User talk:Saintbridget

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Saintbridget! I am Marek69 and have been editing Wikipedia for quite some time. I just wanted to say hi and welcome you to Wikipedia! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page or by typing {{helpme}} at the bottom of this page. I love to help new users, so don't be afraid to leave a message! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Oh yeah, I almost forgot, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

Marek.69 ^talk 19:42, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

Please see m:User:COIBot/XWiki/prophecyfilm.com --Jorunn (talk) 01:27, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, I am unsure how I shall reach the page we were talking at before, so I hope you see this mess and contact me back at my page so I can see your answer and coaching. Peace! Saintbridget (talk) 22:11, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, I saw I had added to some wrong topics but I thought they were right since she was in the catholic church and her writings are accepted by them. Yes, I know I did these mistakes, but I thought it was right since she was a catholic. I am sorry but I am a dummy and new to this, these should all be erased, I agree now that I understand, but the rest were 100% right and ok and yet they were all removed, How do I go about to restoring them. There are maybe 25 right and 5 wrong, and yet almost all were removed, All are concerning Bridget of Sweden, and they are linked together in a wikiproject as you can see in the language section of: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Bridget_of_Sweden I apologize very much again but I am dumb and totally new so I do not understand what to do and my english is poor, have patience with the dummy. Peace!Its not mine site. The site is the only one in the world that has her collected works and her history, so should I not then link the topics and different wikis of this person, when the website with most info about her in the world is posted by me. I have not spammed willfully or broken your rules, please help me. I have read the rules and I dont see where I have erred. If there are many wikis about the same person, then should i not add them if the website has her works in many different languages? I hope you can help me so i can add them again since they are totally relevant, which you can see. I was going to add material from the site, but I was removed and lost the appetite for doing work that would be removed immediately. But someone taught me what I should do - contact you. But when I am going to make contributions to the articles in the different languages, I want to add the specific language link, like, prophecyfilm/italian. Will I be able to do that or is that now spam, I fail to see how that is spam though. So I wait for your answer to do any further work until you have solved my stupid moves and coached me so I can do the work without having it removed immediately. And I hope you can remove me from the blacklist or whatever it was, i didnt understand fully what it was for a list that i was on. Peace

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 18:57, 31 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

re: Your Message

Hi Saintbridget, I've left a response to your message on my talk page -- Marek.69 ^talk 23:48, 1 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Saintbridget, I've left you another reply on my talk page ---- Marek.69 ^talk 14:21, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've left another reply on my talk page -- Marek.69 ^talk 21:16, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External link

Are you trying to add a link to prophecyfilm.com? Acroterion _(talk) 21:45, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is to the different languages from prophecyfilm.com, for example prophecyfilm.com/spanish, which I will be taking material from to the spanish wiki with this person. And then so on with the rest of the languages concerning this person. Saintbridget (talk) 21:48, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You should be aware that that link has been blacklisted on all wikis as spam, and that your account is responsible for these inappropriate additions on multiple wikis. Please stop. You may not use Wikipedia to promote the website. Acroterion _(talk) 21:50, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But how shall I source the material when there is so many languages? I dont see where I have broken the rules? What promotion? the website has her complete works? Please help? Saintbridget (talk) 21:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This seem like someone is joking with me, since I have read the rules and I follow them completely. If there are many wikis on the same person and a website holds her complete works in 15 languages or more, how is that spam, when it is relevant? Please Help me Saintbridget (talk) 21:56, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The link is inappropriate for Wikipedia - it is not compliant with the requirements of Wikipedia's requirements for external links, as it does not provide any significant encyclopedic content. Please stop promoting the site on WIkipedia. Wikipedia is not a linkfarm, and you may be blocked from editing if you persist. Furthermore, if you post across multiple wikis, accounts on other languages may be blocked. Acroterion _(talk) 22:00, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is the only site with all the info that is in existance about her. All others have less. Are you joking with me. I do not understand what you mean? Peace! Saintbridget (talk) 22:05, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Whether or not this is truly the best website about the author of these prophecies is really unimportant, because you are not putting the link solely into an article about "her": You are putting it into all sorts of articles, including into articles about two unrelated saints named Bridget. The first requirement of an external link is that it be about the actual topic of the article, and a website about St Bridget of Sweden tells us absolutely nothing about St Bridget of Kildare.

Please stop adding the link to any article.

