I'm not familiar with Microsoft Picture It, and have no idea why it's trying to do that, unless MPI is supposed to open XML files. I think it's working as normal in RSS readers like Bloglines. Joe D (t) 01:13, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

The image is incorrect. The text below the Bangladesh official emblem is in some other language, NOT in Bangla. Here is the actual flag from Flags of the world site, there are other sites where the flag can be found. So I am removing the reference and the image need to be renamed. Thanks. --Ragib 01:24, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hi Craig, I know that this is a everyone edits web encyclopedia, but I find that some members are using a web page to further their own views. Is there a way of making an NPOV warning site locked. I don't feel that locking the site using one person or another persons final web page edit is fair. I'm proposing that we use the basic 3 liner explanation for this article I am talking about and lock the article. Cause many of us don't have time to return daily to re-do edits that some people seem to spend their whole day doing or un-doing. Extremely biased points of view are being used, which many editiors won't see unless they know much about the topic that the article states. VOO KAP 21:03, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thank you very much for my welcome! :) Laconic 21:26, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Nice to see another British person not allowing generally accepted patterns of sleep get in the way of their Wikipedia enjoyment... -- Francs2000 | 02:25, 25 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I have it in mind to nominate you for Adminship. You seem to be doing some important tasks like welcoming new members, image copyright patrolling etc for which adminship helps. Would you accept? David | Talk 13:55, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for agreeing. Your nomination is currently on WP:RFA - many voters will wait for you to indicate acceptance and add your answers to the adminship questions. David | Talk 28 June 2005 09:46 (UTC)

Hi Craig, have you seen someone has objected to and someone else removed the picture at Buckingham Palace which you uploaded. The permission looks OK to me, but could you see if it could be altered to public domain it would be a shame to loose it completely. Regards Giano | talk 28 June 2005 06:12 (UTC)

So, is this re-instatement legal? About time this page found its way onto the front page - energy for a campaign? Giano | talk 20:58, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support for my adminship. Hey, wait a minute - you never voted! Well, that's ok, you've been very supportive in other ways. Cheers, -Willmcw June 28, 2005 21:57 (UTC)

Hi Craig, Fixed the problem - sorry to have trouble you. --Fir0002 June 29, 2005 01:31 (UTC)

Hi, Craigy. I only do not see problems with the second paragraph. The nature of her designs being plain and simple does not speak for a general objective opinion, but for your own. While it might be the opinion of many people, it is still not a fact, but an opinion. Public opinion can be taken as a fact, but you must provide evidence that public opinion is like this or like that. Simply saying people didn't mind her design doesn't seem very convincing of its being so. The same goes for people being annoyed at her. Hope I have helped. :-) --Golias_Miranda June 29, 2005 01:41 (UTC)

If you are going to check on images, it is polite to sign your items rather than post anomynously, and that the listed source is well established as public domain, dating from 1905. jimfbleak 30 June 2005 04:39 (UTC)

That's an impressive user page you've got there. Deb 30 June 2005 21:01 (UTC)

I'll have to see if the image is okay on the French Wikipedia.. WhisperToMe 1 July 2005 02:56 (UTC)

Congratulations! It's my pleasure to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 4 July 2005 15:38 (UTC)

Hi Craigy144:

Thanks for the welcome message, especially for the tip on how to sign with the tilde thingies.

Nesbit 5 July 2005 04:30 (UTC)

Hello, I noticed you edited my Empress Matilda page to redirect to the Empress Maud article little more than an hour after I created it. I want to forestall any potential edit warring over this by making the following case for the use of Matilda in the relevant articles:

• Although I am by no means the most widely read person in the world, nor am I a classically trained historian (of Britain or anywhere else), nonetheless, in all the reading I've done of the Norman era I had never seen a reference to Maud until I read the King Stephen article a couple of days ago in Wikipedia.
• Virtually every link and reference in the article refers to Empress Matilda (my Matilda article is a virtual cut-and-paste copy of the Maud article, changing the name solely in the narrative where necessary).
• Virtually all of the various language versions of the article use derivations of Matilda as the name.
• Many articles in Wikipedia pertaining to the era use Matilda (even though they link to the Empress Maud article, no doubt by default absent the previously unavailable Empress Matilda article).
• In the internet search I did, there were approximately 50% more hits on Empress Matilda (≈34,000) than on Empress Maud (≈24,000) (NB these figures are somewhat skewed as in the lower order of percentage of quality hits, many links will be presented due to hits on individual, unconcatenated words of the search string).
• Of the Empress Maud hits in the preceding search a great deal of the hits linked to articles that were either at Wikipedia or were clearly derived from Wikipedia.

