User talk:Jeff~enwiki

Hello there Jeff, welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you ever need editing help visit Wikipedia:How does one edit a page or how to format them visit our manual of style. Experiment at Wikipedia:Sandbox. If you need pointers on how we title pages visit Wikipedia:Naming conventions. If you have any other questions about the project then check out Wikipedia:Help or add a question to the Village pump or my talk page.

I have a suggestion: you could have a look in www.genealogia.sapo.pt - it contains a very complete Gotha Book online. It has information about everybody. It's in portuguese, but princess is not so different to princesa. And i think you can find a glossary portuguese-english somewhere (glossário de termos). Unfortunately, the site is "closed" on evenings and weekends. Have fun! Cheers, Muriel Gottrop

Hi Jeff, congratulations on your work on past and present royalty. It is absolutely superb. One suggestion. Don't bold HRH and honours. We agreed on that methodology in a debate on royal naming conventions some months ago. The reason is that for people not au fait with royal styling and terminology being presented with a name buried among a line of letters and references to 'highness' it can make the page opening look daunting. It is useful to people like you and I, but a bit to much for the general reader. Bolding only the actual name and title makes it stand out and that is the key information people are looking for; are they on the page of the right person?

Also, where a female consort possessed a previous name and title, that should go directly after the modern title, without the word former, and the form should be current name, previous name/title (dates). The reason for this is that, as you know, royal consorts are recorded not by marital name but by maiden name, as they lack an ordinal to disambigulate between them and other possessors of the same name. Some people think the former name, when used as the article title should come first, but I am not convinced; it remains an issue of debate. But putting the maiden name down the article, as used to be done, looks clumsy if bolded and has to be bolded to draw attention to it, particular if that is the name the article is under. Using bold italics directly after the main name in bold was found to be the cleanest most user-friendly way of giving information that avoided turning a page into a mass of bolds, italicised bolds and italics, something that can look alkward on some computer screens and some browsers, especially if they are set to 800x600 (why anyone would want to set screens to that beats me, but a lot do for some reason). So the page on Mary of Teck should open as Queen Mary, Princess Mary of Teck. FearÉIREANN 06:37, 6 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Hello Jeff! I would like to add something to the comment above. Is it really necessary to put the full name of the children? I now by personal experience that long names are nothing more a unpratical thing. By the way, what are the initials KC, KGB, etc etc that appear after the names? Muriel Victoria Adelaid Maria ... Gottrop

Muriel and Jtdirl

Thank you for your messages. I am lurker and occassional contributor to the Usenet newsgroup alt.talk.royalty.

I will try to edit my contributions (if someone has not already done so) to condense the names of the royal children and to remove any uncessary formatting (e.g., bold text for royal/noble styles and post-nominal orders of Chivalry and honors). The modern British royal family (e.g., the houses of Hanover, and Saxe-Coburg-Gotha/Windsor) have a habit of giving children an unending list of

Perhaps, I might remove the post-nominals altogether, since Wikepedia articles do not yet exist for the various British orders of chivalry. What do you think? I did not add the Japanese orders of chivalry to the articles on the imperial household of Japan, the Emperors Meiji, Taisho, and Showa, the present Emperor (Akihito), or the Empress Dowager Nagako (Empress Kogan) that I contributed (or edited) earlier.

Briefly, the abbreviations for the British orders are as follows:

K.G. - Knight (or Lady) of the Most Noble Order of the Garter
K.T. - Knight (or Lady) of the Most Ancient and Most Noble Order of the Thistle
G.C.B. - Knight (or Dame) Grand Cross of the Most Honorable Order of the Bath
K.C.B. - Knight Commander of the Most Honorable Order of the Bath
O.M. - Order of Merit
G.C.M.G. - Knight (or Dame) Grand Cross of the Most Distinguished Order of St. Michael and St. George
K.C.M.G./D.C.M.G. - Knight (or Dame) Commander of the Most Distinguished Order of St. Michael and St. George
C.I. - Imperial Order of the Crown of India
G.C.V.O. - Knight (or Dame) Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order
K.C.V.O. - Knight Commander of the Royal Victorian Order
D.C.V.O. - Dame Commander of the Royal Victorian Order
G.B.E. - Knight (or Dame) Grand Cross of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire
K.B.E. - Knight Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire
D.B.E. - Dame Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire
C.B.E. - Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire

I suggest the list above to be put in a new page. As for all these orders of chivalry i think they deserve a page too. Have you checked the link i told you above? Muriel

I tried to access the site you suggested above (www.genealogia.sapo.pt) without much success. I understand that the server is only up for a few hours a day. I will keep trying User: Jeff

I would strongly suggest you keep all of the decorations in, though maybe list them perhaps at the end of the page of a person, saying, their full name plus orders was . . . . I for one find them useful. Keep up the good work. FearÉIREANN 13:02, 6 Aug 2003 (UTC)

Hi...what was the point of changing the dates in the Earl of Athlone article to day-month? They all go to month-day anyway. Just curious... Adam Bishop 18:57, 6 Aug 2003 (UTC)

-- I changed the date formats to make them consistent with the sources I use to compile the article (Burke's Peerage, Debretts, Alison Weir's Britain's Royal Families) and with the other articles I contributed (Duke of Kent, Princess Marina, etc.). Have the powers that be at Wikipedia made a decision on the proper date format (month-day-year or day-month-year) for articles?

