M. Armando

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:05, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

 Template:David di Donatello for Best Score has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Frietjes (talk) 19:28, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

  Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wiki.

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

I noticed your recent edit to Françoise Marie de Bourbon does not have an edit summary. 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. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing →   Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Eric ^talk 22:18, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ranuccio I Farnese, Duke of Parma, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Maria of Aragon. 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) 09:55, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Unfortunately there was massive spam creation from your ip range. I've granted to you a temp GIBE that allow you to edit. Feel free to contact me if you have issues --Melos (talk) 19:29, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi! Can you look this? Please! I do not know about this man anything... Malaiya asked for a help. Thank you! Have a good day! ^-^ ;-) --Nickispeaki (talk) 08:38, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Eduardo Paes, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Guanabara (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 09:18, 7 April 2018 (UTC)

Hi there! Small font should not be forced in infoboxes, because they already have smaller than normal size. Please see MOS:FONTSIZE. This is also an accessibility issue. – Finnusertop (talk ⋅ contribs) 17:30, 14 April 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Helmut Schmidt, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Egon Franke (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Christian Wulff, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jörg Bode (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

 

(English below)

Olá. A Wiki Portugal é uma associação portuguesa sem fins lucrativos, fundada em 2009, reconhecida pela Wiki Foundation como "chapter" de Portugal. A nossa missão é, em geral, contribuir para a disseminação generalizada do saber e da cultura, através do incentivo à recolha e criação de conteúdos isentos de restrições de utilização, modificação e distribuição, e da difusão dos mesmos; e em particular, promover e apoiar os projetos da Wiki Foundation, entre os quais a Wikipédia, com ênfase para os projetos nas línguas faladas em Portugal, o português e o mirandês.

Gostaríamos de contar com o apoio de (e reciprocamente apoiar) todos os voluntários naturais, residentes ou simplesmente interessados em Portugal. Embora fundada em 2009, a associação teve um largo período de inatividade, que estamos agora a ultrapassar. Vimos por isso convidá-lo, caso nisso tenha interesse, a inscrever-se como associado da associação, demonstrar apoio à existência de um "chapter" em Portugal, e a envolver-se em atividades futuras inscrevendo-se na lista de distribuição de email. Recentemente, a Comissão de Afiliações da Wiki suspendeu o apoio à Wiki Portugal, pendente, entre outras coisas, do apoio da comunidade de editores portugueses. [1]

Agradecemos desde já!

Hi! Wiki Portugal is the Portuguese chapter of Wikimedia, founded in 2009 and recognized by the Wiki Foundation. Our mission is to contribute to the general dissemination of knowledge and culture through the incentive to the collection and creation of content without restrictions on use, modification and distribution, and promote their difusion; we promote and support the Wiki Foundation projects, among which Wikipedia, with emphasis on projects in Portuguese and Mirandese.

We would like however to count on the support of (and in turn ourselves support) all volunteers that are citizens, resident, or simply interested in Portugal. Despite being founded in 2009, the chapter has gone through a long period of inactivity that we are trying to overcome. We have sent you this message to invite you, if you are interested, to enroll as associate to the chapter, demonstrate your support to the existence of a chapter in Portugal, and get involved in the discussion of future activities by registering in the mailing list. Recentely, the Wiki Affiliations Committee suspended support to Wiki Portugal pending, among other things, the support from the community of portuguese editors. [2] GoEThe (talk) 14:16, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Hi Sorry to bother u I think you are an editor In the page of William II of the Netherlands He is a king but in his categories he is put as and lgbt head of goverments also with him being lgbt heads of state So is this right As a king he is a head of goverment How is that Can you please clarify if u dont mind And thx AdamPrideTN (talk) 15:51, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

I have 2 questions please First Sophus Thalbitzer is about a straight ally doctor who like Evelyn Hooker helped to decriminalise homosexuality in Denmark His categories are only LGBT history in Denmark But i added the categories of sexual orientation and psychology and the one of sexual orientatiin and science just like those of Evelyn Hooker ones. So should Evelyn Hooker be added to LGBT history in the US category Should Evelyn hooker and dophus trablitzer both be added to the category of LGBT activists in the us and in denmark resoectively Since that category contains a lot of LGBT allies and friends and scientists or what?

Second the page Lesbian Movement (Denmark) is in the category of LGBt history in denmark It is an lgbt assiciation that is defunct now Should it be put in LGBt assiciatii's in denmark category or what Or be created in a new categor of defunct lgbt association in the denmark as i qaw this category with many associatiins Or what what do u think Sorry for the bother again This may sound stupid and unnecessary for some But it is so important and improving believe me AdamPrideTN (talk) 01:52, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

  Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wiki.

