Celia Homeford

George V short Citations

you have a point about combining Citations for the same assertion and where that's done keeping the authors listed alphabetically. however, swapping a raw short ref to the sfn template allows the reader to jump to the full Citation. I think looking for a way to combine your points and with the advantages of of sfn or harvnb, etc, would improve the article. maybe starting with sfn where concatenated short Citations are not being used? Duncnbiscuit (talk) 08:56, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

So with your comment about bundling Citations, there is the sfnm template that achieves this, so the article can be improved by swapping the raw short Citations to a mix of sfn and sfnm templates. Allowing readers to jump to the full citation.

I'll leave it to you improve the article in this way. Duncnbiscuit (talk) 09:41, 8 July 2025 (UTC)

Religion of princess

Hi! Did you read the rather vital item in the article about religion before you did this? Just askin´. What isn't in there (though it should be) is that her rejected conversion would have ruled her out in the latest constitutional change to the succession. SergeWoodzing (talk) 21:04, 16 July 2025 (UTC)

That doesn't make her a theologian. Celia Homeford (talk) 07:42, 18 July 2025 (UTC)

Link, if you please, to any guideline of ours which clearly states that religion only is to be listed for theologians. SergeWoodzing (talk) 23:23, 19 July 2025 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Infoboxes#Religion in infoboxes. Celia Homeford (talk) 09:00, 28 July 2025 (UTC)

New pages patrol September 2025 Backlog drive

September 2025 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 September 2025, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:31, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

Who was the previous queen?

Hello again! I would like you please to inform me of the guideline that supports all these reversals of yours. For once, I agree with MAACCMM that it is herllpful for a reader to have immediate access to an answer to section-title question, and also who was next. How is that hot an improvement? SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:07, 23 August 2025 (UTC)

The template parameters are defined at Template:Infobox royalty. Celia Homeford (talk) 07:15, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Template:Current UK monarch

Hi Celia, given your revert at British Empire I thought I should probably explain what the template {{Current UK monarch}} actually does. It’s a little deceptive, but an input of {{Current UK monarch|Charles III}} doesn’t just output that first unnamed parameter verbatim. It takes a variety of different inputs (in this case: Charles III, or name are the most sensible) and all of those inputs will give the same output: the linked name of the current monarch (currently Charles III). When the time comes, the inputs will all stay the same, but the output will change to whatever the name of the new monarch is. I used Charles III as the input primarily because it makes reading the template much easier for us editors looking at the wiki code.

For example, this is a bit easier to read: The current [[Monarch of the UK]] is {{Current UK monarch|Charles III}}.

Than this: The current [[Monarch of the UK]] is {{Current UK monarch|name}}.

But they both generate the same thing. And when the inevitable happens, they will continue to be equivalent, but the new output will be a different person’s name.

(A quirky little side-benefit is that if someone comes along and vandalises the page, putting in something like {{Current UK monarch|Callum Jones}}, it still outputs: Charles III.) — HTGS (talk) 23:55, 30 October 2025 (UTC)

ArbCom 2025 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2025 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 1 December 2025. 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 2025 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, 18 November 2025 (UTC)

Maud Carnegie

I undid an undiscussed move – Maud Carnegie, Countess of Southesk has been the article's title for four years. It was just moved in September of this year to Princess Maud, Countess of Southesk. If there's a dispute over the title, it should be restored to the former per WP:STATUSQUO. Please revert your move. estar8806 (talk) ★ 15:55, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

No. See the talk page. Celia Homeford (talk) 15:58, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

The talk page has no consensus. Hence WP:STATUSQUO. estar8806 (talk) ★ 16:01, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

STATUSQUO at the time of the last discussion. Mesmeilleurs should not have moved the page to Maud Carnegie, Countess of Southesk, against the result of the discussion. Celia Homeford (talk) 16:04, 20 November 2025 (UTC)

Princess Beatrice of the United Kingdom edits

I noticed your edit summary after my recent changes to this page, and I want to clarify that I'm not intentionally introducing piped links. I know they’re unnecessary and I don't deliberately add them. Sometimes, when I'm copy-editing, I remove and reinsert text, and it seems the editor may automatically reformat the links with pipes even though the destination is unchanged. If this has appeared in my edits, it's accidental. I usually edit with VisualEditor rather than source mode, so I hadn't realised this was happening. From now on I'll make a point of checking in source mode to avoid it. I apologise for any confusion — my intention is always to improve pages, not make them untidy. ItsShandog (talk) 12:26, 2 December 2025 (UTC)

