User talk:DonBeroni

Hello, Dabberoni15, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help. Need some ideas about what kind of things need doing? Try the Task Center.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! N.J.A. | talk 13:13, 14 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited James Drax, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Planter. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 05:52, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Isaac Winslow, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Joseph Blackburn.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, what's the basis for this edit? He was a pirate leader and his crews (as was the case for many crews at time) routinely included escaped slaves. I haven't seen any documentary evidence that he owned slaves... St★lwart¹¹¹ 02:47, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, some versions of his history include stories of him as a slave. For now, I'll undo that edit on the basis that it looks like a mis-click, but happy to discuss. St★lwart¹¹¹ 02:49, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I could be wrong about this, but the article does state that a plantation owned by him was attacked by the Spanish. Now him owning a plantation doesn't necessarily make our Dutch pirate here a slaveholder, but given the context... I admit I'm no expert here, and I'm going to refrain from contesting your revert. If you find any information regarding his plantation, please let me know. Regards, Dabberoni15 (talk) 02:51, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Makes perfect sense. I suspect its a mis-translation and it was simply land he owned (or misinterpretation based on the fact that the majority of land owned in that location was in the form of plantations). The source associated with that paragraph doesn't mention a plantation at all. Good catch. St★lwart¹¹¹ 03:07, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Antanum, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Blowpipe.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 30 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

When editing Wikipedia, there is a field labeled "Edit summary" below the main edit box. It looks like this:

Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.

Edit summary content is visible in:

Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks!

Also, please add reliable sources when you are making changes to parts of an article that are uncited (such as Multiculturalism in Australia).

You may also be interested in reading the Indigenous Australian draft style guide (based on this work) - and are you aware of the Australian Wikipedians' notice board? (Just FYI.) Laterthanyouthink (talk) 00:32, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Godert de Ginkell, 1st Earl of Athlone, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Aughrim.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited James Anthony Froude, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Colonial Secretary.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:55, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:03, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Arms Act, 1959, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Anglo-Sikh War.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:57, 22 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Staats Long Morris you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 15:00, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Staats Long Morris you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Staats Long Morris for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 21:21, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Arnold Wilson, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bengal Lancers.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:58, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article William Brattle you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 21:41, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article William Brattle you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:William Brattle for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 04:40, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article William Brattle you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:William Brattle for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GhostRiver -- GhostRiver (talk) 20:01, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article James Warren (politician) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of HumanxAnthro -- HumanxAnthro (talk) 19:00, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article James Warren (politician) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:James Warren (politician) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of HumanxAnthro -- HumanxAnthro (talk) 13:41, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Thomas Hancock (merchant) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kavyansh.Singh -- Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 08:20, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Thomas Hancock (merchant) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Thomas Hancock (merchant) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kavyansh.Singh -- Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 09:00, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Thomas Hancock (merchant) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Thomas Hancock (merchant) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kavyansh.Singh -- Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 14:41, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article General Butt Naked you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of PizzaKing13 -- PizzaKing13 (talk) 20:20, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article General Butt Naked you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:General Butt Naked for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of PizzaKing13 -- PizzaKing13 (talk) 00:01, 9 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Guardian, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Parachute Regiment.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Benning Wentworth you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 22:40, 3 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Benning Wentworth you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Benning Wentworth for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 14:20, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Benning Wentworth you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Benning Wentworth for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 18:41, 4 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Battle of Caloocan you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 15:21, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Battle of Caloocan you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Battle of Caloocan for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 16:41, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Battle of Caloocan you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Battle of Caloocan for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 14:01, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article James Campbell (British Army officer, died 1745) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 06:41, 1 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article James Murray, Lord Philiphaugh you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:21, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article James Campbell (British Army officer, died 1745) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:James Campbell (British Army officer, died 1745) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 18:41, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article James Campbell (British Army officer, died 1745) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:James Campbell (British Army officer, died 1745) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 20:22, 2 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article James Murray, Lord Philiphaugh you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:James Murray, Lord Philiphaugh for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:01, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for the delay, but I'm unable to access the ODNB for some reason. Would it be possible for you to copy Murray's entry and send it to me so we can resolve the close paraphrasing issue? --Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:16, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here ya go.