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

I noticed your recent edit to Louis VIII of France does not have an edit summary. 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. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing →   Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! Eric ^talk 19:12, 20 August 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Sérgio Moro, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Paraná (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:16, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Franz Josef Strauss, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Christian Social Union (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:32, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

There's no need to create redirects as drafts. Just create them directly in article space at the name you want to use. Celia Homeford (talk) 14:33, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Howdy. Perhaps you should share your views & sources at the discussion at Michel Temer. There's an Rfc about when Brazil presidents & vice presidents leave office. GoodDay (talk) 17:53, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

 

Hello, and welcome to Wiki English. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Carl Ludvig Douglas requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wiki English. This has been done under section A3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an article with no content whatsoever, or whose contents consist only of external links, a "See also" section, book references, category tags, template tags, interwiki links, images, a rephrasing of the title, a question that should have been asked at the help or reference desks, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article. Please see Wiki: Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wiki's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. TheWinRat (talk) 17:22, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Maximilian de Beauharnais, 3rd Duke of Leuchtenberg, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Maximilian I of Bavaria (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). 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) 11:06, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

  Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Alexander, Prince of Orange and William, Prince of Orange, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you.

Your message to me began as follows: "If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation" and goes on to a passive threat of sorts: "you may be blocked from editing". I removed the content with an explanation: there is a policy going on in Wikipedia of removing excessively detailed information in templates of the "ahnentafel" kind. If I am not mistaken, you are the one who undid my editing without explaining anything. This section that you are so protective of is, by the way, completely unsourced. So if you choose to play war with me, I am going to stick two templates above it. One that reads: "Verify this section for unsourced material" and another that reads "Necessity of removal of excessively detailed material". No thanks are needed, I think. M. Armando (talk) 19:03 26 May 2019 (UTC)
Ah, I wasn't aware of that policy. I thought, mistakenly, that your edits were repetitive vandalism. Wikipedia's guidelines for undoing edits say, "If you are undoing an edit that is not vandalism, explain the reason in the edit summary," implying conversely that if one reverts an edit that is vandalism (and, again, I now know that your edits weren't vandalism but in fact made in perfectly good faith—I, while unintentionally malicious, was the one who was wrong), he or she needs not supply an explanation as it is implied. I was also unaware of the unsourced nature of the edit, instead focusing on what I (wrongly) thought was a case of vandalism at the time. Please do insert those templates; I'm with you there! Apologies again for any inconvenience I may have caused.

Sorry again; you have my best wishes,
Xjsamuel (talk) 19:37, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
Quite all right, mate! Thank you for undertanding. Best wishes back at you, cheers! M. Armando (talk) 20:44 26 May 2019 (UTC)

You seem to be engaging in a Devil's bargain here: instead of sourcing and then arguing in defense of the kind and extent of the content you've included in royal Ahnentafels for years, you are pre-emptively implementing the critics' truncation, in apparent hope that doing so will protect the remaining content from deletion. Here, you go so far as to threaten retaliation for objecting to this stratagem! FactStraight (talk) 17:40, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

OK, so there's not a policy of removing information in the ahnentafel template. You're just doing it. You just did it to my edits earlier today. Please stop. There's actually a discussion going on about this issue over here. I urge you to participate. I understand that you think that your deletion of this material is an improvement; it's not vandalism, no, but it is disruptive. This is a standard template that's been used for decade. If you think the template isn't good or shouldn't be used you should explain your reasoning by participating in the discussion. The purpose of this discussion is to try to establish guidelines for this sort of thing. There do not appear to be any guidelines about what constitutes excessive (or appropriate) levels of detail in genealogical charts. Flyte35 (talk) 16:32, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

 Template:Grammy Lifetime Achievement Award has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Moxy 🍁 03:36, 14 July 2019 (UTC)

Hi

Do you have a source that she is not senator now? --Panam2014 (talk) 13:16, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello. Let's not turn this into a political argument, OK? She is the interim president of Bolivia and that's it. Facts. (talk) 21:11, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
Do you have the name of the senator who replaced her or her seat is vacant? --Panam2014 (talk) 22:04, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
I am not Bolivian so I don't know the process. Sometimes there's a stand in, sometimes there's a special election and sometimes the seat just stays vacant. Anyway, unnecessary information in the infobox given it's a proportional system not first-past-the-post. (talk) 22:08, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

What did you do? Or update? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.186.239.213 (talk) 10:19, 2 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi, M. Armando. You recently created the page Elizabeth Trefusis, Baroness Clinton, but this is just a redirect to itself. If you can correct it to redirect to a different Wikipedia article, please do; otherwise the page will soon be deleted. Best wishes! --R'n'B (call me Russ) 12:48, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

  Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wiki.

