Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Duke of la Vega, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:38, 20 April 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Mr. D. E. Mophon. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Duke of la Vega".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the ((db-afc)), ((db-draft)), or ((db-g13)) code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Squeeps10 ^{Talk to me}_{My edits} 14:54, 17 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A tag has been placed on Princess Maria-Olympia of Greece and Denmark requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at Articles for deletion. When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. PatGallacher (talk) 22:55, 25 August 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Brain freeze (psychology). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 October 14#Brain freeze (psychology) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Sangdeboeuf (talk) 08:10, 14 October 2020 (UTC)Reply[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) 02:31, 24 November 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited David Stuart (structural biologist), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page First degree.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:14, 1 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article Robin Fellgett has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unless the Order of the Bath is an award which automatically denotes notability, fails WP:GNG and WP:NPOL.

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. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:32, 24 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Prince Jaime, Count of Bardi 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/Prince Jaime, Count of Bardi 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.

scope_creep^Talk 20:09, 5 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello! As per the specific reading of the lettres patent, Sigvard, Carl Johan & Lennart Bernadotte's personal title of Prince Bernadotte was for them and their wives. They are called Prince and Princess Bernadotte several times in the document. Best wishes, --SergeWoodzing (talk) 11:47, 14 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi SergeWoodzing, this is the literall translation into English of of the lettres patent:

"By extension of the provisions of the grand-ducal decree of April 2, 1892, HRH Madame the Grand Duchess has, according to the decision of July 2, 1951 and by identity of reasons, admitted in the nobility of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg the sons of H.M. Gustave-Adolphe King of Sweden, Sigvard Oscar Frederik Prince Bernadotte, born June 7, 1907, Carl Johan Arthur Prince Bernadotte, born October 31 1916, the nephew of H.M. King Gustave-Adolphe, Gustaf Lennart Nicolas Paul Prince Bernadotte, born on May 8, 1909, their wives and their descendants of both sexes, born and unborn of legitimate marriage. By the same decision the title of Count and Countess of Wisborg was conferred to be worn by the above-named and by all their legitimate descendants, in all places and in all acts, in accordance with the letters patents granted to the Luxembourg Palace on July 2, 1951. July 18, 1951."

As you can read, only Sigvard, Carl Johan and Lennart Bernadotte are styled and acknowledged in this official document with the title of "Prince Bernadotte". Although, not only them, but also their wives and descendants are admitted to the nobility of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg under the title of Count and Countess of Wisborg. But it can be concluded that this lettres patent does not mention at all that their wives are also "Princess Bernadotte". Mr. D. E. Mophon (talk) 21:25, 14 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In all due respect, that is only a shortened version published as an announcement in a government gazette. You have missed this and this. Do you read French? If not (I have added the bold text):

"We Charlotte by the grace of God Grand Duchess of Luxembourg Duchess of Nassau etc. etc. etc.

To all present and to come: Salutation:

Whereas the decision taken on the second day of April, eighteen hundred and ninety-two by Our revered and unforgettable Grandfather, Grand Duke Adolph, admitting into the Nobility of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg His Nephew Oscar Charles August Prince Bernadotte as well as Princess Ebba Henriette Bernadotte and their descendants of both sexes, born and to be born of legal marriage, giving them additionally the title of Count and Countess of Wisborg, to be borne by them and by all their legitimate descendants, in all places and in all matters;

We being inspired by the intentions that guided Our Grandfather in His lofty decision and wishing, for the same reasons, to give a public sign of Our affection and Our lofty benevolence toward two sons of His Majesty Gustaf Adolf, King of Sweden, being Sigvard Oscar Frederick Prince Bernadotte, born June 7, 1907, and Carl Johan Arthur Prince Bernadotte, born 31 October 1916, as well as toward the nephew of His Majesty King Gustaf Adolf, being Gustaf Lennart Nicolaus Paul Prince Bernadotte, born May 8, 1909;

With regard to Article 40 of the Constitution;

As reported by Our Prime Minister, President of the Government, and after deliberation by the Government in Council;

HAVE ORDERED AND HEREBY ORDER:

We admit into the Nobility of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg Our said dear cousin Sigvard Oscar Frederick Prince Bernadotte and His wife, Our said dear cousin Carl Johan Arthur Prince Bernadotte and His wife, Our said dear cousin Gustaf Lennart Nicolaus Paul Prince Bernadotte and His wife as well as their descendants of both sexes, born and to be born of legal marriage, and We confer additionally upon Them the title of Count and Countess of Wisborg, to be borne by Them and by all Their legitimate descendants, in all places and in all matters;