---

Hi Jeff! Apparently i commited a small mistake. The correct link to that Gotha i showed you is...

http://genealogia.sapo.pt/home/

now (16:00 - Central European Time) is working. Cheers, Muriel

--- Thanks Muriel

User: Jeff

Hi. Jeff. I just want to make sure we don't accidentally cover the same ground, I've previously created the Duke of Hamilton, Duke of Abercorn, Duke of Argyll, Duke of Wellington, Duke of Westminster, Earl of Lichfield, Earl of Longford and Earl of Lucan (and a few others possibly), I'm currently working on the Duke of Somerset (a draft version is in my sandbox). Take Care. Mintguy 14:36, 8 Aug 2003 (UTC)

--- Mintguy,

Thanks for the heads up. I had planned to just contribute articles on the dukedoms held by members of the British royal family. I had not planned to create pages on the dukedoms created for the illegitimate sons of James I, Charles I, and Charles II (e.g., duke of Richmond, Lennox, etc.) or the other dukes. BTW, your the pages on the Dukes of Abercon, Westminster, and others are excellent.

Hi. I've kicked of a Wikiproject page at Wikipedia:WikiProject Peerage, so discussion can be lumped together in one place :).

Hi. Regarding Prince Richard, Duke of Gloucester and the brackets you added for his full name, ponder this quote from Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles):

Incorporate surnames if they are known in the opening line of an article, eg, Charles Philip Arthur George Mountbatten-Windsor. But don't automatically presume that a name of a Royal Family is the personal surname of its members. In many cases it isn't. For visual clarity, an article should begin with the form "{royal title} {name} {ordinal if appropriate}, full name (+ surname if known)" with the former in bold (3 's) and the latter in bold italics (5 's). In practice, this means for example an article on Britain's Queen Elizabeth should begin Queen Elizabeth II, Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Windsor ? with the royal title and name in bold and the personal name in bold italics. Using this format makes sure all the naming information is instantly visible with the distinction highlighted through italics. Other information on royal titles should be listed where appropriate in chronological order.

I think it's better if we follow this pattern throughout all royalty, so "Prince Richard, Duke of Gloucester, Richard Alexander Walter George Windsor" -- Jao 12:31, 7 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
Multi-Licensing Guide
Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

Prince Kaya Kuninori

hi Jeff, i see you have a healthy interest in the japanese royalty? i was wondering about the information on Prince Kaya´s father, it says " father, Prince Asakhiko, was...".

Asakhiko? can we verify that, or is there a typo? thanks alot... Antares911 4 July 2005 13:19 (UTC)

Sorry about the type Antares. It should read "Asahiko" not "Asakhiko."

ok, all clear. i just had one more question, do you have any pictures or images of the members of the imperial family, such as Princess Chichibu, or Princess Takamatsu, Prince Hitachi, etc...? that would be really cool. i tried the kunaicho, of course they are not responding... Antares911 8 July 2005 12:56 (UTC)

hi Jeff, thanks for the Princess Takamatsu pics, where did you get those?

the pictures of Princess Kiko, Masako, Mako, etc. have been all removed, do you have any? also for the other ones? if you could tell me where you got the from, or just send them all to me, i´ll gladly do the work for you instead if it is too much of a bother for you. thanks... Antares911 21:17, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:1937-wj5-prince-chichibu.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded, Image:1937-wj5-prince-chichibu.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Image Tagging Image:Takamatsuwedding.jpg

This image may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Takamatsuwedding.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stan 16:23, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Takatsukasa Wedding 1950.jpg

This image may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Takatsukasa Wedding 1950.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stan 16:24, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Takeda Tsuneyoshi.jpg

This image may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Takeda Tsuneyoshi.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stan 16:25, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Empress Teimei 1950.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Empress Teimei 1950.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- Longhair 11:15, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Prince and Princess Kanin Kotohito (1910).jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Prince and Princess Kanin Kotohito (1910).jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- Longhair 14:18, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

image problem

Image Tagging Image:Asaka.jpg

This media may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Asaka.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL-self}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Tawker 03:34, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cadet lines of the imperial family

Jeff, that's a great deal of research you've done there. Where did you find all of that? I would like to learn more specifically about the Takaeda branch. Arigato, Chris 00:11, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging for Image:Higashikuni.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:Higashikuni.gif. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.