User talk:Priestess Noel Ann

Minor Edits

Hi, you may be unaware but you're using minor edit incorrectly. Please familiarise yourself on the help page. Cheers. 𝄞: JohnnyB𝄬 ^{^𝅘𝅥𝅮 Sing with me^𝅘𝅥𝅮} 11:21, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Church of Christian Spiritualism & Lifestyle

Hello, Priestess Noel Ann. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Church of Christian Spiritualism & Lifestyle, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 02:07, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia: check out the Teahouse!

Hello! Priestess Noel Ann, you are invited to the Teahouse, a forum on Wikipedia for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, and get support from peers and experienced editors. Please join us! Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:53, 27 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Church of Christian Spiritualism & Lifestyle

Hello, Priestess Noel Ann. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Church of Christian Spiritualism & Lifestyle".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:01, 28 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you I Had been trying to delete that. Priestess Noel Ann (talk) 17:15, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Priestess

Hey there, just wanted you to know that despite the good faith edits you've made to the priestess page, I reverted it, as the information you've added are just things that can be added into the priest page, with some of the stuff already mentioned there in some form.

Also I think it might be useful for you to know that there was a discussion about what to do with the term "priestess", back in August last year. Therefore I believe you might have to start a consensus of some sort at the term it currently redirects to, in this case Talk:Priest. It also seems you've not been the first person to say something about it either, for example here. Procyon117 (talk) 14:32, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Priestess Noel Ann:! Welcome to Wikipedia. I'm from Special:ShortPages and saw your article Priestess in trouble. Here is how to help it:

Join Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red if you think there is a bias towards "priest". Look at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Women_in_Red/Religion. You could ask for help at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Women_in_Red.
None of the references there are Wikipedia:Reliable sources. You said you're "Seeking more scholarly, unbiased, contributors who know more"? Click here: Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
I am going to revert Priestess to the redirect. Please leave it alone and work at Draft:Priestess, then follow WP:AFC.
I really think you should just edit Ordination of women instead. If you still think there's a Christian bias, you can start a WP:RM on Talk:Ordination of women, citing WP:NPOVTITLE after reading it.

Happy editing! 174.92.25.207 (talk) 19:39, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You said it better than I could have! Procyon117 (talk) 19:43, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your assistance. To be fully honest. I'm a very casual wiki user most of the time. And I am not the best at following all of the guidelines. It is not intentional, however, while I know we need even more credible sources, It just truly was and is a genuine mistake and neglect of a word's definition. I know I am not the arbiter of what is and what isn't correct. But I know this term is a word that, historically, in fantasy, and in present day, is it's own word. It is not an alternative of Priest, it is the word and title " Priestess". For example. "Pastor" is not redirected to Priest. And that is because Pastor is its own word. I make no statement that it is standard, or orthodox, or historically traditional, in the particular faith i Use it in, but it IS in all the other faiths I mention. And my title whilst I have the bias of it being mine. Is a documented legal title. I truly appreciate the help though. 100% I know that I am probably being hit with violations due to lack of proper navigation in how I post. Also I am unclear how the Merriam Webster dictionary isn't a valid objective source. But I am learning how to navigate this. I merely wish to help preserve the word's description. And it redirecting to Priest was just not objective truth in entirety. Priestess Noel Ann (talk) 14:17, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(I'm the same IP user) Who said "Merriam Webster dictionary isn't a valid objective source"? At most, definitions are avoided (WP:NOTDICTIONARY) but history is encyclopedic. "Priestess" isn't "Priest" but other said be a subsection in the "Priest" article.

There is also someone supporting your viewpoint at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_July_22#c-Zxcvbnm-20240723121200-174.92.25.207-20240722195900. Before you go there, please reduce your word count by 50% (WP:BLUDGEON and WP:TLDR) because that might be one of the reasons your userpage was deleted. 142.113.140.146 (talk) 15:54, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Priestess" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Priestess has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 July 22 § Priestess until a consensus is reached.

Based on your concerns that you "had made a proper section for Priestess, earlier, for some odd reason somebody decided to revert it" and surprise "to find the term Priestess simply redirected to Priest", I listed this at RfD asking Priestess to be retargeted to Ordination of women.

BTW, you didn't "create a proper section" when you did [1]. You needed to click "Edit" on the Priest or Ordination of women page, not the Priestess redirect page. 174.92.25.207 (talk) 20:06, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your constructive feedback. I did not know the technicalities of navigating wiki, and am still acquainting myself with them. Like I said, I am normally a more casual user. I like to play at my own grammar corrections on some articles. And I admittedly got caught up In another specific topic at one point, which after realizing that it actually was better curated than I originally thought, I did what I was being corrected on, and stopped altering it. I had a mild presence, after that until noticing the Priestess Redirect. And Lack of a, Priestess specific Article. My old draft as you also can see was rejected, as I did not know 100% why it was not valid. I now know that Wiki (As it should) has a lengthy set of policies to be followed within curation of information and articles. So thank you. Priestess Noel Ann (talk) 21:36, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]