User talk:Lucida.ann

Welcome!

Hello, Lucida.ann, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

Your first article
The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
Picture tutorial
How to write a great article
Naming conventions
Manual of Style
If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Wikipedia:Topical index.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!

— Dismas|^(talk) - 18:15, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bridget Marquardt

Lucida,

I took out the bit about her marriage not because it was your first edit or anything like that. It's just that IMDb can't be used as a reliable source, as far as I recall, for biography items. The info in their bios are added by users. Users are asked to provide a link to the source for the info they submit but how diligent IMDb is about checking those sources is anyone's guess. IMDb is often used here for a source of filmographies and such because that isn't user submitted. It's often given to IMDb, to my knowledge, by the movie studios themselves since it adds to the advertising of the films. I'll go try and find the Wikipedia policy that says that IMDb bio info shouldn't be used... Dismas|^(talk) 18:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here's the link: Wikipedia:Citing IMDb. Dismas|^(talk) 18:19, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As for why I'm removing the info about her marriage, see WP:BLP. I'll quote some of the more relevant bits:

"Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material — whether negative, positive, or just questionable — about living persons should be removed immediately and without discussion from Wikipedia articles"

"An important rule of thumb when writing biographical material about living persons is "do no harm." Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid; it is not our job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives."

And to say that she's married but not living with the man that she's married to, without a reliable source, is to at least suggest the infidelity of the marriage which for many would be offensive and hurtful.

If you can find a reliable source, I for one would have no problem with the information being in the article. It wouldn't necessarily take a marriage cert. but something better than IMDb. Dismas|^(talk) 18:50, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lucida, if you notice i support you on Bridget's birthname and marriage. And the policy they tried to show you about saying IMdb was not acceptable was rejected by the community. If you go to discussions on bridgets page and to both Joe and disnas pages you will see the stuff i have used to back the stuff up. I will be checking her page daily to see what is going on. I have the REAL Bridget as a friend on myspace, and have sent her a personnal message asking her a few questions. I hope she responds:)Rogue Gremlin 04:00, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems as though they aren't messing with the name anymore, that they are just going after using IMdb as a source. But I have provided way to much stuff to them now. So i can't see them going after her name anymore. Plus I will make a statement to them that ONLY controversial stuff has to have a citation (or be deleted). And her name is NOT contraversial since she openly talks about her name.Rogue Gremlin 17:10, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]