Temporary account IP viewer granted

Hello, Celia Homeford. Per your request, your account has been granted temporary-account-viewer rights. You are now able to reveal the IP addresses of individuals using temporary accounts that are not visible to the general public. This is very sensitive information that is only to be used to aid in anti-abuse workflows. Please take a moment to review Wikipedia:Temporary account IP viewer for more information on this user right. It is important to remember:

• You must not share IP address data with someone who does not have the same access permissions unless disclosure is permissible as per guidelines listed at Foundation:Policy:Wikimedia Access to Temporary Account IP Addresses Policy.
• Access must not be used for political control, to apply pressure on editors, or as a threat against another editor in a content dispute. There must be a valid reason to investigate a temporary user. Note that using multiple temporary accounts is not forbidden, so long as they are not used in violation of policies (for example, block or ban evasion).

It is also important to note that the following actions are logged for others to see:

• When a user accepts the preference that enables or disables IP reveal for their account.
• Revealing an IP address of a temporary account.
• Listing the temporary accounts that are associated with one or more IP addresses (using the CIDR notation format).

Remember, even if a user is violating policy, avoid revealing personal information if possible. Use temporary account usernames rather than disclosing IP addresses directly, or give information such as same network/not same network or similar. If you do not want the user right anymore then please ask me or another administrator and it will be removed for you. You may also voluntarily give up access at any time by visiting Special:Preferences. Happy editing! Toadspike [Talk] 15:41, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

Some tips:

1. Please be careful to review the instructions at WP:TAIV and be careful not to disclose information accessed through this tool inappropriately.

2. I suggest setting up talk page archiving (simple instructions here) instead of removing old content from your talk page.

3. If you come across a phone number anywhere on-wiki, after reverting/removing it, you should immediately report it to Oversight by emailing them (WP:OS). Toadspike [Talk] 15:44, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

Page move of Autism and LGBTQ Identities to Autism and LGBTQ people

I was wondering why this page got moved? It didn't really seem like there was a consensus to me, and the ultimately chosen name was only proposed at the very end. Even if you only account for the 5 people who voted after the discussion was reopened, only 3 of them supported the proposed new name, which is 60%, and I'd hardly call that a consensus. Shocksingularity (talk) 19:37, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

That's not my reading of it. It looks to me like Myceteae and Katzrockso oppose and Lp0 on fire, Urthurao, Purplewowies, Trystan, Lastchapter, SomeoneDreaming, MidnightAlarm and Historyday01 support. I admit I misread your comment and was not aware that you explicitly opposed 'people' but that doesn't change the outcome of the discussion. Celia Homeford (talk) 09:01, 9 December 2025 (UTC)

Shetland dialect move request

I am perplexed to see the Shetland dialect requested move closed without moving to Shetland (language). Have you read the alternate proposal? A summary of the votes as I count them:

• Shaetlan: 4 support, 4 oppose, 3 no data.
• Shetland (language): 8 support, 2 oppose, 1 no data
• Shetland language: 4 support, 1 oppose, 5 no data.

Surely Shetland (language) is the clear winner?

The users in favour of Shetland (language) are myself, AjaxSmack, WhirlieWheeter, Myceteae, Jaybainshetland, DankJae, MrAureliusR and Snjorulfr. Against is ZacWill and Vpab15. No data for Frodlekis.

Your summary to not move is based on AjaxSmack's argument, but AjaxSmack supports Shetland (language)!

I hope you would agree with me that Shetland dialect is an inappropriate name for a full language which is recognised as such by international bodies and by the up to date science on the subject?

Could I kindly ask you re-examine the discussion and your chosen outcome? — 🐗 Griceylipper (✉️) 20:01, 3 December 2025 (UTC)

As I have not heard back yet after a few days, I have initiated this:

Move review for Shetland dialect

An editor has asked for a Move review of Shetland dialect. Because you closed the move discussion for this page, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the move review. — 🐗 Griceylipper (✉️) 15:48, 6 December 2025 (UTC)

