User talk:Nancy Danielson

December 2009

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at The God Delusion, you will be blocked from editing. Fieldday-sunday (talk) 12:40, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits, such as those you made to The God Delusion. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you will be blocked from editing. Fieldday-sunday (talk) 13:09, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nancy, I have undone your edit to The Root of All Evil? because your criticism of Dawkins' argument, which may be perfectly valid, is just not relevant to a page about his TV series. Instead it belongs on such pages as Existence of God or elsewhere. Thanks. Zanzare (talk) 14:15, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Nancy Danielson, 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
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Karanacs (talk) 17:49, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Catholic Church

Hi Nancy. I think that your recent addition to the lead of the article Catholic Church was not appropriate and I have removed it. I also opened a discussion on the talk page (Talk:Catholic_Church#New_lead_additions). Could you please join that discussion and provide an explanation of why you think the text should be in the article and in that particular place? Then hopefully other editors will respond to both of our points and we can reach a consensus on whether those additions belong in the article. Please do not just add the text back into the article. Wikipedia has a policy on edit-warring, and you are close to violating the three-revert rule. I look forward to discussing this issue with you and gaining your perspective. Karanacs (talk) 17:46, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nancy. Don't forget to log in! It looks as if you are posting with an IP address on Catholic Church right now. As you are a new user, it would probably be very helpful to read the Wikipedia policy neutral point of view and also the policy on original research and the one on reliable sources. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and its intent is to provide a summary of what experts say on various topics. It is not to be used to push a particular point of view, or to try to convince others that any particular interpretation is the "right" one. Some people don't believe in any higher being at all. Some aren't Christians. Some Christians don't believe Catholic teachings. Because of this, we can't present the Catholic interpretation of biblical teachings as "The Truth", no matter what we as editors personally believe. The beliefs section of the Catholic Church article has been crafted from several books, all with Nihil obstat and imprimateur, written by scholars. It does a good job of being neutral and providing a broad overview of the beliefs of the Church. This article is not the right place for a detailed analysis of the theology behind every Church teaching - that would be much too long! I encourage you to read the beliefs section and see how topics are portrayed there, and see how different the tone is there from what you posted. Karanacs (talk) 19:40, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This article is an article about The Catholic Church. Are not suggesting that Wikipedia should misrepresent the fundamental Truths of The Catholic Church?

Nor is the lead of that article the place to put your reading of Canon 750. Opinions do differ; Catholics have disputed the meaning of, and even defied, canons before now.

Anyone can dispute or defy a canon. This does not change the essence of Canon 750. N.D.

Even were that not so, there is a document, which some would hold to be rather central to the Church's mission, which says: All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD hath laid upon him the iniquity of us all. This is the middle of Advent; if the unco guid are ever in season, they are not now.
Wikipedia is not the forum for this discussion; the only reason I addressed it is to make plain our meaning of neutrality. We are not here for some members of the Church of Rome to belabor others.

If Wikipedia has an article on The Catholic Church, I would certainly hope that it would be a truthful representation of the Church rather than a misrepresentation. N.D.

With all due Respect, Canon 750 of The Catholic Church makes it clear that in order to be Catholic, one must be in communion with The Catholic Church, to begin with. One can not be in communion and autonomous at the same time. N.D.

That is your reading of a primary source. That's fine on a blog; it may even persuade those you would convert; but that's not what we're doing here. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:18, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas! Septentrionalis PMAnderson 20:31, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Nancy. I see you have replaced your addition to the Lead section of Catholic Church, which was removed earlier. I have sympathy for the point you are trying to make, but 'Please don't do this. Putting back or removing text repetitively without gaining agreement breaks one of the main rules on Wikipedia against edit-warring. Repeating an edit like that more than three times could get you blocked from editing Wikipedia articles for a time.

In addition, the Lead section is not the place for detailed information like this. It belongs in the body of the article, under the relevant subsection, and it has to be carefully worded to present it it neutrally. Can you therefore discuss these issues with us patiently on the article's talk page. You probably won't get your own way immediately, since this is a busy article with many editors of differing views, but you can help to improve the accuracy of the article. Xandar 01:50, 19 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: Talk Page guidelines

Nancy, please see the talk page guidelines. You should not interweave your comments with those of others, as it makes it look like the other person said something they did not. Please be sure to also sign all your posts with 4 tildes ~~~~. That way, everyone can tell who wrote what. Thanks. Karanacs (talk) 21:21, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's clear enough, since she's initialled all of hers - although four tildes are customary. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 21:23, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you all for your advice. I will get back to you soon.- Nancy D.

Hi Nancy, I have edited the Catholic Church article as well. We welcome new editors to the page both Catholic and non all the time. I hope you will not be discouraged by any incivility you may have experienced and come try to help us improve the page. Please take some time to read the talk page guidelines as well as WP:NPOV, WP:RS, WP:reliable source examples, WP:consensus. There are also some other rules such as WP:civil, WP:no personal attacks, WP:sockpuppet. These try to help us carry on productive conversations but we frequently have to deal with rudeness and try to work through it nevertheless. We are helped when more editors get involved and I hope you will enjoy discussing issues with us. We are especially in need of editors who can get to the library and contribute new and better sources as well as improved prose that can convey the facts revealed in scholarly sources and do it in a neutral sort of way - not always easy to do! Scholars themselves don't always use neutral language when making a point but we have to deal with that too. I hope to see you around at Catholic Church. Thanks. NancyHeise ^talk 03:42, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, you posted a comment on Xandar's userpage here [1]. Typically, we don't edit another person's userpage, we post comments on their talk page. Most editors have a username like mine that has the word "talk" next to it. If you click on the word "talk", it takes you to the person's talk page where you can then post a comment. However, Xandar's name has two links in it, the first three letters, if you click on those, take you to his userpage and the second three letters take you to his talk page. Every editor has a talk page. If you end up on their userpage just look at the top of the page and you will see the word "discussion". Click on this and it will take you to the talk page as well. I hope that helps. NancyHeise ^talk 04:19, 21 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Nancy.-Nancy D.