User talk:Gemmathegael

Welcome!

Hello, Gemmathegael! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Doug Weller talk 09:41, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Contributing to Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article The five pillars of Wikipedia • Simplified ruleset How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions Directories and indexes Where to: ask questions • make requests Tip of the day Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style (Simplified) • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists The Signpost (Wikipedia's newspaper)
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

February 2020

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits to Lebor Gabála Érenn while logged out. Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow the use of both an account and an IP address by the same person in the same setting and doing so may result in your account being blocked from editing. Additionally, making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 09:42, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add original research or novel syntheses of published material to articles as you apparently did to Lebor Gabála Érenn. Please cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. In other words, unless the DNA and archaeological studies mention Lebor Gabála Érenn, you can't use them in the article. Doug Weller talk 09:43, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss your desired changes to Lebor Gabála Érenn on the article's talk page

You are new so it's understandable you don't know our policies and guidelines. But these changes are too major, even without the problem of original research. It's not a coincidence that the Lebor Gabála Érenn is discussed in so many books on Celtic mythology, it's not just Carey.[1]

you spelled the Lebor Gabála Érenn wrong. can you list the books you refer to please, you are editing all Bardic information out, its clear it was a Bardic tome. and repeating carey (1994) again and again.. conicidently Kochs latest work has shown an Iberian connection as does DNA. can you show me where in the "guidelines" you are trying to enforce research MUST state the Lebor Gabála please.. please link the exact guidleine.Gemmathegael (talk) 10:11, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also you left the page a mess, take a look:[2]. Doug Weller talk 09:47, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

Your recent editing history at Lebor Gabála Érenn shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Doug Weller talk 12:47, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

how convenient. you can delete at will and when i offer valid citations you remove on threat of a ban. two florida accounts removing my additions.. all additons are valid and ciations are valid

btw you gave no reasons valid for your edits only threats when i attempt to edit the History and culture of my country

1/  bardic tradition as per my citations, is relevant. i request reasons why you removed  bardic traditions , what issue you have with the inclusion of Bards and the issue you have with the source https://www.britannica.com/art/bard  "Bard, a poet, especially one who writes impassioned, lyrical, or epic verse. Bards were originally Celtic composers of eulogy and satire; the word came to mean more generally a tribal poet-singer gifted in composing and reciting verses on heroes and their deeds. As early as the 1st century AD"

2/ Welsh monk Nennius , there was distinction between monks and priests, citations i provided are ample, what issue you have with pointing out that said distinction in Christianity and reason you took issue with the Encyclopaedia Britannica as a source that Nennius was a monk

3 evidence, reason must be given for keeping the professional attack on Robert Graves whilst removing the current thought on the work of Macalister ... i refer "The White Goddess itself has been the subject of much criticism by archeologists and historians" i asked for a citation of where other people have specified the LGE in theirGemmathegael (talk) 13:38, 5 February 2020 (UTC) criticisms. regardsGemmathegael (talk) 13:02, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/2A00:23C5:9483:A600:8176:933E:CCB6:F07, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community. Nicknack009 (talk) 13:44, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:Gemmathegael reported by User:Doug Weller (Result: ). Thank you. Doug Weller talk 13:49, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring, as you did at Lebor Gabála Érenn. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 14:26, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not attack other editors, as you did at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gemmathegael. 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. Doug Weller talk 16:26, 5 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Gemmathegael, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your additions to Lebor Gabála Érenn have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are PD or compatibly licensed) it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions, the help desk or the Teahouse before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Doug Weller talk 15:23, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

February 2020

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, such as at Talk:Lebor Gabála Érenn, (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. Doug Weller talk 15:23, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please use indentation properly on talk pages

And make sure there is only one blank line between paragraphs.

Thread your posts. Use indentation as shown in Help:Using talk pages § Indentation, to clearly indicate to whom you are replying, as with usual threaded discussions. Doug Weller talk 15:27, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No more personal attacks, please: a warning

Hello, Gemmathegael. I understand you are a new user, but the extra tolerance and good faith you get as a new user will eventually run out if you keep attacking other users. Doug Weller in particular has tried to explain Wikipedia's principles to you, and has been abused and insulted for his pains. Some examples below (the examples are links, and can be followed to see your whole posts):

obvs (?) has issues with people editing the page .. reportee (=Doug W) should be investigated for bias and cultural discrimination.
"Doug Weller does not like new sources"..."I feel he reverted as he didnt like the new source as it contradicts his POV".
Accusing Doug W of "relentless hounding" here.
you are but one editor and dont own the page.. what you think of what Koch wrote on his more recent work is an issue you should take up with him, as koch has been on this page as a source at least 7 times i wil reinsert.. this is at the stage for mediation as you clearly have a biased POV and will not allow me to edit with recent work, you prefer old sources that adhere to your bias. (Seriously, you expect a Wikipedia editor to go out and argue with the sources in person, as in "an issue you should take up with him"??)

