But if we are onto that stage where a lack of referencing isn't a problem, as the page references - will I will get onto as and when I find the references - are now a problem - can I remove the "Original BS"? There's plenty of references now or will full foul of the rude and pugnacious Wiki-editors?
Also MAPS! I love maps and have started creating maps of the area - the threiplands are on there, next is the religious and secular liberties of Northumberland. Hopefully I'll find more information of the regalities, but I know they aint too much information and they weren't quite the same thing (Scotland was a lot less centralised, so regalities didn't perform in the same way). Also thoughts on current map would be great.
Please assume the good faith of myself and the other editors and that we care about these articles as much as you. If you are interpreting these interactions as rude and pugnacious (I haven't seen any), consider how yours might be coming across to some people. (Read them back from someone else's perspective.)
If you look at the version of the article at the time the WP:OR tag was added, much of it was more poorly referenced, so it does not seem unreasonable. Please don't refer to it as BS. Nothing was added to the talk page at the time, so you can't respond to any specific concerns that may have been behind the addition of the tag, but it would be good practice to note there (at the bottom) that you feel that your edits warrant the tag's removal. Wait two or three days and if there is agreement, or no response, it would be justified to remove the tag. Mutt Lunker (talk) 12:07, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I seem to have spoken to three of the rudest Wikieditors when seeking help in the past. I appreciate the goal of quality.
Thanks for your edits. I'll add them as I going forward. I'm off for Xmas soon, so I will have the time to hunt down the pages, but tbh I am enjoying the map making at the moment (liberties then Marches then Scottish-side). It's rare for me to be so focussed on one thing, but I feel this part of British history (especially mine) is much ignored - and not much written in a serious academic manner. Lategreatanddead (talk) 14:41, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have seen several editors interacting with you and they may have been matter-of-fact but not a one has been rude. If this is your perception of how people are when they are being perfectly co-operative, you are going to find it very tough here. Again, please WP:AGF. Mutt Lunker (talk) 15:16, 10 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
