Page history
28 November 2008
→Guidelines for prospective editors
+86
no edit summary
+86
→Guidelines for prospective editors
m+6
→Guidelines for prospective editors: I feel users of Conservapedia need warnings what can lead to a block.
−53
→Guidelines for prospective editors
−81
→Guidelines for prospective editors
−85
27 November 2008
25 November 2008
24 November 2008
no edit summary
mno edit summary
+14
I think the white flag has been raised and a truce has been agreed to
−18
→Criticism
−323
→Criticism
−736
Unprotected "Conservapedia"
mProtected "Conservapedia": Set the wrong date. [edit=sysop:move=sysop] (expires 05:00, 11 December 2008 (UTC))
mProtected "Conservapedia": Supporters of Conservapedia tolerate only a whithwash of their controversial wiki. This edit war has gone on too long. [edit=sysop:move=sysop] (expires 05:00, 10 December 2009 (UTC))
m→Criticism
+6
I compromised and removed a lot of stuff that Conservapedians don't like. I'm protecting this compromise.
+277
23 November 2008
no edit summary
+48
no edit summary
+1
Your external links are just more attacks against Conservapedia
−749
→Criticism: this is vague, try to expand; hopefully the language is agreeable to all?
+423
→Criticism: re-add links (with new descriptions), and edit to give what I think is a fair but accurate description
+619
→External links: I think we could even move these into the criticism section
−466
→External links
+1
→External links
+193
→See also
+21
→See also
+23
→Criticism
−45
→See also
+270
→External links
−269
→Criticism
−109
21 November 2008
attempt at a compromise - some criticism, no personal attacks
−584
→See also
−34
no edit summary
+76
→Criticism
+154
no edit summary
+64
20 November 2008
no edit summary
+114
no edit summary
−69
→Criticism: add citation as requested -- I don't think this should be in the actual article, but <ref> tags don't seem to work...
+307
→See also
+596
→See also
→See also
+3
no edit summary
+52
19 November 2008
no edit summary
−6,288
no edit summary
−35
→Criticisms
−6
no edit summary
+18
→Criticisms: Really Gulik?
+9
→Description
m