If you feel strongly that it is better for English readers than the existing link to her work at Bridget of Sweden, then you should go to Talk:Bridget of Sweden and explain to the other editors why you think this link is better than the pre-existing link. WhatamIdoing (talk) 22:53, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If I made an error about the wrong person which had the similar name or any other mistake, then that should be removed, not the other relevant links that were right, I can see how I made a few mistakes since I am new and wasnt paying attention, but most of my edits was right, so must I now comment on every site about her, which is quite a large work in order to make the work I did be replaced? Should I contact you on your page or can you see this mess, please answer here so I can see the answer! Peace! Saintbridget (talk) 23:02, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am watching this page, so you can reply here, and I'll see your note (perhaps after a few days, depending on how busy I am). Most of your edits were not right because they placed the link about St Bridget in articles that were not about St Bridget. Those errors have been corrected already, and you don't need to do anything about them.

The only thing you need to do is to go to Talk:Bridget of Sweden and leave a message (click "new section" at the top of the page) and leave a note for any other editors about the link that you want to add. Explain how it is different from all of the other links, including this free copy of her revelations, which is at Wikisource. Then wait a week or so to see whether anyone else agrees or disagrees with you. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:27, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the edits were wrong? But I almost only added the link to the different st Bridget pages in the different languages of the wiki project of her. Are you talking about the same thing as me, I am confused now? There were a few mistakes of me as I see? Should I wait a week and then add the links to the different St Bridget languages in the wikiproject? Peace! Saintbridget (talk) 23:41, 2 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Consider your contributions: you added the link to the wrong Brigid's article, to Catholicism, to Roman Catholic Church, to yet another article that isn't about St Brigid, to the wrong section of an article that is still not about St Brigid.

So you put the website in half a dozen articles on the English Wikipedia, and the only one that you got "right" was the addition to Brigid of Sweden. All of the others are "wrong" because the articles are not specifically about the specific Brigid in question.

All of the different Wikipedias have their own rules, and I don't even pretend to know what their rules are. Here on the English Wikipedia, a link to prophecyfilm.com is not going to be accepted in articles about anything other than Brigid of Sweden (and perhaps not even there). Nobody at wiki.riteme.site can help you with problems at Wikipedias that are in other languages. You will have to handle each Wikipedia separately.

In terms of resolving the issues at the English Wikipedia, you should go back to Talk:Bridget of Sweden and explain why your website is the best English-language source for these writings. You need to clearly communicate why you think the English-language copy of these writings at prophecyfilm.com is better than the English-language copy of these same writings at the websites that are already provided in the article Brigid of Sweden. Then you need to wait until other editors have read your reasons, looked at the various options, and expressed a preference for one or the other of them. WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:35, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I know I did these mistakes, but I thought it was right since she was a catholic. I am sorry but I am a dummy and new to this, these should all be erased, I agree now that I understand, but the rest were 100% right and ok and yet they were all removed, How do I go about to restoring them. There are maybe 25 right and 5 wrong, and yet almost all were removed, All are concerning Bridget of Sweden, and they are linked together in a wikiproject as you can see in the language section of: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Bridget_of_Sweden I apologize very much again but I am dumb and totally new so I do not understand what to do and my english is poor, have patience with the dummy. Peace! Saintbridget (talk) 00:53, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The only relevant article appears to be Brigid of Sweden. As WhatamIdoing suggests, the talk page is the correct place to suggest its inclusion. Other editors may agree or disagree. There are more than 10,000 Catholic saints, so we really can't have every saint with an external link in anything but the article on that saint, and even then it has to be judged worthwhile and must be strictly non-promotional in nature. The link you've posted appears to be promotional - it seems to be a ministry rather than an encyclopedic discussion of the subject and does not appear (to me) to be an appropriate link, but other editors are welcome to judge. The fact that you've added the link on dozens of wikis and triggered an automatic filter on the Meta wiki designed to find spam does not help matters. Acroterion _(talk) 02:29, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your English skills are good enough for us to easily understand you, so you need not apologize or worry. Wikipedia is a complicated place, so everyone has questions and needs some help on occasion. We're happy to do what we can -- think of it as our gift to repay those that helped us learn.

You have left a note at Talk:Bridget of Sweden. You named a specific reason (more chapters at this website than at another). Now you wait for responses. It may take several days, or perhaps longer. This is all you need to do at the English Wikipedia right now.

