Talk:Christian Singles Information-exchange

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello Wikipedia.

I would like the chance to "live by the rules" for a new entry. I have read and agree with the intent of the rules, and am willing to make any changes necessary to accomodate what may be an infraction of the rules. I have no problem removing the link to the web-site if that is a problem.

I am an avid Wikipedia user, and I have many other entries which I would like to share, when I learn how to use this system.

Thanks for a wonderful tool in spreading knowledge world-wide.

Mark S. Gietzen

Hi Mark. I've left some pointers on your talk page that may help. The link to the page is not a problem in itself, as long as the article shows that the website is notable enough to warrant an entry. 9Nak (talk) 19:18, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

2008-Feb-19 11:50 am.

I do not know if this is the right place to respond, but I will try. Please consider moving this back under "Christian Singles" as I have added references and information about the Federal legal case that gave us the right to use "Christian Single" in our sub-chapter names (also now listed in the article).

Here is the problem. Very few people know us by our full name: The Christian Singles Info-exchange. 99% of the public knows us by the state or territorial sub-chapter of the state they live in. For example: Tennessee Christian Singles, or California Christian Singles.

If they want to look us up, they are likely to either enter their state name first, or, just enter "Christian Singles".

I am worried that someone looking for New York Christian Singles, will see the re-direct title, but not know that he or she has indeed found "Christian Singles".

Another option, I guess would be to allow me to put in 50 redirects, to the current listing, but it seems more appropriate to me, given what we went through in Federal Court, that Wikipedia would recognize the same thing that Judge Griffin recognized in 1999. (see new article - reference note # 2)

Thanks again.

My hat is off to the great idea that Wikipedia encompasses. In years to come, this will be the most authoritative site on the internet. Keep up the good work.

Sincerely;

Mark S. Gietzen.

PS: While looking at the Saint Valentine's entry this morning, I notice that someone vandalized your site with a profane entry advertising a porn movie. I tried to remove the out-of-place sentence but when I went to the edit screen, the text was not there, it is somehow hidden. Any suggestions on how to handle that would be appreciated.

Given the author's repeated use of "us" to describe this organisation I have added a WP:COI tag. Ros0709 (talk) 18:27, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

The main article is very difficult ro read now, but most of it seems to be concerned with the name of the organisation and is justifying the renaming of the article. That really belongs here, and I have marked the article "section" offtopic. Ros0709 (talk) 18:43, 19 February 2008 (UTC)