If you have any serious concerns about the use of Matilda vs Maud, or if you could cite authoritative references indicating that any of the foregoing is misinformed, please let me know. Otherwise, I would be happy to collaborate on any of this to the extent of my limited knowledge, beginning with my intent to rework pertinent articles to indicate Matilda (and link to Empress Matilda) in the near future. I look forward to your thoughts. Duckecho (Talk) 5 July 2005 20:44 (UTC)

Whew! Then we're of a mind. I lapsed because A) I wasn't anticipating a redirect edit (particularly so quickly), and 2) I wanted to wait a bit to see if there would be any input from editors with entrenched alternate views. Although I have hundreds of edits on Wiki, my focus for the last three months has been on the Terri Schiavo article, and I am only just now beginning to branch out into other areas where I have a little knowledge and/or experience.

Here's what I accomplished this afternoon/evening:

• un redirected Empress Matilda (as discussed).
• redirected Empress Maud.
• found and reredirected Queen Matilda.
• Maud-ified the following articles:

• template:Normans
• King Stephen
• Henry V
• William Adelin
• Geoffrey of Anjou
• Henry I
• Robert of Gloucester
• Robert of Gloucester disambiguation page

Doing all of that, of course, I wound up with several other tasks. I ran across questionable or just plain wrong information on several pages and had to do some research and edits to clear it all up. I'm going to have to start a page for Isabella of Anjou, William Adelin's wife since she had at least some noteriety in her life besides being a child-widow. My dad used to say that research was like pulling a fishhook out of a jar—you pull up one and there are five more hanging on. Cheers. Duckecho (Talk) 6 July 2005 02:15 (UTC)

Have I corrected the flaw? This is an engraving published in a book in 1771. PD-art should be the category. I couldn't understand the covert instructions on the label you added to my talk page, and I only noticed them today. --Wetman 6 July 2005 04:56 (UTC)

Thanks for all your hard work in Wikipedia! I've been doing RC patrol and tagging delete quite often, and I see you've been hard at work deleting them all. Just one quick question (maybe this is appropriate for the help desk if you don't know the answer...)- I note on some pages that I tagged for deletion you mark "and the only contributer was Flcelloguy...". Why doesn't the original IP edit show up? I've noticed this in the past as well- I tagged a page, and decided to leave {{test}} on the IP page, and there was no history (except for my edit)! Hmm... interesting. Anyways, thanks! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 6 July 2005 23:23 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll put the question on the help desk. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 6 July 2005 23:29 (UTC)

Thanks for joining in on the fun at WP:PUI :) kmccoy (talk) 7 July 2005 21:07 (UTC)

You removed a bunch of pictures from the "to be deleted" section of PUI, but they're not removed from their articles and the images are still on the project, but their description page is empty (except for the picture itself). Is this some sort of bug? kmccoy (talk) 7 July 2005 21:39 (UTC)

Holy cow. Awesome job sorting through the Adam Carr pictures. I kept looking at that list and shuddering.  :) kmccoy (talk) 02:41, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. When you are moving images from phase I to phase II, are you tagging them where they're used in articles? Thanks. :) kmccoy (talk) 19:01, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's kind of the point of having phase I and phase II. :P kmccoy (talk) 19:22, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, considering she was arrested just last month, I think it's safe to assume that her profession remains unchanged. She was born in 1959, but frankly I can't be bothered at this time to hunt down her exact birthdate. She is also publishing a "tell-all book" detailing that she took up this line of work to support her sister's career. The book alone should provide plenty of meat for an article. (unsigned comment by User talk:220.238.84.167 12:04, July 10, 2005)

I was wondering if you'd mind if I borrowed some of the elements of code from your userpage, I have already requested permission from User:ClockworkSoul and since you seem to have done some cool things with the code was hoping you'd give permission. Please leave any reply on my usertalk page since I will not be watching this page. Thanks. Jtkiefer 20:31, July 10, 2005 (UTC)

hey craigy. glad to be here. i read alot of articles on the british monarchy and looking forward to reading more.

hey craigy. glad to be here. i read alot of articles on the british monarchy and looking forward to reading more.