And so that said Princes and Princesses Bernadotte and Their descendants enjoy without disorder in the dignity of Nobles of Our Grand Duchy of Luxembourg and the title of Count and Countess of Wisborg which We have conferred upon them, they use a coat of arms as described and fashioned in the aforementioned order of 2 April 1892: Divided in three by a cross patty of yellow reversed; on the left, divided in three in bands of blue, white and red with a withy of yellow bound and taped in same; on the right, on blue a bridge of three arches white, supporting two towers and moving on a river of same, surmounted by a black eagle grasping yellow lightening horizontally and accompanied above by seven stars of same, forming the constellation of the Great Bear; below, on blue, a white Paschal Lamb passing; the escutcheon surmounted by the ducal coronet such as it actually is borne by the Princes and Princesses Bernadotte, which for their descendants shall be replaced by a coronet of a Count;

We have delivered these Letters Patent.

We ask all Sovereigns and Princes and hereby summon and enjoin the Courts and Tribunals, authorities and public officials and officers of Our Grand Duchy, both for the present and the future, to recognize the said Princes and Princesses Bernadotte as well as Their legitimate descendants as belonging to the nobility of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg and to attribute Them the titles and qualifications which they own by virtue of this.

And so that this is something firm and stable for ever, We have signed this and have affixed to it the seal of Our arms.

Our Prime Minister, President of the Government, is responsible for the execution of this decree.

Palace of Luxembourg, the second of July nineteen fifty-one.

CHARLOTTE.

The Prime Minister President of the Government

P. Dupong."

It would be nice if you'd be so kind and reverse yourself now. Best wishes, --SergeWoodzing (talk) 09:31, 16 February 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please stop changing the CWTS Leiden rankings for UK universities using a different scale from the PP (top 10%) specified in the infobox documentation. The changes you are making contradict the consensus given in the documentation. Robminchin (talk) 00:01, 2 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I literally took it from the source!!! Mr. D. E. Mophon (talk) 00:03, 2 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The source has three possible scales: P, P (top 10%) and PP (top 10%), referring to the total research output, total research output in the top 10% by citations, and proportion of research output in the top 10% by citations. The PO (top 10%) scale is the one specified in the docs, but you have been substituting in the P scale – which is basically a ranking of universities by size. You need to sort by the PP (top 10%) column by clicking on it or selecting it in the "order by" drop-down menu. Robminchin (talk) 00:09, 2 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Okay, thanks for the explanation. I get it now. Mr. D. E. Mophon (talk) 00:46, 2 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Rocky Tuan, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page ICRS.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:17, 27 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello again and thank you for your good work! The wording of Oscar Bernadotte's lettre of patent is identical with those of his grandnephews Sigvard, Carl Johan and Lennart when it comes to the style. Thus, it is not 100% OK to differentiate between the use of the title by the four men and their wives, "created" versus "styled". Oscar II didn't "create" the title either for his son Oscar but gave it to him just as a courtesy title with no status in Swedish nobility or royalty, where is has never been included. In my opinion, and that of Professor Bramstång, Prince Bernadotte is a title in the nobility of Luxembourg, granted equally to Oscar, Sigvard, Carl Johan, Lennart and their wives. There is no other way to read the full text of the documents. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 10:51, 27 March 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please stop adding MOS:PUFFERY like "prominent" to describe the organizations that rank universities. Also, at University of Groningen you replace "three" with "several". This sort of promotional editing is discouraged. Thank you for your consideration. Magnolia677 (talk) 11:47, 16 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Prince Ranieri, Duke of Castro, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Duke of Castro.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 26 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

On 19 June 2021, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Vekuii Rukoro, which you updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. PFHLai (talk) 08:46, 19 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Count of Paris, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Henri, Count of Paris.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 05:59, 21 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, articles should not be moved, as you did to Jaime de Bourbon de Parme, without good reason. They should have a name that is both accurate and intuitive. Wikipedia has some guidelines in place to help with this. Generally, a page should only be moved to a new title if the current name doesn't follow these guidelines. Also, if a page move is being discussed, consensus needs to be reached before anybody moves the page. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Celia Homeford (talk) 10:19, 2 September 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please study cited sources before making changes that go against them, such as you did at Prince Bernadotte. Cited sources become polluted when article text is altered ib a manner that no longer coincides. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 07:53, 24 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are aware as per previous discussion on this page that your latest edits to that article were disruptive. Please don't do anything like that again! --SergeWoodzing (talk) 17:23, 24 October 2021 (UTC)Reply[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) 00:28, 23 November 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please don't change the format of dates, as you did to Louis Mountbatten, 1st Earl Mountbatten of Burma. As a general rule, if an article has evolved using predominantly one format, the dates should be left in the format they were originally written in, unless there are reasons for changing it based on strong national ties to the topic. Please also note that Wikipedia does not use ordinal suffixes (e.g., st, nd, th), articles, or leading zeros on dates.