Murray, Sir James, Lord Philiphaugh (1655–1708), politician and judge, was born on 11 July 1655 at Eddleston, Peeblesshire, the eldest son of Sir John Murray of Philiphaugh (d. 1675) and Anne, daughter of Sir Archibald Douglas of Cavers. His father was parliamentary commissioner for Selkirkshire in 1661–3, a commissioner for supply in 1661 and 1667, and commissioner for the borders in 1665. He was educated at Edinburgh University, graduating in 1674. He succeeded his father in August 1675 and soon continued the family link with parliament. Like his father he was a member for Selkirkshire, and he sat in the convention of estates that assembled in Edinburgh in June 1678, and was elected member for the same county in 1681. His career in parliament and the estates was lengthy and he was a commissioner for supply in 1678, 1685, 1690, and 1704.

Murray's early career stumbled on account of his apparent shortcomings as sheriff of Selkirk, in which post he had also succeeded his father. A dispute between him and Urquhart of Meldrum, a commander of the king's troops, began his temporary eclipse. The case came before the privy council in November 1680 and the issue seemed to be a clash of jurisdiction between Urquhart as justice of the peace and Murray as sheriff. However, the main concern of Urquhart—and of the privy council as it happened—was that Murray had 'malversed and been remiss in punishing conventicles' (Historical Notices, 277). Thus when the privy council ruled on the case in October 1681 Murray found himself deprived of his right as sheriff of Selkirk. Lauder of Fountainhall suggests that he was a minor victim of the collapse in patronage of Elizabeth, duchess of Lauderdale, her influence having 'dried up' (ibid., 331).

This was not, however, the end of Murray's difficulties. He was arrested and committed to prison in 1684, following the discovery of the 1683 Rye House plot to assassinate Charles II. In September 1684 he was brought before the privy council and, on being threatened with torture, made his confession and threw himself on the mercy of the first duke of Queensberry. He was released on bond of caution, and eventually received royal pardon, but on condition that he testified against his so-called accomplices. Indeed, it was his testimony which led to the controversial double trial and execution of Robert Baillie of Jerviswood, and which was used in cases against Walter Scott, earl of Tarras, Patrick Hume, earl of Marchmont, George Pringle of Torwoodlie, and others, many of whom were forfeited in their absence. As a contemporary observed a few years later, Murray 'had a chief hand in ruining many families' (Melville, 77).

In spite of unpopularity with some, after the revolution of 1688 Murray's fortunes began to recover. He was appointed an ordinary lord of session in November 1689 with the title Lord Philiphaugh, and in 1701 parliament ratified the barony of Philiphaugh in his name and that of his heirs. Yet, his post-revolution career was to depend on his role as a close personal adviser to James Douglas, second duke of Queensberry, the most important political manager in Scotland from 1700 to 1707. Though it did take a few years for Queensberry to make his mark at court—he was only twenty-six years old at the revolution—in May 1696 Philiphaugh joined the privy council and became a lord of exchequer. In 1698 Queensberry tried unsuccessfully to press on King William the appointment of Philiphaugh as lord justice clerk. Lively party politics, but especially the factions clustered around Queensberry and the tenth earl and first duke of Argyll, made consensus over appointments quite impossible. Queensberry's elevation in 1700 to king's commissioner to parliament actually reduced the scope for agreement. Thus, while in 1701 there was general agreement to replace the earl of Selkirk as clerk register, Queensberry's nomination of Philiphaugh was countered by the candidatures of Sir William Hamilton of Whitelaw and Adam Cockburn of Ormiston. Nevertheless, after the succession of Queen Anne, Philiphaugh was appointed clerk register in November 1702. He held this position until July 1708 apart from a period from June 1704 to 7 April 1705. The so-called ‘Queensberry’ or ‘Scotch plot’, a futile attempt by the duke to incriminate political rivals, led to Philiphaugh being temporarily replaced by James Johnston and the brief removal from office of the duke himself.