New pages patrol January–February 2026 Backlog drive

January–February 2026 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
New Pages Patrol is hosting a one-time, two-month experimental backlog drive aimed at reducing the backlog. This will be a combo drive: both articles and redirects will earn points. The drive will run from 1 January to 28 February 2026. The drive is divided into two phases. Participants may take part in either phase or across both phases, depending on availability. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles and redirects patrolled during the drive. Two-month drive-exclusive barnstars will be awarded to eligible participants. Each article review earns 1 point, while each redirect review earns 0.2 points. Streak awards will be granted based on consistently meeting weekly point thresholds. Barnstars will also be awarded for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Interested in participating? Sign up here.
You are receiving this message because you are a New Pages Patrol reviewer. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself from here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:21, 27 December 2025 (UTC)

Holiday deletion

User_talk:Explicit#Coat_of_arms_of_Canada Moxy🍁 17:32, 1 January 2026 (UTC)

Henry VIII introductory paragraph

Greetings, Celia

I recognize that you made changes to my last sentence in the introductory paragraph of the article Henry VIII.
I do apologise for reverting it without notice, but I must highlight that my aims were to compress the first paragraph into a size not exceeding four lines (enough to fully show in the preview which appears when hovering over a link to the article), as in Elizabeth I or Abraham Lincoln, both featured articles.

I structured it in this manner:

First sentence: Outlines his six wives and the Reformation, arguably the two things he is most notable for. There is a brief explanation for Henry's role in the Reformation, which was enacting religious legislation (after all, the article is about him, not the period). I thought that breaking from the pope and bishops and granting the monarch full religious authority in England and Ireland could go under that sentence as well, since all these actions came about by way of passing laws.

Second (final sentence): Outlines two more actions/events he is notable (albeit lesser) for, which came to me as the Renaissance and the expansion of royal power. As with the sentence including the Reformation, I decided to add an explanatory clause as to how he expanded royal power, where the best example for me was turning his claim over Ireland from Lord to King (fully integrating Ireland into England). Would it have been a good idea I add an explanatory footnote or, in brackets, anything showing he was previously its lord? I do notice an issue with how I structured that paragraph, though.

Becoming the Supreme Head of the Church of England was both an act of passing religious legislation and expanding royal power, though I implicitly grouped it with the former since it was more religious than, say, expansionist. That is why it does not get an explicit mention in the introductory paragraph.

I have a few ideas, though. Tell me which you think is best, or come up with your own:
"He presided over the early English Renaissance and expanded royal power over foreign affairs." (This one is simple and straightforward, accurate (Henry was very much interested in foreign policy) and neutral, I like it most.)
"through which he enacted religious legislation such as transferring authority from the pope to the monarch." (This one is too long and detailed, I like it least.)
"He presided over the early English Renaissance and expanded royal power over English religion, government, society, and foreign policy."

Thank you, UltraCobson (talk) 18:44, 10 February 2026 (UTC)

I see nothing obviously wrong with the current introduction. Celia Homeford (talk) 09:31, 17 February 2026 (UTC)

Inquiry regarding the deletion of content on Commonwealth Realms

Hello Celia Homeford,

I am writing to inquire about the specific issues you have with my recent contributions. I have noticed that while my other edits remain untouched, my work regarding the Commonwealth Realms is consistently reverted. I hope this wasn't an oversight as it is quite discouraging to spend hours conducting research and navigating the complexities of Wikipedia’s guidelines only to have my work deleted with very shallow explanations.

If certain elements of my contributions were perceived as factually inaccurate or improperly framed, I believe a more collaborative approach would have been to refine or correct those specific points. Deleting a fellow contributor’s hard work in its entirety—especially after multiple attempts to source and improve the text—feels less like a peer review and more like an unjustified removal of content before a discussion could even begin. This approach is quite unpalatable, as it bypasses the standard cycle that fosters a productive editing environment. I would have expected a more constructive editorial intervention rather than a total removal of the content without prior discussion on the talk page.

Furthermore, I have found the tone of the messages left on my talk page to be unnecessarily harsh. To speak of a ban when I have contributed significantly to this wiki is distressing. While I do not typically produce edits as highly curated as those on the "Commonwealth Realms" article—as I normally use information from verifiable sources with as little intervention as possible—my goal here was simply to provide clarity. As we know, the distinction between the Commonwealth Realms and the Commonwealth of Nations is often blurred in public discourse and poorly articulated on many websites. My intent was to provide a basic, accurate summary to prevent reader confusion, using the source material with as much integrity as possible.

Rather than threatening my standing on the site as if I were an inexperienced user, I would expect a fellow Wikipedian to offer constructive feedback. I believe you could have provided guidance on how to correct the paragraph or addressed the debated terms I used. You might have even provided more factual information or reliable sources to better illustrate this distinction for the readers, instead of completely reverting my work and issuing threats.

