| Revision as of 01:44, 1 January 2014 editLowercase sigmabot III (talk | contribs)Bots, Template editors2,303,087 editsm Archiving 2 discussion(s) to User talk:Epicgenius/Archive/2013/Dec) (bot← Previous edit | Revision as of 05:35, 1 January 2014 edit undoDanguard.co (talk | contribs)7 edits →A barnstar for you!: new WikiLove messageNext edit → | ||
| Line 77: | Line 77: | ||
| :::It is okay, and I will revert my edit. ] (]) 22:06, 30 December 2013 (UTC) | :::It is okay, and I will revert my edit. ] (]) 22:06, 30 December 2013 (UTC) | ||
| == A barnstar for you! == | |||
| {| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;" | |||
| |rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | ] | |||
| |style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''The Original Barnstar''' | |||
| |- | |||
| |style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 3px;" | Thank you for great your contributions to the world knowledge base. ] (]) 05:35, 1 January 2014 (UTC) | |||
| |} | |||
Revision as of 05:35, 1 January 2014
This page was last edited or modified by Danguard.co (talk, contribs) on Wednesday 5:35:08 January 1, 2014 (UTC). Sign my guestbook, please, if you can!
| Skip to table of contents |
| This is Epicgenius's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83Auto-archiving period: 7 days  |
|
|
Centralized discussion
- Refining the administrator elections process
- Blocks for promotional activity outside of mainspace
- Voluntary RfAs after resignation
- Proposed rewrite of WP:BITE
- LLM/chatbot comments in discussions
 Archives |
|
2013: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2014: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2015: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2016: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2017: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2018: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2019: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2020: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2021: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2022: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2023: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2024: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Other talk pages: |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Very important userboxes
|
Top | Talk (new message) | User page | Contribs | User log
|
Archives |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
You might have the skills to moderate an editing conflict over Great Chinese Famine
Great Chinese Famine has been continually edited by User talk:Oldhand 12, who was recently blocked for seven days for edit warring, and has now resumed a determined effort to impose his view of events without discussion. I would be interested to hear from you. --Greenmaven (talk) 07:03, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
- I'll see what I can do to help. Epicgenius (talk) 14:17, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
But Father Jack does say DRINK!!! It is not vandalism!!
I'm only summing up a whole a Paragraph in one word. --The 29th Earl of Grimsby (talk) 17:25, 27 December 2013 (UTC) (stricken out as vandalism) Epicgenius (talk) 19:42, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
Philoumenos of Jacob's Well
Quoting your FAQ: "Most edits should be properly cited, sourced and referenced."
The original page, before your deletion, of https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Philoumenos_of_Jacob%27s_Well
that is the mention of the Zionist perpetrators, was true. The claim is sourced, as provided in the article.
Why I feel strongly about it? Myself I was on the very spot there, and I talked to the current archimandrite. (I had not known about this murder at all before entering the church by chance). I could not believe it, as it was so shocking, so I did secondary research about this crime in Israel. It did indeed happen as described.
Do not vandalize this article further. If you feel that the current sources about these Jewish religious murderers are incomplete, say so in the note, and I or other wikipedians will spend the time again providing better refs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zezen (talk • contribs) 19:36, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
- Me, vandalizing the article? If anything, the other editor "vandalized" the article. Even then, that edit was made in good faith. It was reverted because it had bad grammar, and the edit you made just now has little to do with my revert. Epicgenius (talk) 19:40, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you for not removing this content again and the kind words on my talk page. FYI, I had invested some hours trying to find the deleted Reuters article, books, etc., so I am happy that the content remains there (at least for now).
- Happy NYE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zezen (talk • contribs) 18:49, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
- Same to you, Epicgenius (talk) 22:35, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
The Signpost: 25 December 2013
- Recent research: Cross-language editors, election predictions, vandalism experiments
- Featured content: Drunken birds and treasonous kings
- Discussion report: Draft namespace, VisualEditor meetings
- WikiProject report: More Great WikiProject Logos
- News and notes: IEG round 2 funding rewards diverse ambitions
- Technology report: OAuth: future of user designed tools
Reverted article / Le testament
Hi, and let say first, happy new year!.
I just noticed that you reverted my change as in https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Le_Testament&oldid=584420801
May I point that unless legitimated this reversion is without any proof whereas I'm doubting seriously that this can be an original handwriting of Le Testament?
As mentionned in the article'talk this scanned text doesn't seem to be part anywhere of Le Testament, in any printed edition, whereas I know that Kungliga biblioteket in Stockholm, is supposed to hold some François Villon handwriting, supposed again to be inherited from François Ier. But for sure I may be wrong.
Nevertheless, adding supposed to a declaration without any reference seems to me, say, fair...
Any further information you may have about this would be of real interest to me. Meanwhile, I'm letting the article as-is.
Well cheers!
- Yes, but the article doesn't say that Le Testament "was a supposed collection of poetry". Unless there is proof that the poetry is only "supposed", there's no source that this is either real or fake. I will need a third opinion on this. Epicgenius (talk) 15:20, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- Hey! I'm not challenging at all the fact that François Villon was a poet, a real one, marking the difference between old and middle french (I eventually completed part of the french edition of wikipedia about its writings). I'm challenging the fact that the showned scanned image is from any part of Le Testament. Again, this scanned image doesn't seem to appear in any printed edition of FV... Thus, supposed. Altough I'm not totally & really aware of Netiquette herein, I would have supposed that unless a reference clearly showing that this is part of it, it should be taken very carefully. And, sorry for my poor english skills. Chefdegare (talk) 22:04, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
- It is okay, and I will revert my edit. Epicgenius (talk) 22:06, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Original Barnstar |
| Thank you for great your contributions to the world knowledge base. Danguard.co (talk) 05:35, 1 January 2014 (UTC) |