For more information about how dates should be written on Wikipedia, please see this page.

If you have any questions about this, ask me on my talk page, or place ((helpme)) on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Enjoy your time on Wikipedia. Thank you. DuncanHill (talk) 19:13, 8 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for pointing out that you reverted the edit because of the format of birth and death dates that was changed. This was not my intention, but was accidentally changed by me. I've added some text, but have now left the DMY format of birth and death dates intact in the article as desired by you. Mr. D. E. Mophon (talk) 22:31, 8 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

See talk page. Robin S. Taylor (talk) 19:40, 17 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:BaoQuocHuanChuongR.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for discussion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 11:46, 18 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Louis Mountbatten, 1st Earl Mountbatten of Burma. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

1. Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
2. Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. You must supply a reference, Common knowledge that Governors-General are styled "Excellency" is not a source

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Meat Loaf, you may be blocked from editing. Sundayclose (talk) 21:00, 21 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I made only one adjustment and deleted text once because it was POV. Immediately I get this aggressive message, stop with this obsessive behavior of unfriendly messaging! Mr. D. E. Mophon (talk) 21:28, 21 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is the only time I will give you this warning. If I remove something from my talk page, do not restore it. Read WP:OWNTALK and WP:HARASS. It is serious policy violation to muck around in someone's user space. Do it again and you'll be explaining it at WP:ANI. Again, only warning. Sundayclose (talk) 23:27, 21 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I will notice your rude behavior at WP:ANI. Mr. D. E. Mophon (talk) 23:31, 21 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

My last message here. By all means, please go to WP:ANI. But I suggest reading WP:BOOMERANG first. Sundayclose (talk) 23:37, 21 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

STOP POSTING YOUR RUDE COMMENTS HERE! Mr. D. E. Mophon (talk) 23:43, 21 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Whenever someone suggests that you should read WP:BOOMERANG first, they do not worry about you - they worry about themselves :-). The typical pattern comes down to "Go to WP:ANI but... it is better not to, because you may get into trouble". But your adversary does want you to get into trouble. The only problem is that this is a double-edged sword which can put your adversary into trouble as well.:-) 85.193.252.19 (talk) 03:59, 22 January 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi there - Wikipedia relies on reliable sources to verify information, especially about living people. You didn't provide a source for your changes to the Boudewijn de Geer article, and I couldn't find one either. If you have a reliable source please let me know and we can change the article. Please let me know if you have any questions. GiantSnowman 13:16, 19 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

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

I noticed your recent edit to Deborah James (journalist) does not have an edit summary. You can use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or provide a description of what the edit changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits a summary may be quite brief.

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. With a Wikipedia account you can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary. Thanks! ‑‑Neveselbert (talk · contribs · email) 18:50, 5 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Charles Scicluna, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Civil law.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:25, 13 June 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Arie Pais, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Barneveld.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:19, 5 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Aalborg University, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dark blue.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:22, 25 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Principality of Orange-Nassau, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Principality of Orange-Nassau until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. 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.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[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) 01:12, 29 November 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please do not use styles that are nonstandard, unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Per MOS:POINTS, acronyms should not usually contain periods. DrKay (talk) 22:38, 10 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Carl von Bismarck. Thank you. DMacks (talk) 09:34, 25 February 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Mr. D. E. Mophon,

Thank you for creating National Order of Merit (Tunisia).

I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:

Please cite sources inline when creating new articles.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and begin it with ((Re|Edward-Woodrow)). Remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Edward-Woodrow :) _[talk] 19:53, 8 September 2023 (UTC)Reply[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) 00:39, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear Mr. D. E. Mophon. I have noticed you have been adding the title "His/Her Excellency" to the articles about Dutch ministers and state secretaries (Vivianne Heijnen, Hans Vijlbrief, Conny Helder, and Mariëlle Paul). Could you please provide a source that this is the official title for Dutch cabinet members? This 2005 news article describes complaints about disrespect by a defense minister who wanted the title "Excellency" to be reinstated. However, it says the the cabinet was not planning to reintroduce it, and I can find no later mention that this is an official title. This article by a language website lists "His/Her Excellency" as a way to address cabinet members, but also does not claim it to be an official title. (it similarly says all lawyers should be addressed with "edelgrootachtbare" and professors with "hooggeleerde"). - Tristan Surtel (talk) 20:41, 29 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dear Mr. D. E. Mophon. Since I am still not seeing a source for this title, I will remove these again from the pages about Dutch cabinet members. - Tristan Surtel (talk) 18:34, 4 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hello, Please note, according to the English Wikipedia Manual of Style MOS:POINTS, "Dr" does not have a "." after it in articles written in British English. Thanks cagliost (talk) 20:00, 1 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]