Welcome!

Hello, -A-M-B-1996-, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type ((help me)) on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Your first article
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!--Biografer (talk) 22:16, 25 September 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This is so interesting. I had no idea! Thanks for adding it. Marquardtika (talk) 02:44, 9 March 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sure, the early-to-mid-20th-century South Carolina U.S. Senate elections were just foregone conclusions, based on the Democratic primaries, but I think the infoboxes for the primaries should be kept in that section. —GoldRingChip 21:03, 28 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@GoldRingChip: That doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever. Why not put the infobox for all elections in the "results" section then? Because the purpose of an infobox is to briefly tell the story of the election; those infoboxes do that. Keep them in the introduction to summarize the article. -A-M-B-1996- (talk) 21:29, 28 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Because then shouldn't we use an infobox for the general? —GoldRingChip 01:05, 29 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@GoldRingChip: No, because a 99%–1% uncompetitive landslide or unopposed race doesn't "tell the story of the election." –-A-M-B-1996- (talk) 01:09, 29 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's a good point. Then go ahead and change them back. —GoldRingChip 01:12, 29 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for starting on the expansion of Harry Harper last week. I had that article on my watchlist and finished getting the article to a five-fold expansion. I've nominated the article for WP:DYK. See the nomination at Template:Did you know nominations/Harry Harper and propose any hook changes that you like. – Muboshgu (talk) 15:47, 20 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

On 1 June 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Harry Harper, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Harry Harper refused to play baseball on Sundays? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Harry Harper. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page (here's how, Harry Harper), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 1 June 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Re: this edit. Lloyd George was NOT admitted to the bar. He was a solicitor not a barrister. DuncanHill (talk) 01:34, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@DuncanHill: Apologies and thank you for the correction. An Americanism slipping in, I'm afraid. -A-M-B-1996- (talk) 01:35, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No problem. DuncanHill (talk) 01:43, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Seeing that you made convention maps for the republican primary articles, and I just want to say that that's a great addition. Keep up the good work. GeorgeBailey (talk) 23:00, 23 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@GeorgeBailey: Thanks very much! I'm hopeful that they (and the Democratic equivalents) can provide more comprehensive stories of the nomination process before the McGovern reforms. -A-M-B-1996- (talk) 01:39, 25 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	1896 Texas gubernatorial election is a very good page. Well done! BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 06:04, 11 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

	The Original Barnstar
	1906 Texas gubernatorial election is a very good article. Well done! BoyTheKingCanDance (talk) 06:49, 18 March 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited 2004 Indiana gubernatorial election, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Joe Kernan.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:04, 17 October 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) 00:51, 28 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Compromise of 1877, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Mexican Empire and French intervention in Mexico.

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 2 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]