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

I noticed your recent edit to Philip II of Spain does not have an edit summary. 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 Wiki 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! Elizium23 (talk) 22:38, 13 September 2020 (UTC)

Hi. I notice you are using the minor edit checkbox wrong. Use it for "typographical corrections, corrections of minor formatting errors, and reversion of obvious vandalism. A minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute"--Asqueladd (talk) 18:57, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

"Stop messing with it!" "Just stop doing it!" is not an adequate engagement. Articles' scopes intersects in infinite instances. That a set of editors may have a penchant for a particular set of article of royals does not override discussion and reasoning. Why do you add the infantes anyway? The legitimate children (bar possibly the prince of Asturias) are supposed to enjoy the recognition as infantes. It is redundant. It is just bonafide cruft. What important bit is supposed to play that cruft in the infobox of their mother (particularly given those five have linked standalone articles). Also, why do you create a bulleted list when there is no need whatsoever? Why do you remove the number of pregnancies this woman had (sourced) and replace it with unsourced content?--Asqueladd (talk) 22:20, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
What is supposed to be this? Canvassing? Passive-aggressive bullying? Are you asking for a guardian angel? I am asking you to get involved here or in the talk page, because I am addressing legitimate and specific concerns to your edits and you are delivering nothing but a sui generis bandwagon fallacy. 1) Why do you add the infante bit? The legitimate children (bar possibly the prince of Asturias) are supposed to enjoy the recognition as infantes. It is redundant. It is just bonafide cruft. What important bit is supposed to play that cruft in the infobox of their mother (particularly given that those five already have linked standalone articles to begin with). Also, 2) why do you create a bulleted list when there is no need whatsoever? 3) Why do you remove the number of pregnancies this woman had (sourced) and replace it with unsourced content? 4) Can you source Francisco de Asís was an "infante" (source it in the article of his)--Asqueladd (talk) 00:54, 18 September 2020 (UTC)

  Hello, I'm Denniss. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Joachim Gauck have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. Denniss (talk) 04:55, 29 September 2020 (UTC)

  Please do not move a page to a title that is harder to follow, or move it unilaterally against naming conventions or consensus. This includes making page moves while a discussion remains underway. We have some guidelines to help with deciding what title is best for a subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wiki English. Do not make page moves without discussing first. Do not move pages without leaving an edit summary. Eric ^talk 01:51, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

Do not mark page moves as minor. Eric ^talk 02:04, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

  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. Thanks! Eric ^talk 05:59, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

And please stop editing against RfC consensus whilst leaving no edit summaries. If you disagree with the consensus, see WP:CLOSECHALLENGE but don’t reinstate the content otherwise. ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 04:39, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

 

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wiki's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

ProcrastinatingReader (talk) 04:40, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hi M. Armando, I invite you to engage in a discussion at Talk:Calvin Coolidge#"Served as" vs. "was" to avoid further ping-pong on this choice of language. Let's see if we can develop a consensus through discussion. Cheers, HopsonRoad (talk) 22:26, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John O'Dowd, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Peter Robinson.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:20, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

  Hello, M. Armando. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Margaret Nelson, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wiki English. FireflyBot (talk) 00:02, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

 

Hello, M. Armando. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Margaret Nelson".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:26, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

  A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Pedro Bosch Labrús. The discussion will occur at Wiki: Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 June 23#Pedro Bosch Labrús until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. dudhhr_Contribs 02:48, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Omar Aziz, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Amazonas and Alfredo Nascimento.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:00, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

  Hello, I'm Denisarona. I noticed that you recently removed content from Victor Emmanuel III of Italy without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Denisarona (talk) 09:30, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi M, I reverted your move here because it's not in accordance with the the article titles capitalization guidance. Apologies! Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 03:57, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Fernando Collor de Mello, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Heloísa Helena.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:09, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

  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! ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 23:13, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, M. Armando

Thank you for creating Prince Charles Philippe, Duke of Nemours.

User:CollectiveSolidarity, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Thank you for the article!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|CollectiveSolidarity}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~ .

