User talk:Idyllweiss

Welcome![edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia, Idyllweiss! Thank you for your contributions. I am Wikipelli and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{help me}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Wikipelli ^Talk 23:54, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of discretionary sanctions[edit]

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding Scientology, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Grayfell (talk) 20:48, 9 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

January 2017[edit]

Hello, I'm Grayfell. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Church of Scientology International have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Grayfell (talk) 00:48, 5 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Grayfell. Just to clarify that it's not my intention to post something "promotional." The article badly needed content from secondary sources and I provided that - its straightforward information coming from the perspective of of two religious scholars about the function and purpose of the Church of Scientology International.Idyllweiss (talk) 00:28, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As an example, the phrase ...the opportunity for celebrities to climb up The Bridge to Total Freedom in an environment that fits their lifestyle is painfully promotional language which is totally inappropriate for an encyclopedia article. Grayfell (talk) 00:32, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That I can understand, and can be modified to still be useful to the article. (It would be pertinent to note that this comes from an encyclopedic source). But the edit in question is the one about the Church of Scientology International. You are digressing. How is it promotional to clarify a function of CSI using language used by scholars, in an article badly needing of secondary sources?Idyllweiss (talk) 00:37, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"These centers enable celebrities to climb up the Bridge to Total Freedom in an environment that fits them." How does that sound?Idyllweiss (talk) 00:41, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's still very promotional and vacuous. That phrasing assumes that the bridge exists and can be climbed, and that the centre's environment is good for doing this hypothetical task. All of those claims are controversial and promotional. Discuss any proposed changes at Talk:Scientology and celebrities so that other interested editors can participate.

The wording you added to CSI added bulk without actually explaining anything, and was also poor grammar. What is a "visible point of unity"? What does that mean beyond sounding impressive? It's just more bloat in an already bloated article, and it doesn't explain anything. Again, Talk:Church of Scientology International would be the place to continue this. Grayfell (talk) 01:09, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]