When in power, Queensberry was provided with effective political advice by Philiphaugh. In 1700 the latter encouraged necessary concessions to be made to parliament over resentments at the failure of the Darien scheme. Although in 1703 the passing of the Act of Security and the Act anent Peace and War were set-backs for both men, after returning to power in 1705 Philiphaugh assisted Queensberry in successfully steering the treaty of Union through a divided Scottish parliament.

In his memoirs John Macky describes Murray as of 'fair complexion, fat, middle sized' but 'clever', and he certainly had the wit to rekindle an effective political career after early false starts. Murray married first, on 24 April 1678, Anne, daughter of Patrick Hepburne of Blackcastle, and second (c.1681), Margaret, daughter of Sir Alexander Don of Newton. He had no children by his first marriage, but three sons and five daughters by the second. He was succeeded by his eldest son, John (b. 1682). His will and testament have not survived yet he was clearly a man of means, with lands at Kershope in Roxburghshire as well as at Philiphaugh in Selkirkshire, an estate which had been in the family since the 1520s. Murray died at Inch in Wigtownshire on 1 July 1708. Dabberoni15 (talk) 17:38, 17 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article James Murray, Lord Philiphaugh you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:James Murray, Lord Philiphaugh for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:41, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sir William James, 1st Baronet you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Johannes Schade -- Johannes Schade (talk) 14:40, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Peter Warren (Royal Navy officer) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Pickersgill-Cunliffe -- Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 15:00, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Peter Warren (Royal Navy officer) you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Peter Warren (Royal Navy officer) for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Pickersgill-Cunliffe -- Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 12:21, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Sir William James, 1st Baronet you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Sir William James, 1st Baronet for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Johannes Schade -- Johannes Schade (talk) 11:23, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Marinus Willett you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of PCN02WPS -- PCN02WPS (talk) 18:21, 22 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Marinus Willett you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Marinus Willett for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of PCN02WPS -- PCN02WPS (talk) 14:21, 23 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Marinus Willett you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Marinus Willett for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of PCN02WPS -- PCN02WPS (talk) 21:02, 24 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Battle of Málaga (1704) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Spudlace -- Spudlace (talk) 19:20, 27 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Trifle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page English.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 31 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Battle of Málaga (1704) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Battle of Málaga (1704) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Spudlace -- Spudlace (talk) 18:42, 7 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article William O'Brien, 2nd Earl of Inchiquin you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Johannes Schade -- Johannes Schade (talk) 13:01, 9 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Henry Boyle, 1st Earl of Shannon you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of GuardianH -- GuardianH (talk) 08:20, 11 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article William O'Brien, 2nd Earl of Inchiquin you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:William O'Brien, 2nd Earl of Inchiquin for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Johannes Schade -- Johannes Schade (talk) 12:21, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article William O'Brien, 2nd Earl of Inchiquin you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:William O'Brien, 2nd Earl of Inchiquin for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Johannes Schade -- Johannes Schade (talk) 07:22, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article John Leveson-Gower, 1st Earl Gower you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Mike Christie -- Mike Christie (talk) 22:01, 5 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article John Leveson-Gower, 1st Earl Gower you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:John Leveson-Gower, 1st Earl Gower for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Mike Christie -- Mike Christie (talk) 21:41, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Henry Boyle, 1st Earl of Shannon you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Henry Boyle, 1st Earl of Shannon for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Mike Christie -- Mike Christie (talk) 16:21, 18 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Francis Brinley you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AirshipJungleman29 -- AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:41, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Francis Brinley you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Francis Brinley for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AirshipJungleman29 -- AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:21, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Jacobus Capitein you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AirshipJungleman29 -- AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:01, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Jacobus Capitein you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Jacobus Capitein for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AirshipJungleman29 -- AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:40, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Jacobus Capitein you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Jacobus Capitein for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of AirshipJungleman29 -- AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:41, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Have you considered nominating one of your articles for Featured Article status? I think they would be of sufficient quality to pass. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:45, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've considered for some of them, but I think they still need further expansions before I can take them there. Thanks for the suggestion; if I ever plan on doing so I'll be sure to let you know. Regards, Dabberoni15 (talk) 11:19, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have noticed that you often edit without using an edit summary. Please do your best to always fill in the summary field. This helps your fellow editors use their time more productively, rather than spending it unnecessarily scrutinizing and verifying your work. Even a short summary is better than no summary, and summaries are particularly important for large, complex, or potentially controversial edits. To help yourself remember, you may wish to check the "prompt me when entering a blank edit summary" box in your preferences. Thanks! Zinnober9 (talk) 01:43, 8 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article John Custis you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 03:40, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Thomas Penn you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 20:43, 2 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article John Custis you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:John Custis and Talk:John Custis/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 13:43, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article John Custis you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:John Custis for comments about the article, and Talk:John Custis/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of SNUGGUMS -- SNUGGUMS (talk) 23:04, 5 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Thomas Penn you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Thomas Penn and Talk:Thomas Penn/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 22:24, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Thomas Penn you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Thomas Penn for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 08:24, 11 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

