User talk:Eumachia

Liquidity crisis

Your continued refusal to understand wp:RS has crossed the line of acceptable behavior. Either find a good source or move on. NJGW (talk) 06:42, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are sources. Find some support for the deletion of Liquidity crisis or move on, you are acting alone on this. Eumachia (talk) 08:56, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your continued lack of discussion of the content is disturbing. Please do not edit the article again until after the issues related to the extremely poor sources you are relying on have been completely discussed on the talk page. NJGW (talk) 09:07, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last time I will request for you to discuss your disruptive edits. You have long ago ceased being productive on the project. NJGW (talk) 15:21, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

stop lecturing me, you are acting alone and you are wrong. Eumachia (talk) 21:02, 5 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A request for proper sources is no lecture. Discuss their merits or provide better sources, or you risk being blocked by an administrator until you can. NJGW (talk) 09:38, 6 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

École Polytechnique

Since you removed the "dubious" tag for "undergraduates: none", you presumably can explain how the following statements in the article are consistent with there being no undergraduates at the École Polytechnique:

The École polytechnique has an undergraduate/graduate general engineering teaching curriculum as well as a graduate school.

Studies at Polytechnique cover a scope that goes from advanced undergraduate studies (students are awarded a Master after the third year of their studies at Polytechnique) to Graduate studies.

The total length of the undergraduate curriculum was historically 3 years: one year of military service, one year of “common trunk”, then one year of specialized studies (“majors”). This was somewhat changed in the X2000 reform, whereby a fourth year of studies was introduced.

I have gone ahead and retagged "undergraduates: none" as dubious. If you disagree, then kindly explain why on the discussion topic that was established four days ago to address this question, and when you remove the dubious tag please at the same time correct, or tag as themselves dubious, the three statements cited above.

--MyPOV (talk) 00:05, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being 'minor'. The only thing that's changed is that you will no longer be able to have them marked as minor by default. For more information on what a minor edit is, see WP:MINOR or feel to get in touch.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 20:25, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]