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 15:37, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Eugen Schiffer, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Hermann Müller.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 07:30, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

But one need only to look as far as the other Queen Consorts to see what her legal title is in this moment. They are all referred to as Her Majesty The Queen until their husbands deaths where they become Her Majesty Queen *name*. 173.212.65.254 (talk) 21:06, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

pls fix template also, or else it will be double work for me Fostera12 (talk) 09:22, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

I would like to remind you that per WP:SOFTREDIRECT Soft redirects to non-English language editions of Wikipedia should be avoided because they are generally unhelpful to English-language readers. Instead, editors should link to the alternate language Wikipedia directly with one of various forms of interlanguage links. I don’t see why you insist on continuing to create soft redirects to German Wikipedia articles despite this. These redirects may end up deleted in the future. Jalen Folf (talk) 23:43, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Adolfo Rodríguez Saá, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Interim.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

Why did you redirect this page to the Socialist Party? The article doesn't mention him.Roundtheworld (talk) 11:17, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

 Template:French Senator has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:18, 13 November 2022 (UTC)

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

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:08, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

 Template:SEN FR has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:59, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi,

I see you changed this link on Catherine's page from III to IV, this prompted me to look at the French article and the French page for the count. They agree with you about it being Jean IV, I do not know however why. There are only 3 Jean's in the count list, what's going on here? Sovietblobfish (talk) 18:37, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

He is not "IV" of Auvergne, he is "IV" Jean de La Tour, his family. M. Armando (talk) ..:13, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

The article title is John (Number), Count of Auvergne though. Regardless, my thanks for clarifying Sovietblobfish (talk) 21:21, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

For example, his father, Bertrand VI is only the second of his name to be Count of Auvergne, but he is the sixth Bertrand de La Tour. That is why the correct numbeing, in my view, is "IV", following the familial logic. M. Armando (talk) ..:29, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

My approach to that Bertrand would be that he is Bertrand VI de la Tour, but in his capacity as count of Auvergne he is Bertrand II d'Auvergne. In much the same way Henri IV de France is simultaneously Henri III de Navarre, I wouldn't call him Henri IV de Navarre I guess we have different approaches. :) Sovietblobfish (talk) 21:36, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

You can always use "Jean IV de La Tour, Count of Auvergne" or "Jean IV de La Tour d'Auvergne". Both would meet your criteria. M. Armando (talk) ..:41, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

 Template:FCA MP has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:42, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

 Template:ARP MP has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:53, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

  Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wiki. I noticed that your recent edit to James Callaghan did not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief.

The edit summary field looks like this:

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wiki account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing →   Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary, and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! -- Toddy1 (talk) 08:48, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

  Just to let you know, Iain Macleod was still an MP under the Douglas Home administration, but not in office. Regards, David J Johnson (talk) 10:47, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

There is currently a Request Move discussion about William IV. Since you participated in a previous move discussion about William IV, I thought you might want to know about this one. Cheers. Rreagan007 (talk) 19:41, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Why did you delete the Infobox of the page Ferdinand II of Portugal? Acolex2 (talk) 04:44, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

I respect your edit. But, please at least leave Jure Uxoris King and Prince Consort on the infobox Acolex2 (talk) 07:48, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Fernando Collor de Mello, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Heloísa Helena.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 15 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello M. Armando,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Infante Miguel, Duke of Braganza for deletion in response to your request.

If you didn't intend to make such a request and don't want the article to be deleted, you can edit the page and remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 00:10, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

 Template:MP ME has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:09, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, M. Armando. Thank you for your work on Princess Cecilie of Prussia. SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Hello my friend! Good day to you. Thanks for creating the article, I have marked it as reviewed. Have a blessed day!

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 05:44, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

 Template:BAFTA Best British Film recipients has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. --woodensuperman 13:50, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

 Template:Golden Globe Award Best Motion Picture Drama Recipients has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. --woodensuperman 13:51, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

 Template:Golden Globe Award Best Motion Picture Musical or Comedy Recipients has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. --woodensuperman 13:52, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi M. Armando. I just reverted your addition here to Jo Brand. I see that the notes in Template:Infobox person say: "Education, e.g., degree, institution and graduation year, if relevant." and "Alma mater. This parameter is a more concise alternative to (not addition to) education, and will often consist of the linked name of the last-attended institution of higher education (not secondary schools)." But neither of them ask for qualification details? Your additions of qualifications are the first I've seen to infoboxes. Is there some consensus to start doing this? Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 08:55, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited John Wakeham, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Lord Keeper of the Privy Seal.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:06, 12 April 2024 (UTC)