I welcome a more constructive dialogue on my talk page if you wish to discuss how we can improve this section together. AnonymouslyFrench.

P.S.I have noted that your deletion aligns closely with the repetitive reverts performed by DrKay. This pattern makes it difficult to establish a genuine community consensus and gives the impression of coordinated article ownership. I would prefer to engage in an open discussion on the Talk page where all viewpoints are considered based on their merit and sourcing. AnonymouslyFrench (talk) 19:41, 10 March 2026 (UTC)

There is nothing uncivil in my talk page comment. I became aware of the edits to Commonwealth realm not through any actions of DrKay but because that article is on my watchlist and your lengthy aggressive uncivil edit summary was prominently displayed there. Celia Homeford (talk) 09:10, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Marriage of Henry and Mary

The wiki page for Henry IV states he married Mary at Rochford Hall, thr page for Mary states they married at Arundel Castle. Is this correct or is error on Henry IV page? ~2026-86717-3 (talk) 09:44, 19 April 2026 (UTC)

Henry's article is cited, whereas Mary's isn't. So, I've removed Arundel from Mary's article. Celia Homeford (talk) 11:35, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying. ~2026-86717-3 (talk) 00:20, 25 April 2026 (UTC)

New pages patrol May 2026 Backlog drive

May 2026 Backlog Drive | New pages patrol
On 1 May 2026, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of articles patrolled. Barnstars will also be granted for re-reviewing articles previously reviewed by other patrollers during the drive. Each review will earn 1 point. Interested in taking part? Sign up here.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:23, 29 April 2026 (UTC)

New Page Patrol Newsletter - May 2026

Hello Celia Homeford,

New Page Review queue November 2025 - May 2026

Backlog update

At the time of this message, there are 15,282 articles and 32,951 redirects awaiting review.

After the January–February drive the article backlog was reduced to 15,179 articles and the redirect backlog to 19,053 respectively. Great job! However, both queues are growing rapidly and any additional reviews are highly appreciated.

2024 and 2025 NPP Awards

JTtheOG was selected as the NPP reviewer of the year for both 2024 and 2025, for reviewing the most articles amongst all reviewers.

Hey man im josh and MPGuy2824 won the Redirect Ninja Master Award for 2024 and 2025 respectively, for reviewing the most redirects.

Overall in 2024, one Platinum, two Gold, eight Silver, 12 Bronze and 45 Iron Barnstars were awarded. Additionally, 66 reviewers got the NPP barnstar for doing more than 100 reviews through the year. In 2025, one Platinum, ten Silver, 13 Bronze and 38 Iron Barnstars were awarded. Additionally, 38 reviewers got the NPP barnstar for doing more than 100 reviews through the year.

BoyTheKingCanDance, Rosiestep, SunDawn, and Vanderwaalforces were inducted into the NPP Hall of Fame for having two separate years of 2,000+ article reviews.

January–February backlog drive

The experimental two-month long backlog drive concluded with 183 reviewers patrolling over 27,761 articles and 35,309 redirects, earning over 36,836 points. Congratulations to JTtheOG, who achieved first place with 6,484.6 points in this drive.

May backlog drive

An article-only backlog drive is currently underway. We are hoping to make a big dent in the backlog. You can read more about it or join at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/Backlog drives/May 2026.

PageTriage

An attempt was made to get the New Pages Feed to sort by date marked as reviewed instead of date created. However we had to revert it due to bugs. We may try again in the future. You can subscribe to the Phabricator ticket if you're interested in following along.

Reminders:

• You can access live chat with patrollers on the New Page Patrol Discord.
• Consider adding the project discussion page to your watchlist.
• To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:37, 14 May 2026 (UTC)

Articles for Creation backlog drive

Hello Celia Homeford:

WikiProject Articles for creation is holding a month long Backlog Drive in August!
The goal of this drive is to reduce the backlog of unreviewed drafts to less than a month of outstanding reviews from the current 3+ months. Bonus points will be given for reviewing drafts that have been waiting more than 30 days. The drive is running from 1 August 2026 through 31 August 2026.

You may find Category:AfC pending submissions by age or other categories and sorting helpful.

Barnstars will be given out as awards at the end of the drive.
There is a backlog of over 5000 pages, so start reviewing drafts. We're looking forward to your help! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:37, 19 July 2026 (UTC)

• If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.