Welcome to Wikipedia…

...and thanks for your edits to Solway Firth. When adding references, please include them in <ref> tags so that they appear as footnotes. I’ve converted the cloudofwitnesses one to a reference – I see you put it back in, but I hadn’t deleted it. It was still there, but now formatted as a reference instead of an inline URL. Thanks --Northernhenge (talk) 13:06, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Greets!

Apologies for any errors. I am trying to learn the right protocols. You say you didn't delete it but I didn't see it. This is why I added it again.

How do I include items as a reference as you request. I am unfamiliar. Voltaire Knows (talk) 15:11, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

I added this just after where it says John Everett Millais created an illustration, a wood engraving, depicting the Scottish martyr Margaret Wilson, tied to a stake in the surf at Solway, because, as a Covenanter, refusing to acknowledge James II as head of the church.

<ref>{{cite book |url=https://archive.org/details/cloudofwitnesses00thom/page/434/mode/2up?view=theater |chapter=Margaret Lauehlane and Margaret Wilson |pages=435-442 |title=A cloud of witnesses, for the royal prerogatives of Jesus Christ : being the last speeches and testimonies of those who have suffered for the truth in Scotland, since the year 1680 |editor-last=Thomson|editor-first=John Henderson |date=1871 |orig-date=1714}} and then put /ref in < > at the end of the reference straight after the closing curly brackets.

So it’s currently reference number 13 in the list at the end. (That number may change in future if anyone adds more sources.) The vertical bar character | is on my keyboard as a shifted \ but yours may be different. See Help:Citations quick reference for more details. Northernhenge (talk) 15:27, 10 April 2025 (UTC)

Introduction to contentious topics

You have recently edited a page related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic designated as contentious. This is a brief introduction to contentious topics and does not imply that there are any issues with your editing.

A special set of rules applies to certain topic areas, which are referred to as contentious topics. These are specially designated topics that tend to attract more persistent disruptive editing than the rest of the project and have been designated as contentious topics by the Arbitration Committee. When editing a contentious topic, Wikipedia’s norms and policies are more strictly enforced, and Wikipedia administrators have an expanded level of powers and discretion in order to reduce disruption to the project.

Within contentious topics, editors should edit carefully and constructively, refrain from disrupting the encyclopedia, and:

• adhere to the purposes of Wikipedia;
• comply with all applicable policies and guidelines;
• follow editorial and behavioural best practices;
• comply with any page restrictions in force within the area of conflict; and
• refrain from gaming the system.

Editors are advised to err on the side of caution if unsure whether making a particular edit is consistent with these expectations. If you have any questions about contentious topics procedures, you may ask them at the arbitration clerks' noticeboard or you may learn more about this contentious topic here. You may also choose to note which contentious topics you know about by using the {{Ctopics/aware}} template.

Doug Weller talk 10:31, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

May 2025

Hi Voltaire Knows! I noticed that you recently made an edit and marked it as "minor", but it may not have been. "Minor edit" has a specific definition on Wikipedia: it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Almost all, if not all, of your edits. Doug Weller talk 10:54, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that one or more recent edit(s) you made did not have an edit summary. Collaboration among editors is fundamental to Wikipedia, and every edit should be explained by a clear edit summary, or by discussion on the Talk page. Please use the edit summary field to explain your reasoning for an edit, or to describe what it changes. Summaries save time for other editors and reduce the chances that your edit will be misunderstood. For some edits, an adequate summary may be quite brief.

The edit summary field looks like this:

Please provide an edit summary for every edit you make. When logged in to your Wikipedia account, you can give yourself a reminder by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary (or the default undo summary), and then click the "Save" button. Thanks! Doug Weller talk 10:54, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

See Help:Referencing for beginners

It's very useful. Doug Weller talk 10:55, 18 May 2025 (UTC)

Kinder, Küche, Kirche

You were reverted there, we don't use opinion pieces for comments on living persons. Doug Weller talk 10:56, 18 May 2025 (UTC)