Why did you change the date format on Louis XVI of France? It is against Wikipedia policy to change dates from whatever way they were put in, just as it is with the use of American English or British English, subject to relevant style of usage in different geographic locations. It also made sense in a European article in English to use the date format used by English speakers in Europe, as opposed to the mm/dd/yy format that is very much minority usage. Please leave dates as written. People can pick version they want to see by setting their preferences, once every date is Wikified. FearÉIREANNFile:Tricolour.gifFile:Animated-union-jack-01.gif SOLIDARITY WITH THE PEOPLE OF LONDON\^(caint) 23:02, 12 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Not only is that image (Image:Wazn wahdah sayirah.PNG) not listed on Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images, but it very clearly includes source and thus copyright status. Thanks. Hyacinth 01:08, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I definitely understand how these things happen. Hyacinth 20:03, 13 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm the admin who maintains WP:RfD. The reason I was waiting to delete Highly-educated, high-class, elitism. and Liberal, tolerant socialism. was that they didn't seem to fall under one of the general criteria for speedy deletion, and they definitely were not one of the four extra kinds of redirect candidates for speedy deletion. That being the case, policy says that pages need to stay there for at least a week before they are deleted.

BTW, if you have extra energy, I used to archive WP:AN and sub-pages (WP:AN/I and WP:AN/3RR), but I just can't deal with it any more, and we need someone to take that job over. You interested? Noel (talk) 23:17, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No problem on the delay replying, and no problem on the deletion - just wanted to provide information for the future. I obviously sympathize with the time bit! As for help, you might try User:SimonP - he offered to help with the archiving, so maybe he has some time. Noel (talk) 15:31, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi you listed two images on my talk page questioning copyright. On both of them they could have the tag (already used on similar pages:

This image displays an insignia of a rank in UK Army. International law requires for combatant identification and copyrighting rank insignias violates international law, hence this image cannot be copyrighted and belongs to public domain However, both images have been superceded and can be deleted, but I have no idea how to do this. I will try speedy deletion first. Dainamo 23:48, 14 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Those images may well display insignia of the British Army. International law on the insignia themselves is irrelevant. Images carry a separate copyright. David Newton 08:10, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You may have noticed *mega sigh* that yet another user has dragged up the lets rename Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom farce, only 9 days after the last vote ended. (What next? A vote every day on the issue next?) I have proposed instead this vote on Talk:Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom page:

That Wikipedia stop wasting time on endless revoting on this goddamned issue and ban votes on this issue from this page for at least six months.

Hopefully this will put this nonsense to bed for at least 6 months. Your (hopefully final) vote would be welcome. FearÉIREANN \^(caint) 21:10, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My understanding is that you only have one postnominal per order. A KBE is no longer just a CBE, so he uses KBE instead. john k 15:32, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You've added something described as the Scottish Executive Arms to the Scottish Executive article. The Scottish Executive does not in fact have its own arms. Rather, as it exercises its functions on behalf of Her Majesty, it uses the Royal Arms (the Scottish version thereof). The Executive's "logo", inherited from the old Scottish Office is also a representation of the Royal Arms, minus the flags and "lion with toasting fork". The First Minister is about to start using a version of this logo with the words "FIRST MINISTER OF SCOTLAND" within the circle. Acts of the Scottish Parliament are also printed with the Royal Arms, and larger Scottish Statutory Instruments use the lion and toasting fork as does the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. [1]--George Burgess 09:55, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, the anon who uploaded Sourcefire also uploaded a bunch of stuff that reads like it came from the same source. -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 20:15, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

A possible copy right violation was placed on this page. I copied this base text directly out of one of my internal company's reports -- which very likely could have something taken from a City of Denver's documents in part or whole. Overall, though, this wiki entry is a broad accummulation of hundreds of our sources and several of our authors. Can your program identify as such so it can be corrected? Pls respond to its talk page. Your comments appreciated. Thx.

