Congratulations on your job. I do appreciate your precision and your way of improving Wikipediaby creating new pages.

Thank you for your nice words! --Editor FIN (talk) 04:53, 13 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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) 17:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Just drawing this one to your attention, which may be of interest. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Hubertus,_Hereditary_Prince_of_Saxe-Coburg_and_Gotha Engleham (talk) 09:22, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Engleham I have added my opinion to the discussion now. --Editor FIN (talk) 06:54, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Editor FIN, please note that AFDs are not polls. As Wikipedia:Articles for deletion states, "The debate is not a vote; please make recommendations on the course of action to be taken, sustained by arguments" and the same applies to all deletion debates. Any statement that just consists of "Keep" or "Delete" with a signature can easily be dismissed by the admin making the final decision (as yours was at the Lady Rose Gilman discussion). Try, in the future, to present persuasive reasons in line with policy or consensus as to why the article/template/category/whatever should be kept or deleted, and try to make sure it is an argument based on the right reasons. — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 07:11, 1 February 2016 (UTC) Are you nuts? This is a clearly notable person! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.167.89.24 (talk) 15:01, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't have to edit-war me on Viscount Simon and get shirty about it. I'm persuaded by your argument, and would have reverted my last edit myself. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 15:57, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Jdcrutch I'm happy that we reached a solution. Sorry, if I was shirty, but I felt that you were patronising me to some extent. --Editor FIN (talk) 04:51, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. We each seem to have misjudged the other somewhat. I didn't mean to patronize you: since the article's Talk page is a public forum, I thought I should lay out a complete argument, without presuming prior knowledge on the reader's part. Your point about the heirs of the first peer's body was one I hadn't thought of. It wasn't clearly mentioned in any of the sources I had at hand, but some reflection ought to have led me to it. Best of luck. J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 16:57, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! I proposed a move at Talk:Julian Byng, 1st Viscount Byng of Vimy (moving it to Julian Byng, per WP:NCPEER and WP:COMMONNAME). I would like to hear your opinion on it!--The Traditionalist (talk) 13:18, 17 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Kamalesh Sharma, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Indian. 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) 10:12, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for noticing. I have corrected that now. --Editor FIN (talk) 14:34, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited List of current members of the British Privy Council, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Queen. 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, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Editor FIN. John Boyle, 15th Earl of Cork, an article you either created or to which you significantly contributed,has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot (talk!) 12:01, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I messed up the infoboxes

Thanks

Cantab1985 (talk) 13:45, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Cantab1985 Done! Thank you for noticing. There was only one small mistake: "years = " was added twice for Colonel of the Yorkshire Regiment. --Editor FIN (talk) 14:15, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Cantab1985 (talk) 14:39, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On 27 July 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article John Boyle, 15th Earl of Cork, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that despite Lords of Ireland being ineligible for election, the Earl of Cork was elected to the British House of Lords? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/John Boyle, 15th Earl of Cork. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, John Boyle, 15th Earl of Cork), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 01:01, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

I made a good contribution to the Nicholas Hougton article and now they want to delete my account. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Jeneral28#Suspected_sockpuppets

I am not that person please assist thanks.

Cantab1985 (talk) 03:03, 18 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FIN. Re: "Reverted, because peers are known by their titles in the House of Lords, not by their names.", I wonder whether I might contend that Wikipedia articles are not in the House of Lords? DBD 09:39, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Both Lord Speaker election, 2016 and Non-affiliated members of the House of Lords deal with peers in their capacity as members of the House of Lords. Why do you think that peers should rather be known by their names than by their titles in those articles? --Editor FIN (talk) 10:18, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I owe you an apology regarding my edit summary for Shami Chakrabarty. I said that she was gazetted on 16 August not 6 September. I hadn't noticed that she was gazetted twice - once for intention to appoint and again when the full title was established. Sorry. Apuldram (talk) 17:01, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Honours usually appear in The London Gazette only once, but peerages belonging to some honours list are an exception. --Editor FIN (talk) 18:27, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding your edit today here: In the new reference, Chakrabarti is mentioned on page 2, but page 1 (19331) comes up on the screen. I suggest changing the ref to 19332. I would do that myself, but because of my previous mistake I'm mentioning it here instead. Apuldram (talk) 12:23, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for noticing me. I corrected that. --Editor FIN (talk) 16:43, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Great work adding the years of induction. I'd intended to continue adding them, but I've started a new job in the past few weeks, and was completely swamped. --William Quill (talk) 12:12, 13 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Editor FIN. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

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 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 14:16, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Juliancolton! --Editor FIN (talk) 14:59, 23 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to have established a practice of describing the by-elections as being held over the period in which votes are to be received.The consistent practice of the HoL website is to treat the day the votes are counted and the result announced,not the advance voting period,as the day on which the election "is held".--L.E/12.144.5.2 (talk) 01:15, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

12.144.5.2, I looked at the Parliament website and saw that, but I think that it would be quite illogical to say that a by-election would be held after the end of voting as voting is essential in the nature of elections. Result announcement dates of forthcoming by-elections have also been mentioned in the article By-elections to the House of Lords. --Editor FIN (talk) 05:02, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

From my perspective,Election Day is still Election Day no matter how early you're allowed to send in your absentee ballot.--L.E./12.144.5.2 (talk) 02:52, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

