Jump to content

User contributions for ΙΧΘΥΣ

For ΙΧΘΥΣ talk block log uploads logs global account filter log

A user with 166 edits. Account created on 29 December 2008.

Search for contributionsshowhide

⧼contribs-top⧽

Username, IP address or CIDR range:

Namespace:

Invert selection

Associated namespace

Tag filter:

Invert selection

Only show edits that are latest revisions

Only show edits that are page creations

Hide minor edits

⧼contribs-date⧽

From date:

To date:

Show only edits pending review

Hide probably good edits

23:3623:36, 17 April 2010 diff hist +590‎ User talk:Aunt Entropy ‎ →‎re:personal attack: new section
23:3323:33, 17 April 2010 diff hist +508‎ m Talk:Teach the Controversy ‎ →‎NPOV?
23:2823:28, 17 April 2010 diff hist +994‎ Talk:Teach the Controversy ‎ →‎NPOV?
03:4103:41, 17 April 2010 diff hist +157‎ Talk:Teach the Controversy ‎ →‎NPOV?
03:2303:23, 17 April 2010 diff hist +40‎ Ica stones ‎ sources confirm that some groups still debate this. there is no DEFINITIVE/RELIABLE source claiming that they are 100% hoax
03:1003:10, 17 April 2010 diff hist +310‎ Talk:Teach the Controversy ‎ →‎NPOV?

18:5518:55, 11 April 2010 diff hist −4‎ m Talk:Roe v. Wade ‎ →‎Public Opinion
18:5518:55, 11 April 2010 diff hist +265‎ Talk:Roe v. Wade ‎ →‎Public Opinion
18:2118:21, 11 April 2010 diff hist +56‎ Ica stones ‎ it is absolutely NOT obvious that it is a hoax. You are assuming Paris is a reliable source. However, it is impossible to fake over 11,000 of these stones and there is NO EVIDENCE of them being fake
16:2116:21, 11 April 2010 diff hist +56‎ Ica stones ‎ revert -- there is NO CONFIRMATION that they are a hoax. if you have a source for confirmation, then please list it

22:2722:27, 10 April 2010 diff hist +56‎ Ica stones ‎ there is no confirmation that they are a hoax. claiming they are definitely a hoax is an opinion without source
22:1122:11, 10 April 2010 diff hist −87‎ Ica stones ‎ biased information with NO SOURCE

00:5700:57, 23 February 2010 diff hist +402‎ User talk:Comder ‎ →‎Reply

03:0603:06, 22 February 2010 diff hist +44‎ m User talk:Comder ‎ →‎Reply
03:0603:06, 22 February 2010 diff hist +637‎ User talk:Comder ‎ →‎Reply: new section

17:0417:04, 15 February 2010 diff hist +422‎ User talk:Shadoom ‎ →‎RE:Another website: new section

04:2104:21, 26 January 2010 diff hist +351‎ Sandra Bullock ‎ Undid revision 340054693 by Wildhartlivie (talk) yes she does say that. read the interview
01:5801:58, 26 January 2010 diff hist +153‎ Sandra Bullock ‎ →‎Personal life
01:5601:56, 26 January 2010 diff hist +198‎ Sandra Bullock ‎ →‎Personal life: Bullock is a Christian
01:5001:50, 26 January 2010 diff hist +159‎ Talk:Sandra Bullock ‎ →‎Her Religion ??

03:0203:02, 20 January 2010 diff hist +38‎ N Senator Scott Brown ‎ ←Redirected page to Scott Brown (politician)

19:3519:35, 17 January 2010 diff hist +6‎ m The Exodus ‎ →‎Traditional exodus
19:3419:34, 17 January 2010 diff hist +48‎ The Exodus ‎ →‎Dating: no reason to just use BCE here. If BC notation solely won't be permitted, then both notations can be used as per the Jesus article
16:5016:50, 17 January 2010 diff hist −2‎ m The Exodus ‎ →‎Dating
16:4916:49, 17 January 2010 diff hist −23‎ m The Exodus ‎ →‎Dating
04:3904:39, 17 January 2010 diff hist −32‎ Protestantism by country ‎ →‎By country

23:4523:45, 13 January 2010 diff hist +8‎ m Ica stones ‎ Undid revision 337694536 by ClovisPt (talk) - sorry but that IS how it works. there is NO REASON WHATSOEVER to erase that word
23:2223:22, 13 January 2010 diff hist +8‎ Ica stones ‎ the majority of stones reside in a museum and unless otherwise proven they are ancient. (otherwise we can take the "ancient" tag off Moai statues)
21:2221:22, 13 January 2010 diff hist −6‎ Ica stones ‎ they aren't "alleged" to have dinosaur depictions - they do

19:1819:18, 7 January 2010 diff hist −81‎ m Talk:Jesus ‎ →‎Using BC/BCE and AD/CE versus using BC/AD
19:1719:17, 7 January 2010 diff hist +1,048‎ Talk:Jesus ‎ →‎Using BC/BCE and AD/CE versus using BC/AD
02:3002:30, 7 January 2010 diff hist +39‎ m Talk:Jesus ‎ →‎Using BC/BCE and AD/CE versus using BC/AD
02:1602:16, 7 January 2010 diff hist +776‎ Talk:Jesus ‎ →‎Using BC/BCE and AD/CE versus using BC/AD
01:4401:44, 7 January 2010 diff hist +1‎ m Talk:Jesus ‎ →‎Using BC/BCE and AD/CE versus using BC/AD
01:4301:43, 7 January 2010 diff hist +887‎ Talk:Jesus ‎ →‎Using BC/BCE and AD/CE versus using BC/AD

02:0902:09, 6 January 2010 diff hist +688‎ Talk:Jesus ‎ →‎Using BC/BCE and AD/CE versus using BC/AD: new section
00:4400:44, 6 January 2010 diff hist +117‎ m Talk:Intelligent design ‎ →‎One of the Best Written Biased Views of a Famous Historical American Debate I Have Ever Read
00:4000:40, 6 January 2010 diff hist +395‎ User:ΙΧΘΥΣ/sig ‎ Undid revision 336108755 by ΙΧΘΥΣ (talk)
00:3900:39, 6 January 2010 diff hist −395‎ User:ΙΧΘΥΣ/sig ‎ ←Blanked the page
00:3900:39, 6 January 2010 diff hist +17‎ m Talk:Intelligent design ‎ →‎One of the Best Written Biased Views of a Famous Historical American Debate I Have Ever Read
00:3800:38, 6 January 2010 diff hist +919‎ Talk:Intelligent design ‎ →‎One of the Best Written Biased Views of a Famous Historical American Debate I Have Ever Read

21:4621:46, 17 December 2009 diff hist +8‎ m Talk:Intelligent design ‎ →‎This Article is biased and an embarrassment to Wiki
21:4421:44, 17 December 2009 diff hist +1,717‎ Talk:Intelligent design ‎ →‎This Article is biased and an embarrassment to Wiki
00:4700:47, 17 December 2009 diff hist +384‎ User talk:Ttiotsw ‎ →‎RE:Speedy deletion: new section

03:5003:50, 16 December 2009 diff hist −3‎ m Talk:Intelligent design ‎ →‎This Article is biased and an embarrassment to Wiki
02:1902:19, 16 December 2009 diff hist +62‎ N Wikipedia is bias ‎ ←Redirected page to Criticism of Wikipedia#Systemic bias in coverage
02:1802:18, 16 December 2009 diff hist −2‎ m Wikipedia biases ‎ ←Redirected page to Criticism of Wikipedia#Systemic bias in coverage

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/ΙΧΘΥΣ"