— Maile (talk) 00:03, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Daniel Parke you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Urieldiaz11 -- Urieldiaz11 (talk) 20:21, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Bartholomew Teeling, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jean Humbert.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Daniel Parke you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Daniel Parke and Talk:Daniel Parke/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Urieldiaz11 -- Urieldiaz11 (talk) 08:42, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Daniel Parke you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Daniel Parke for comments about the article, and Talk:Daniel Parke/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Urieldiaz11 -- Urieldiaz11 (talk) 16:02, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

		The Golden Wiki
		Congratulations! You have been selected as the Military History Newcomer of the Year by a popular vote of your peers in recognition of your contributions to the English Wikipedia's coverage of military history - specifically, for improving a variety of military history articles to GA class, including the Battle of Caloocan and Battle of Málaga (1704). As the lead coordinator of WikiProject Military history, it is my pleasure to present the esteemed Golden Wiki. Please accept this token of our gratitude and appreciation; we hope to see more of you in the years to come. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:03, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Daniel Parke you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Thebiguglyalien -- Thebiguglyalien (talk) 06:21, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Daniel Parke you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Daniel Parke and Talk:Daniel Parke/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Thebiguglyalien -- Thebiguglyalien (talk) 07:42, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I thought I'd remind you that Talk:Daniel Parke/GA1 has been open for the last few days and is waiting for nominator input. It's no problem if you can't get to it right away, but I just wanted to make sure that you were aware of the review and that nothing was messed up by the sockpuppet that falsely passed the review a few weeks ago. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 04:44, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to say this, @Thebiguglyalien:, but it's probably for the best if you go ahead and fail that review ASAP. Something unexpected has come up, and I don't think I'll have the time to respond to your suggestions for the time being. Sorry for this and good luck on your GA nominations. Regards, Dabberoni15 (talk) 09:06, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No worries! I'll fail the review so you can revisit it at your leisure should you choose to do so. Feel free to ping me or leave a message on my talk page if you ever decide to return to this article and need clarification on anything from my review. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 15:29, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Daniel Parke you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Daniel Parke for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Thebiguglyalien -- Thebiguglyalien (talk) 15:41, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Vincent Ogé you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 15:45, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Alexander MacFarlane (judge) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Mychemicalromanceisrealemo -- Mychemicalromanceisrealemo (talk) 09:02, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Alexander MacFarlane (judge) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Alexander MacFarlane (judge) for comments about the article, and Talk:Alexander MacFarlane (judge)/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Mychemicalromanceisrealemo -- Mychemicalromanceisrealemo (talk) 12:21, 27 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your recent copy editing of Logan (novel)! Its current nomination for featured status needs some comments and I wonder if you'd be willing to participate, given that it seems you've already read the article. You'll find it here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Logan (novel)/archive1. Thanks in advance! Dugan Murphy (talk) 15:11, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Vincent Ogé you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Vincent Ogé for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 15:01, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Anglo-Dutch Wars, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battle of Dogger Bank.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:03, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Pierre Laureys, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Alias.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 13 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Suleiman al-Halabi you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Aintabli -- Aintabli (talk) 03:41, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Suleiman al-Halabi you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Suleiman al-Halabi for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Aintabli -- Aintabli (talk) 04:00, 15 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Chasselay massacre you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 10:22, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Chasselay massacre you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Chasselay massacre and Talk:Chasselay massacre/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:02, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Have you noticed that I've reviewed this, at long last? I'll give you a week from now to respond.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 10:36, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