<<On Wikipedia, I think we usually add the prefix 'His Grace' rather than 'The Most Noble' to ducal articles. Please be sure to add the correct prefix to peerage pages. Thanks>>

The prefix I used is correct. Most Noble is the correct higher style for dukes where their name is listed in full. You will find that form and that form alone used in Royal Warrants and formal official documents. His Grace is a lower style used commonly and in the context of His Grace the [Duke] of [Title]. Wiki uses the format [Forenames][Surnames][title]. You can see an example of the correct use of both style if you google “English Patent of Arms to a Corporate Body, 1992”

Taking the official usage and considering we use the equivalents (The Right Honourable) in front of others I see no option but to be correct and consistent in this matter. [See the Peerage talk page why we came to this view]

Craigy, just seen you've been adding article for the Dukes of St Albans. That's great but you have been using the style for a marquess (The Most Honourable) not the style for Dukes. I have amended.Alci12

Hi. When you create an article about a peer (such as in this case Alan Lennox-Boyd, 1st Viscount Boyd of Merton could you create redirects such as Alan Lennox-Boyd. Otherwise it could potentially lead to duplicate articles if people aren't careful. (in this case Alan Lennox-Boyd had about 5 articles redlinking to it). Thanks, Morwen - Talk 18:47, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've done a minor typo edit on that article and one removal. It is almost never acceptable in the UK to keep using a rank as low as Lt. after retirement. Usually it's only for Major (sometimes Captain) and above.

Hi! I was going through PUI doing some cleanup (a bit behind since my laptop's hard drive failed), and noticed that the first few pictures from the group had been deleted. I just wanted to make sure you're not in the process of editing that section, so we don't duplicate efforts. kmccoy (talk) 22:09, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I'll leave that section to you, then, and I'll move on to doing more phase I to phase II moves. :) kmccoy (talk) 22:14, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for my faulty revert on the QM page - I wanted to include your arms change automatically but didn't do it probably (come to think of it it probably wasn't possible to do it automatically as I wanted to revert to a state before your change but to incorporate your change). Ben Finn 21:45, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I have not been editing recently. My work with Ubuntu Linux and my job serach has basically killed my free time. Burgundavia (✈ take a flight?) 05:56, July 26, 2005 (UTC)

See my 1911 EB article, Waldegrave family. The articles should perhaps be merged, or the EB one used to create daughter articles for Earl Waldegrave.

In marking this up, I came across an apparent error in William Cavendish, 4th Duke of Devonshire or Thomas Pelham-Holles, 1st Duke of Newcastle-upon-Tyne in the prime minister table: who succeeded whom?

The 2nd Earl W "was first lord of the treasury for five days in June 1757" -- didn't this make him technically the PM?--FourthAve 01:25, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Waldegrave was PM as he kissed hands. As to the other question, Newcastle was PM either side of Devonshire and that should be reflected. The PM list is somewhat odd tbh as it seems to miss out people considered PM in all major sources. eg Lord Bath in 1746.

Alci12

Thank you for addressing my issue. Would you mind sending me an email? Since we are like minded, I'd like to discuss some other Peerage topics with you.

Michael_Moore@HereditaryTitles.com

Hello, I'm wondering why you didn't do anything with this image when you removed it from PUI. It sat there for over thirty days with no objections to it being deleted, yet it was kept. - SimonP 18:17, August 1, 2005 (UTC)

Hey there Craigy. It's been a while since you welcomed me, but I don't think I ever took the time to thank you. Thus, I am here to do so at this very instant. Thank you for welcoming me to the World of Wikipedia, and giving me something that I can use as an excuse to whittle away precious hours of my youth, yet feel I am part of something larger. As a newcomer, I made some bad choices, but in the spirit of don't bite the newcomers, I still felt welcomed. I'm sure you're used to getting thanks from people all the time, but you honestly made a difference in the (wiki)life of this user. Thanks again, and happy editing, Sunglasses at night. 04:59, 2 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Craigy! I admire the images of coats of arms of our respective royal houses you added to the topics. And I want to ask, wich sources you use to find that pictures, and what site can you recommend me, where can i find that images. Thank you and sorry for my terrible English, because i'm russian :)

