User talk:XDev

Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test worked, and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thanks. --File:Ottawa flag.png Spinboy 17:12, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You did

You died and made me a God. --File:Ottawa flag.png Spinboy 18:19, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Spinboy

Hey I also see your having issues with Spinboy. He's vandalizing pages and says I do it. He is annoying the Hell out me! Keeps deleting Talk chat and vandalizes pages cause he's biased. We should report him to a Admin. Let me know what you think.

-Anakinskywalker 17:40, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Illuminati

Hi. I'm trying to start a discussion on the direction/flow of Illuminati at Talk:Illuminati#Forwards?. Your thoughts would be appreciated. Fiddlersmouth (talk) 02:27, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OR and synthesis

WP:OR (original research) and WP:SYNTH are the relevant links. Basically, we can't use primary sources in any way that might rely on editor interpretation, and we can't use multiple sources to arrive at a point that none of the individual sources explicitly makes. Ian.thomson (talk) 16:59, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

September 2020

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose their editing privileges. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:18, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. The user is anonymous and is vandalizing the page on behalf of someone already banned, and likely is the same person. He didn't bring up what he intended to add in the talk page and just went ahead and added an conspiracy theorist antisemite as a source in the main article. XDev (talk) 16:28, 28 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of neutral point of view noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is The Conflict with Rosicrucians section of the Illuminati page. The discussion is about the topic Conflict with Rosicrucians section the Illuminati Wikipedia page. Thank you. --AnandaBliss (talk) 12:53, 16 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The primary sources cited by Le Forestier are in his notes. I guess I'll have to add those to satisfy your ignorance. I'll be adding more relevant data on this conflict from eminent experts such as professors Christopher McIntosh, Ernst Benz and Klaus Epstein. I'll be editing both the Illuminati page and Rosy Cross page to make it absolutely clear the real nature of the conflict and their views on each other. XDev (talk) 14:02, 19 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]