If the other links you mention were at other Wikipedias (such as the French one, or the Spanish one), then you must do the same thing at each of them. We can not tell another Wikipedia what to do; you must ask them. I suggest doing it slowly. WP:There is no deadline. WhatamIdoing (talk) 05:24, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are my ip somehow blocked or banned or classified as spammer for this mistake that I did so that I cannot make any contribution at all in the future? Saintbridget (talk) 02:56, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bridget and accusation of lies

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Talk:Bridget of Sweden. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Tomas e (talk) 14:22, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The message refer to this edit a couple of days ago, but I thought you had better know that you should start following Wikipedia's policies. Why don't you start by actually reading them? Regards, Tomas e (talk) 14:22, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Block worries

Your account hasn't ever been blocked, as you can see here.

If you have a shared IP address, and it was blocked, then it's because of someone else. (If it were due to your actions, then your account would have also been blocked, and the administrator would have left a note on this page about it.) Most such blocks are temporary. Also, if it were blocked, you wouldn't have been able to leave a message on my talk page, because blocked accounts can only edit their own user talk page.

If you were having trouble editing a page, then it could be that the Wikipedia servers were unhappy, or that your own computer was unhappy. When the Wikipedia servers get overloaded, you have to wait until they are less busy. If you think the problem might have been with your own computer, then you might try the usual fixes, like quitting and restarting your web browser, switching to Mozilla Firefox, getting a Mac, etc. Good luck, WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:22, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So I am able now to do editions or additions of content in the future without being called a spammer or without my work being erased some time afterwards? Or is it the link I used that I cannot quote from or show the sources I qouted from. Should I never use this link when being here? I am confused? Thank you very much for your help so far! Saintbridget (talk) 17:59, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All of your edits are subject to the judgment of the Wikipedia community, meaning that anything you write may be edited, removed or changed if it reflects the consensus of the community. To quote what's at the bottom of every edit window:

If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed for profit by others, do not submit it.
Only public domain resources can be copied without permission — this does not include most web pages or images.

The site you wish to use has been blacklisted as spam by the Wikipedia community - not just the English language Wikipedia, but every Wikipedia, due to abuse by people trying to promote it. You therefore need to use other sources if you wish to edit, which is encouraged in any case - all work on Wikipedia should cite multiple, independent sources, not just one. Acroterion _(talk) 01:29, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright and other matters

Please do not attack WhatamIdoing as you have done on her talk page [1]. She is trying - very patiently - to explain issues of copyright to you, and you are unable or unwilling to understand. You may not copy content from other websites, unless they are licensed under the same Creative Commons copyright license that Wikipedia uses, or by direct permission to the Wikimedia Foundation from the authors of the website in question. Even if that is the case, you may not plagiarize by adding extensive direct copies of material from elsewhere. You may not use Wikipedia to proselytize or promote a cause or organization. The website has been blacklisted because many editors - apparently including you - have spammed it across many languages in a disruptive manner. You therefore are not permitted to add it as a link. Acroterion _(talk) 01:19, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Saint Bridget was canonized by Pope Boniface IX in the year 1391 and confirmed by Pope Martin V in the Council of Constance in the year 1415

The Revelations were accorded an exceptionally high degree of authenticity, authority and importance from an early date. Pope Gregory XI (1371-78) approved and confirmed them and judged them highly favourably, as did Boniface IX (1389-1404) in the papal Bull Ab origine mundi, par. 39 (7 Oct 1391). They were later examined at the Council of Constance (1414-18) and at the Council of Basel (1431-49), both judging them to be in conformity with the Catholic faith; The Revelations were also strongly defended by numerous highly regarded theologians, including Jean Gerson (1363-1429), Chancellor of the University of Paris and Cardinal Juan de Torquemada (1388-1468).

This was the extent of my qoute, of a 1200 pages work, and the entry is encyclopedic in nature. That is well inside the limits of fair use and they even allow to share their material. If the page allows free copyright and the entry is originally encyclopedic then how come I cannot use it? Find it strange, what part was an attack?Saintbridget (talk) 03:06, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you not rewrite this to the same effect? There appears to be no reason to directly quote. As to WhatamIdoing, your comments that she is joking with you or deliberately trying to make it difficult to edit are inappropriate. She is very patiently explaining policy. Acroterion _(talk) 18:25, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How little of the work you're copying is not the most important issue. This lawsuit involved a mere 400 words out of an entire book -- and the people who copied that small fraction lost the case.

Additionally, most of those "1200 pages" involves text that nobody can claim a copyright for, because they were written hundreds of years ago. Once you remove the St Bridget's writings (etc.), these paragraphs become a much more substantial component. WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:56, 8 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

About copying from a website

I thought these links might be helpful to you:

You may not copy sentences off another website and paste them into a Wikipedia article unless the sentences are duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material: such additions must always be deleted.
Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text.

Hope that helps, WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:35, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]