I suppose it would be a better idea to take out the links, but if I recall correctly, Prince and Princess Michael of Kent do not carry out royal duties, but they are nevertheless on the template. Sure, they have represented the Queen at several foreign events, but they do not do it on a regular basis. --Matjlav 11:52, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Can you provide a source for this?--Jimbo Wales 14:19, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I see you've been doing some mop and bucket work with a deleted image. I wasn't aware the image was going to be deleted until I saw your edit summaries. Do you happen to know why the image was deleted? Was it a source/copyright issue? If so, I have several of Penshaw Monument taken by moi that could be inserted in its place. The JPS 09:45, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. I've uploaded a couple of images to the commons and added them to the relevant pages. The JPS 13:49, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, Craig,

Thanks for your support on my RFA. I just got my computer back from having its hard drive replaced and I'm busily installing software on it -- I'll be back to PUI once I get that computer working correctly. :) kmccoy (talk) 15:56, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's not up for deletion again, but I want to tell you that I am going to save it as a jpg image. Is that ok with you? Zscout370 (Sound Off) 16:09, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Привет, Крейг. Я немного вас не понял. Но, я думаю, вы окажете мне огромную услугу, если сможете найти этот источник, этот сайт, с которого вы загружали гербы для королевских семей Испании (royspa.jpg), Люксембурга, и так далее. Я буду благодарен, если вы найдёте этот сайт. А герб для герцогини Корнуольской я брал с сайта "The Royal Archive". Но почему-то, к сожалению, этот сайт уже несколько дней не работает.

UPD: Крейг, мне кажется, что и герб Андре Массена (Image:André_Masséna_coa.png) вы брали на том же сайте, что и гербы королевских домов. По стилю герба можно найти сходства. Я буду очень благодарен, если бы вы смогли вспомнить или найти тот сайт, где вы находили эти гербы. Спасибо заранее.

Craigy, greatest thanks to you! My French is not bad, so it's not a problem. Thanks again! Леонид Лишневецкий 1:58, 5 August 2005 (UTC +3:00)

Category:Move to Wikibooks, Category:Move to Wikiquote, Category:Move to Wikisource, and Category:Copy to Wiktionary are currently tagged as having backlogs. Do you still have a bot which could clean these out? -- Beland 01:31, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that should have been directed to Dmcdevit. I suppose it's good that I'm cleaning out this confusing table...thanks for your quick reply. -- Beland 01:52, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings. You are receiving this boilerplate notice because you have a task on your Cleanup Taskforce desk that has not been updated for over 30 days. If you do not wish to complete this task please assign it to another Cleanup Taskforce member who has space on their desk. If you do not wish to receive cleanup requests on your desk any more, you may remove yourself from the membership list. If you or someone else has completed the task, you can close it by adding {{cleanup taskforce closed|ARTICLE NAME HERE}} to the article's talk page and removing it from Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce. If you have a status update (e.g. you intend to work on it in the future) or need help, you can update the collaboration page (which is linked from your desk). Also feel free to reply to the person who left you this message. -- Beland 06:02, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK now I'm confused, Beland. Why do I have a cleanup reminder on my talk page now? Craigy (talk) 06:08, August 7, 2005 (UTC)

Your desk is User:Craigy144/Desk, and it has two issues which have been pending since May 24, 2005. I think we assume people add their desk to a regularly-checked watchlist, and thus know when things are added to it. -- Beland 06:13, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ah right, I see. Sorry, I thought it was meant for someone else like before (and I haven't had any sleep). I'm thinking about removing myself actually, I simply haven't got the time to be part of it anymore. Craigy (talk) 06:17, August 7, 2005 (UTC)

Ive been going back through and putting copyright notices on all the pictures (im almost done with most of them). have i left anything out? nbgoku August 16, 2005 (UTC -6)

Just floated by your updates to the Bedford dukes. You've done a great job of digging out those post nominals which can be a pain to confirm. Only one slight doubt. I have no idea where wiki opinion is on this one but socially people don't tend to list hon degrees as post nominals. I don't feel strongly on this issue but just thought we ought to have some sense of a policy one way or the other. Alci12