming links to use the new article name.
It would be a great help if you would check the other Wikipedia articles that contain links to "Maria Josepha of Saxony" and fix them to take readers to the correct article. Thanks. R'n'B (call me Russ) 16:14, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
- And here's a link to a handy tool which should make things easier. :) — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 17:13, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for adding the Belgium descendants, it completely slipped my mind. Cheers, Cristiano Tomás (talk) 18:25, 8 September 2012 (UTC)
It's better if one helps change section headings, rather the simply revert :) GoodDay (talk) 12:01, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
- It would be even better if you change the section headings since you insist on the removal of the only viable headings on some of these articles.--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 14:14, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
- Okay I see that you have now. And one last word in your campaign of removing the biography headings across wikipedia, please don't leave any articles like this --The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 14:17, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
Sorry, but I must decline, at least at the moment, as I am very busy in RL. I'll perhaps stroll over and have a look sometime, though :). Lectonar (talk) 06:56, 25 September 2012 (UTC)
Hi! Not sure I will do all of them, but I completed Johanna of Hanau-Münzenberg at least. Please take a look at it and let me know if there is anything unclear or if there are any obvious mistakes as I don't know anything about the topic. Not sure I translated all the given names that need translation. bamse (talk) 19:28, 26 September 2012 (UTC)
- Ah, great. That means less work for me :) I think I'm going to share this task with Bamse. De728631 (talk) 12:35, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
- Done with George Frederick, Count of Nassau-Siegen. Please check and if necessary move the article to a better name and/or create redirects. bamse (talk) 21:15, 27 September 2012 (UTC)
- Hi! In George Frederick, Prince of Nassau-Siegen you made those children "illegitimate". Is this correct? de:Mauritia Eleonora von Portugal also says that those are her children, though I understand that this might be a copy-paste mistake. bamse (talk) 07:35, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
- Done with Manuel António of Portugal (now that is a colorful vita!) Not sure where "Schlagen" is located, perhaps a misspelling or old name!? bamse (talk) 20:49, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
- Done with Mauritia Eleonora of Portugal. The image is only available on de-wikipedia and I left out the illegitimate children of her husband. De728631 wanted to expand the other two articles. bamse (talk) 18:50, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
- I finished work at Manuel, Prince Hereditary of Portugal a few days ago. Countess Emilia of Nassau however may not need a translation from the sources indicated. The Dutch version does not expand on what've got here and the German article is almost a verbatim copy of de:Manuel von Portugal. @Bamse, I've also been wondering about "Schlagen". Maybe it's an old placename of a village that is now incorporated into some larger municipality. De728631 (talk) 17:48, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
- That's already in there. The German version isn't much different from the English article and I couldn't find anything to add. De728631 (talk) 18:13, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
- And I'm clearly too late to assist thanks to excellent work by the above gentlemen! --Bermicourt (talk) 11:04, 25 October 2012 (UTC)
- That's already in there. The German version isn't much different from the English article and I couldn't find anything to add. De728631 (talk) 18:13, 2 October 2012 (UTC)
Hello,
I'll add Emilia and Albert to my to-do list. I've also added the list of Counts Palatine you asked about in August. I'm still working on your list of Saxon nobility; I'm not progressing as fast as I had hoped.
Kind regards,
HansM (talk) 21:45, 7 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi TENS, I'm sorry I didn't reply earlier, I overlooked your message! I will consider doing your requested translation at some point, but the German Wikipedia has the problem of a very inconsistent citation style, so I'm usually cautious because I don't want to translation original research. We'll see whether HansM or I get to it faster. Best regards Hekerui (talk) 12:28, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi, Emperor's Spy. Yes, I can translate Prince Peter of Saxe-Coburg-Kohary article, but I will need a few days, since I'm just leaving for a short trip, without much time to dedicte to wikipedia. I'll let you know when I finish it. Antonio Prates (talk) 03:46, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- Same here, The Emperor's New Spy, it'll take me some days. Victão Lopes I hear you... 20:43, 11 October 2012 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, Emperor, November will be a very tough month for me, too much work on real life, I won't be able to work on this before December. Victão Lopes I hear you... 13:25, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Hello, There's a move discussion here Talk:Dukes of Albret, maybe you're interested. Jack Bufalo Head (talk) 02:13, 17 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi mate, did you see my response to your comment on my talk page? I'd be interested to hear what your views are on the issues I brought up. Thhist (talk) 09:49, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Sorry - work kicked off a bit. Doing some more now. Beth Holmes 1 (talk) 20:56, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
Category:Komnenodoukai dynasty, which you created, has been nominated for possible deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Constantine ✍ 10:11, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi TENS,
Sometimes I see an image on Wikipedia that is in my opinion too pale, or lacking in contrast, or poor in some other way; and I copy it from Commons, try to improve it, and re-upload it. I have never had any feedback when I have done this. My change does not appear in any article history, so maybe people don't realise it has changed.