I'm afraid I find your arguments on the article talkpage quite difficult to follow. I, and I'm sure others, would appreciate it if you wrote more calmly and simply, with ordinary punctuation and sentences. There's not supposed to be any hurry on talkpages. Who is it, for example, you are accusing of "discrimination on the basis of place of origin, ethnicity, citizenship, gender, age, political or religious affiliation" here? When Doug W asks what you mean by it, you reply very evasively.[3] Please don't threaten people. Aha, here I see it is in fact Doug W you are threatening: "would like again to point out the terms and conditions and ethics of wiki re: discrimination Doug be mindful".

To summarise: if you persist in assuming bad faith, attacking and bludgeoning others, as well as generally using a nasty tone, I will block you for disruptive editing, even though you are new. Bishonen | talk 22:01, 9 February 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Sorry, Bishonen, but this user's behavior has been disruptive from the beginning and shows no signs of abatement. Gemmathegael, I have indefinitely blocked you for resuming edit-warring after expiration of your block, personal attacks, and a generally incoherent POV.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:09, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All my pretty diffs! You couldn't have done it an hour earlier, Bbb23? Bishonen | talk 22:12, 9 February 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Sorry, I was too busy blocking other editors. They are still pretty.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:15, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Gemmathegael, if you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Bishonen | talk 13:20, 10 February 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Gemmathegael, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
The Wikipedia Adventure (a fun interactive editing tutorial that takes about an hour)
Wikipedia Teahouse (a user-friendly help forum)
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
How to add those all-important references
Simplified Manual of Style
The Signpost, our newspaper.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, or you can click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! We are so glad you are here! Sm8900 (talk) 14:27, 16 February 2020 (UTC) Sm8900 (talk) 14:27, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

some very odd editing on my talk page.. hmm

14:38, 16 February 2020‎ Bbb23 talk contribs‎ 27,595 bytes -1,944‎ Undid revision 941085314 by Sm8900 (talk) you're kidding undothank Tag: Undo

i understand there is recourse to appeal this block. really very odd

There was nothing odd about Bbb23's removal of that welcome message. He did it because a) there was already another, similar, welcome message at the top of the page, which is the right place for it, and b) the second welcome message was placed after you had already been indefinitely blocked, which makes no sense. The only odd editing was by Sm8900, who posted the doubled, misplaced, and inappropriate message, and by you, who restored it after Bbb23 had removed it for so many good reasons. Do you mind if I remove it again? If you like to have a collection of welcome messages, the inappropriate along with the appropriate, I can't say I care, for my own part. Bishonen | talk 21:23, 16 February 2020 (UTC).[reply]

the remark in the history by Bbb23 is very odd===>you're kidding <<<=== given it was a message on my talk page and deleted before i could read it with the aforementioned remark. it did not say , a welcome message has already been left, or wrong place.. i understand there is an appeal process to the "indefinitely blocked" and will consider it given time to proceed. in the meantime i am pointing out the remark in the edit history as odd.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:User_pages#Ownership_and_editing_of_user_pagesditing of other editors' user and user talk pages

In general, it is usual to avoid substantially editing another's user and user talk pages other than where it is likely edits are expected and/or will be helpful.

to clarify as I am new ,Bbb23 deleted the message from Sm8900 and left in the talk history the remark ==you're kidding .. to be helpful to me.. glad we cleared that up

i reverted the deletion by Bbb23 so i could read what was posted in the first instance.. Gemmathegael (talk) 21:56, 16 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

remove what you guys want, seems to be the general rule on wiki for mods admins anyway regardless of what the code of conduct or general rules seems to state.. ta

Oh, if you're going to sneer and snarl and wikilawyer about it I won't, you can have your page just as messy as you like. Forget it, goodbye. Bishonen | talk 22:20, 16 February 2020 (UTC).[reply]

thats a very nice reply thank you. to clarify as a new user you are suggesting i must not draw attention to the wiki code at all least I open to namecalling. thank you all for your concern regarding my talk page, there seems to quite an interest today especially after i reverted so i could read what was written in the first instance., however the new input today on editing wiki is much more user friendly for me as a new user.

can you send me information on what a wikilawyer is and where i can read about it thank you for your concern or perhaps this is the page on wikilawyer i should read? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikilawyering

Negative connotations The word wikilawyering typically has negative connotations, much like the term meatpuppet; those utilizing the term should take care that it can be backed up and isn't frivolous (see WP:No personal attacks and WP:Civility).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Civility

Avoiding incivility Avoid name-calling. Avoid condescension Avoid appearing to ridicule another editor's comment. Be careful with edit summaries. Remember to explain your edit, especially when things are getting heated; to avoid personal comments about any editors you have disputes with; and to use the talk page to further explain your view of the situation... ==>

Incivility

Incivility consists of personal attacks, rudeness and disrespectful comments. Especially when done in an aggressive manner, these often alienate editors and disrupt the project through unproductive stressors and conflict. While a few minor incidents of incivility that no one complains about are not necessarily a concern, a continuing pattern of incivility is unacceptable.

I think a complaint from me, also logged here, as per above, is perhaps correct

have a nice even all.

I've revoked Talk page access.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:32, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Gemmathegael (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #29015 was submitted on 2020-02-17 11:41:41. This review is now closed.