User talk:72.228.41.88

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] http://www.wikiweddings.org link

Hi, I was in the middle of trying to word a message to you when I got yours. The link fails our external links guidelines and was placed in the body of the text as though it was an internal link to another Wikipedia article or an external link to a reference. But after seeing your other edits I regretted using the word "spam" in the edit summary - I should simply have said "inappropriate".

On the transwiki issue: If you wish to use content from Wikipedia you can do so under the terms of the GFDL - you don't need anyone's additional permission - it's already provided. See Wikipedia:Copyrights for details. Note however, that your use must also be released under the GFDL - I don't currently see any copyright or licensing notice on the wikiweddings.org site. You'll need to fix this first, at least for any pages that you use Wikipedia content in. Transwiki often implies that the text gets moved, that is it leaves this wiki and goes to that wiki. I don't think removing the information from Wikipedia is appropriate - I get the impression you didn't intend to imply this, but I just want to check.

On the Forbes article, it's because they quote "typical" rather than "average" and particularly because of the unjustifiable comparison with American average costs that it seemed lacking in suitable rigor. Also, I know the figures from the CSI and Salon references come from Mead's book, and she is using a mean provided by the US wedding industry. I don't think much to the American figure either and have started a thread on the article talk page about it. I don't think there is actually good enough data out there for us to be including any of it in the article.

Sorry this is so long. And sorry for labeling your edit spam. Hope I've explained my actions clearly - please feel free to ask questions or disagree with my reasoning. -- SiobhanHansa 20:12, 22 October 2007 (UTC)