User talk:Midsummersday

You removed sourced text at Priestley Riots
With the edit summary."How can we know this? Please try your hand at historical fiction. It pays better. Friendship for all intended" Please try to avoid comments like this. You could have simply said "unsourced", except that it was well sourced in the body of the article:"The "disciplined nucleus of rioters", which numbered only thirty or so, directed the mob and stayed sober throughout the three to four days of rioting. Unlike the hundreds of others who joined in, they could not be bribed to stop their destructions. Essayist William Hazlitt's first published work was a letter to the Shrewsbury Chronicle, printed later in July 1791, condemning the Priestley riots; Priestley had been one of (then 13-year-old) Hazlitt's teachers.

The WP:LEAD, the introduction, doesn't need sourcing so long as the sources are in the article.

No problem as you are a new editor and there's a steep learning curve. On other thing, article talk pages are there only to discuss the article, a lot of new editors think they can discuss the subject of the article there, but that's not the case.

Have a good day! Doug Weller talk 07:03, 17 July 2022 (UTC)

You are probably right. What I objected to was getting into people's heads about their motives, not the reference for the statement. I will try to be nicer in my comments too. Midsummersday (talk) 20:57, 17 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Doug Weller  talk 08:56, 18 July 2022 (UTC)

Thanks again for helping me. I will also follow the example of those men and stay sober when I am editing Wikipedia.

Potential conflict of interest re Unification Church
Hello, Midsummersday. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Unification Church, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:


 * avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
 * propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the request edit template);
 * disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Conflict of interest);
 * avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Spam);
 * do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Horse Eye&#39;s Back (talk) 23:11, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

William D. Leahy
Hi! I have the article on William D. Leahy up for review at Featured article candidates/William D. Leahy/archive1. If you could find the time to drop by with a few comments, it would be much appreciated. Hawkeye7  (discuss)  04:10, 27 February 2023 (UTC)


 * @Hawkeye7 OK I will do that. Midsummersday (talk) 04:27, 27 February 2023 (UTC)