One last chance.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:32, 23 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reversion [here.]. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 23:59, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No problem amigo, happens to the best of us. Glad you were so reasonable :). Until next time. Dabberoni15 (talk) 00:02, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding my suggestion here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Military_police#Photographs titled Photographs and with the date 12 January 2023. Dreddmoto (talk) 16:37, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sent by Zippybonzo using MediaWiki message delivery (talk) at 10:30, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Chasselay massacre you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Chasselay massacre for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 12:40, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nominations | August 2023 Backlog Drive
August 2023 Backlog Drive: On 1 August, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year. (t · c) buidhe 05:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Peter Beckford (junior) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Kaiser matias -- Kaiser matias (talk) 00:02, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Peter Beckford (junior) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Peter Beckford (junior) and Talk:Peter Beckford (junior)/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Kaiser matias -- Kaiser matias (talk) 16:01, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The article Peter Beckford (junior) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Peter Beckford (junior) for comments about the article, and Talk:Peter Beckford (junior)/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has never appeared on the Main Page as a "Did you know" item, and has not appeared within the last year either as "Today's featured article", or as a bold link under "In the news" or in the "On this day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear at DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On this day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Kaiser matias -- Kaiser matias (talk) 00:22, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Cao Huan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Prince of Chenliu.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:07, 1 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nominations | March 2024 Backlog Drive
March 2024 Backlog Drive: On 1 March, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here or ask questions here.
You're receiving this message because you have reviewed or nominated a good article in the last year.

(t · c) buidhe 02:39, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Thomas Savage (major), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Major. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 06:07, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there

I wonder if you would mind explaining your edit to this article? I actually have no opinion on whether it is correct, except to say that the distinction between 'withstood an attack" and "repelled an attack" seems somewhat substantive and an edit summary would have been cool ... But that is not my point, which is simply that I am trying to understand whether or not it improves the article. I don't think it does much harm if any, and have left it in place pending your response. Mainly, my concern is that I may need to make a decision about it if the editor who wrote it reverts you, so I am seeking information, thass all ;) Thanks.

Btw the article is being actively worked for promotion, so if you are familiar with the topic, or some of these battles, feedback is welcome. Elinruby (talk) 02:09, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Elinruby, thanks for this message. With regards to my edit, I took a look at the source cited and it clearly states that Neale's attack on Algiers in 1824 ended indecisively (i.e., without a clear-cut victory on either side). In this context, "withstanding an fruitless British attack" is better than stating that Algiers outright repelled it (i.e. drove Neale's squadron away with military force), because what happened was the Royal Navy showed up and shelled the city but did not achieve their desired outcome despite not being driven back. Ultimately, the point of this section is to show that Algiers was under the (mistaken) impression that it could withstand the desires of European powers, which the article in its current state still makes perfectly clear. Regards DonBeroni (talk) 10:35, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]