But that is not election day, because electors can't vote on that day anymore. It's just the day, when results are announced and published. For example, in the crossbench by-election held last year, ballot papers were sent to electors on 10 June and completed papers should be returned either by post or in person by 11 July 5 p.m., when the voting closed. 12 July was just the result announcement day. --Editor FIN (talk) 12:56, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is the consistent practice of the House of Lords website to identify the day on which the election result is announced as the one day on which the election is held,with the davance voting period treated as minor fine print.12.144.5.2 (talk) 06:09, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is, for some reason, the practice of the House of Lords website, but I don't think that Wikipedia should do the same. As voting is fundamental in an election, it would be incoherent to say that an election is held on a day when electors can't vote anymore. --Editor FIN (talk) 17:27, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like your crosstable on the latest election omitted the conclusive ballot after the elimination of the Earl of Stockton,where Lord Colgrain won with 143 votes.This is it seems a record number of counts. I had expected based on past whole-house elections and the convention of choosing a peer of the deceased peer's party that Lords Stockton and Harrowby would be the leading contenders,but this was not so...curious that when Lord Lloyd-George of Dwyfor and Lord Harrowby were both eliminated at the 23-vote stage,Lord Stockton picked up nine votes from Lord Lloyd-George (the last Liberal Democrat contender) but only one from Lord Harrowby(a fellow Conservative).--L.E./12.144.5.2 (talk) 17:13, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

12.144.5.2, I think that there is some technical issue, which makes the last round invisible, because I have included all 25 rounds in the table. I was little surprised by the result too. But this by-election was quite hard to predict as also life peers were voting and latest whole House by-election after a Conservative peer had been held in July 2013. --Editor FIN (talk) 03:32, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Editor FIN. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
130		Theodore G. Bilbo (talk)	Add sources
12		Bankers' bonuses (talk)	Add sources
883		Peerage of England (talk)	Add sources
2,580		House of Lords (talk)	Add sources
7		Sir George Baker, 1st Baronet (talk)	Add sources
15		Brian Abel-Smith (talk)	Add sources
8		Sir Thomas Barlow, 1st Baronet (talk)	Cleanup
113		Spain–United Kingdom relations (talk)	Cleanup
33		Allan Glen's School (talk)	Cleanup
134		Daniel Finkelstein (talk)	Expand
330		Reduplication (talk)	Expand
49		Lobbying in the United Kingdom (talk)	Expand
50		Doctor Who fandom (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
26		Army United F.C. (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
331		Gender bender (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
8		Stable bandage (talk)	Merge
27		Afghan rebel flags (talk)	Merge
4		Ada Svedin (talk)	Merge
55		Disability benefits (talk)	Wikify
504		Battle of Largs (talk)	Wikify
26		David Clark, Baron Clark of Windermere (talk)	Wikify
2		Alisahib Huseynov (talk)	Orphan
3		Cathrin Brisken (talk)	Orphan
6		Cipriano Targioni (talk)	Orphan
8		De Wolden (talk)	Stub
21		Benjamin Gascoigne, Baron Gascoigne (talk)	Stub
6		Christopher Lennie, Baron Lennie (talk)	Stub
26		Alastair Bruce, 5th Baron Aberdare (talk)	Stub
4		Garfield Davies, Baron Davies of Coity (talk)	Stub
6		Raymond Robertson (politician) (talk)	Stub

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:38, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Editor FIN. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible 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 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. 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 2019 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) 00:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi my idea was with the flags of the by-elections is which county the Peerage was created as I thought it was a good idea. Mr Hall of England (talk) 12:14, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I understand your logic, but I think that that is not very essential information in the context of by-elections to the House of Lords. Hereditary seats in the House are not allocated by country and peers don't form groups in the House by country. It should also be noted that a random Wikipedia reader could get a false impression that flags refer to individual peers' own home countries. --Editor FIN (talk) 06:02, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Princess Amalia of Nassau is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Princess Amalia of Nassau until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Surtsicna (talk) 11:36, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. 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 2020 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) 02:43, 24 November 2020 (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) 00:36, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The article List of children of prime ministers of the United Kingdom has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

I think this page should be deleted for many reasons. It is just an indiscriminate list of information, children (and grandchildren in particular!) of Prime Ministers hold no power, or official position as such. Most if not all of the living individuals are 'private individuals' who do not seek any particular fame, and the article is almost entirely unsourced.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JeffUK (talk) 22:41, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of children of prime ministers of the United Kingdom is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of children of prime ministers of the United Kingdom until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

JeffUK (talk) 22:55, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. 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 2022 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) 01:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The article Philippe-Maurice, 9th duc de Broglie has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp/dated}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. jlwoodwa (talk) 20:35, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Current Lords Spiritual has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:42, 8 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lord Queensberry wasn't a member of the House of Lords before the Peerage Act 1963 because he was "only" a Peer of Scotland, the UK barony Kelhead was created in 1893 but became exstinct the following year (death of the first and only holder) Alternow (talk) 08:17, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I had made a mistake. Thank you, Alternow, for correcting that. --Editor FIN (talk) 07:14, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Template:2021 Lord Speaker election has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the entry on the Templates for discussion page. --woodensuperman 13:32, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. 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 2023 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) 00:44, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oy, Baron Bhatia died on January 16! Can you do it on House of Lords Reform Act 2014, please? Thanks! 142.162.146.249 (talk) 17:47, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]