Yesterday I did this to the image of Haakon VI of Norway, which appears in at least one article you are involved with. I thought that the original version was too pale (you can see it at the bottom of its Commons page), so I made it darker and increased the contrast. But looking at it now, I think I may have overdone it, it is now too dark, and too orange.
I would like to hear your opinion. Maproom (talk) 11:18, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
- I would definitely agree with you that you over did it. You might want also to hear the opinion of User:Thhist too about it since he is the original uploader and more knowledgable in this area than I am.--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 18:04, 7 November 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I could start on Sancha in a couple of days although first I want to fix the article in the Spanish wiki. I would not translate but sort of re-write it. I did not write the original article, although I contributed cleaning it up a bit. Would not write such a long section on her burial and would probably use some of my own sources, including a monography written on her. The other character you mentioned would take a bit longer and maybe somebody else could start working on it. Regards,--Maragm (talk) 06:33, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
Just curious: did you notice that one of the userboxes on your user page no longer exists? No need to reply. Nyttend (talk) 13:14, 17 November 2012 (UTC)
Hello, The Emperor's New Spy! You recently moved the page Hatice Sultan (1720–1730) with no previous discussion. Such a discussion may have been well in order, as you may see from the comment on the following discussion page: Talk:Hatice Sultan (1720–1730). Judging from your comment about me recently, you have a somewhat hostile attitude toward me, which I can do no more than see as sad, but I hope that you do not regard this as hostile from my part. Thank you. --Aciram (talk) 12:19, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
- Reread this post and see how unprofessional your remark is and who the sad one is.--The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 14:54, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
- No, my remark is hardly sad: If you wish to criticise people about how sad they are, than you should look at your own language first. I commented on your own hostile remark about me earlier on the discussion about Adelaide of Savoy, and that comment from you was indeed sad from your part. It was hostile, and it was also unprofessional, as it had nothing to do with the subject, and was, if I understand what you were referring to, caused by nothing more than the fact that I once pointed out to you that your critic was unwarranted and unpolitely phrased. If you can not stand to have that pointed out to you without holding a grudge all this time, than who do you think is the sad one here. It is rather me who has showed tolerance in regard to you behaviour toward me; granted, I could have pointed those things out to you in a more polite way myself. Now, as I have pointed out, your move of that page have caused a problem, as you can also see on that talkpage, if you yourself are as professional as you claim to be. If you have no selusion to that problem, than at least lease do not move pages without discussion at you did with this. Thank you. --Aciram (talk) 15:12, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
- When you create an article that has no purpose and no notability to it just for the sake of having it on here then you have to expect that people when criticize your work. You create articles in which the only thing we know about the said person is their name, marriage and children, which looks great on a genealogical database but is basically a waste of space here on Wikipedia (sorry for the harsh word). You understand that any criticism anybody ever raise against you consider it offensive or rude. --The Emperor's New Spy (talk) 06:51, 21 June 2013 (UTC)
- No, my remark is hardly sad: If you wish to criticise people about how sad they are, than you should look at your own language first. I commented on your own hostile remark about me earlier on the discussion about Adelaide of Savoy, and that comment from you was indeed sad from your part. It was hostile, and it was also unprofessional, as it had nothing to do with the subject, and was, if I understand what you were referring to, caused by nothing more than the fact that I once pointed out to you that your critic was unwarranted and unpolitely phrased. If you can not stand to have that pointed out to you without holding a grudge all this time, than who do you think is the sad one here. It is rather me who has showed tolerance in regard to you behaviour toward me; granted, I could have pointed those things out to you in a more polite way myself. Now, as I have pointed out, your move of that page have caused a problem, as you can also see on that talkpage, if you yourself are as professional as you claim to be. If you have no selusion to that problem, than at least lease do not move pages without discussion at you did with this. Thank you. --Aciram (talk) 15:12, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
Wikiwand in your browser!
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.
