A user with 25 edits. Account created on 22 April 2011.
22 April 2011
- 14:48 14:48, 22 April 2011 diff hist +388 Shakespeare authorship question added "some" as qualifier. This section needs to be clear as to what each side proposes. Otherwise, bias is in play.
- 09:25 09:25, 22 April 2011 diff hist +417 Talk:Shakespeare authorship question Hi.
- 09:20 09:20, 22 April 2011 diff hist +232 N User:Anton321 ←Created page with 'I'm new here so will just be doing some clean-up work until I get the hang of things. I've been doing some research on the Shakespeare Authorship Controversy so cam...' current
- 09:15 09:15, 22 April 2011 diff hist +557 Shakespeare authorship question →Bardolatry and early doubt: moving description of graphic to same section.
- 09:10 09:10, 22 April 2011 diff hist −463 Shakespeare authorship question →Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford: this should be in the same section as the graphic. Will try to find a place. Tag: references removed
- 09:09 09:09, 22 April 2011 diff hist +33 Shakespeare authorship question →Bardolatry and early doubt: again - trying to match this statement with the main article on the history of the question.
- 09:07 09:07, 22 April 2011 diff hist +421 Shakespeare authorship question →Bardolatry and early doubt: this graphic seems to fit best under "early doubts" (but isn't there a better version of this?)
- 09:05 09:05, 22 April 2011 diff hist −419 Shakespeare authorship question →Authorship in the mainstream media: this graphic seems to be in the wrong section. Will try moving to history section.
- 09:01 09:01, 22 April 2011 diff hist 0 m Shakespeare authorship question →Bardolatry and early doubt
- 09:00 09:00, 22 April 2011 diff hist +9 m Shakespeare authorship question →Bardolatry and early doubt
- 08:59 08:59, 22 April 2011 diff hist +36 Shakespeare authorship question →Bardolatry and early doubt: same as previous edit (trying to match this with the main history article).
- 08:57 08:57, 22 April 2011 diff hist +7 Shakespeare authorship question →Bardolatry and early doubt: again - trying to match this statement with the main article on the history of the question.
- 08:55 08:55, 22 April 2011 diff hist +127 Shakespeare authorship question trying to match this statement to the main wikipedia article on the history of the question. Right now it does not.
- 08:51 08:51, 22 April 2011 diff hist +75 Shakespeare authorship question These are opinions, yes? They seem to be stated as facts and do not correspond to the main article on the history of the question. We have to be careful about stating opinion as undisputed fact.
- 08:39 08:39, 22 April 2011 diff hist +806 Talk:Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford →Admin note: edit request
- 08:27 08:27, 22 April 2011 diff hist +570 Talk:Oxfordian theory of Shakespeare authorship →Biaised contributions: my recent edits
- 08:21 08:21, 22 April 2011 diff hist +1 m Oxfordian theory of Shakespeare authorship →History of the Oxfordian theory
- 08:19 08:19, 22 April 2011 diff hist +505 Oxfordian theory of Shakespeare authorship →History of the Oxfordian theory: moved bit I cut about Ogburn down here for now. This section needs serious help!
- 08:16 08:16, 22 April 2011 diff hist +1,317 Oxfordian theory of Shakespeare authorship →History of the Oxfordian theory: moving the bit I cut down here for now. This section needs more attention. It's woefully incomplete.
- 08:10 08:10, 22 April 2011 diff hist −1,118 Oxfordian theory of Shakespeare authorship deleting this section, which has nothing to do with Oxford. Maybe it can go elsewhere, but it is out of place here. Tag: references removed
- 08:07 08:07, 22 April 2011 diff hist −582 Oxfordian theory of Shakespeare authorship issues discussed at talk seem to have been resolved. Flag no longer needed. Tag: references removed
- 08:05 08:05, 22 April 2011 diff hist +91 Oxfordian theory of Shakespeare authorship →Additional objections: attributing opinons to Nelson, etc. We must be careful not to state opinions as facts and to attribute these opinions.
- 07:43 07:43, 22 April 2011 diff hist +467 Oxfordian theory of Shakespeare authorship →History of the Oxfordian theory: putting what I cut back into the section that mentions Ogburn. Perhaps there is still a better location for this (if at all)?
- 07:36 07:36, 22 April 2011 diff hist −495 Oxfordian theory of Shakespeare authorship cutting non-secquitor. Perhaps move this to body of article? Tag: references removed
- 07:33 07:33, 22 April 2011 diff hist −13 Oxfordian theory of Shakespeare authorship the first reference uses "strongest". It's not a popularity contest. Adjusting to match the reference (Encyclopedia Britannica)
A user with 25 edits. Account created on 22 April 2011.
22 April 2011
- 14:48 14:48, 22 April 2011 diff hist +388 Shakespeare authorship question added "some" as qualifier. This section needs to be clear as to what each side proposes. Otherwise, bias is in play.
- 09:25 09:25, 22 April 2011 diff hist +417 Talk:Shakespeare authorship question Hi.
- 09:20 09:20, 22 April 2011 diff hist +232 N User:Anton321 ←Created page with 'I'm new here so will just be doing some clean-up work until I get the hang of things. I've been doing some research on the Shakespeare Authorship Controversy so cam...' current
- 09:15 09:15, 22 April 2011 diff hist +557 Shakespeare authorship question →Bardolatry and early doubt: moving description of graphic to same section.
- 09:10 09:10, 22 April 2011 diff hist −463 Shakespeare authorship question →Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford: this should be in the same section as the graphic. Will try to find a place. Tag: references removed
- 09:09 09:09, 22 April 2011 diff hist +33 Shakespeare authorship question →Bardolatry and early doubt: again - trying to match this statement with the main article on the history of the question.
- 09:07 09:07, 22 April 2011 diff hist +421 Shakespeare authorship question →Bardolatry and early doubt: this graphic seems to fit best under "early doubts" (but isn't there a better version of this?)
- 09:05 09:05, 22 April 2011 diff hist −419 Shakespeare authorship question →Authorship in the mainstream media: this graphic seems to be in the wrong section. Will try moving to history section.
- 09:01 09:01, 22 April 2011 diff hist 0 m Shakespeare authorship question →Bardolatry and early doubt
- 09:00 09:00, 22 April 2011 diff hist +9 m Shakespeare authorship question →Bardolatry and early doubt
- 08:59 08:59, 22 April 2011 diff hist +36 Shakespeare authorship question →Bardolatry and early doubt: same as previous edit (trying to match this with the main history article).
- 08:57 08:57, 22 April 2011 diff hist +7 Shakespeare authorship question →Bardolatry and early doubt: again - trying to match this statement with the main article on the history of the question.
- 08:55 08:55, 22 April 2011 diff hist +127 Shakespeare authorship question trying to match this statement to the main wikipedia article on the history of the question. Right now it does not.
- 08:51 08:51, 22 April 2011 diff hist +75 Shakespeare authorship question These are opinions, yes? They seem to be stated as facts and do not correspond to the main article on the history of the question. We have to be careful about stating opinion as undisputed fact.
- 08:39 08:39, 22 April 2011 diff hist +806 Talk:Edward de Vere, 17th Earl of Oxford →Admin note: edit request
- 08:27 08:27, 22 April 2011 diff hist +570 Talk:Oxfordian theory of Shakespeare authorship →Biaised contributions: my recent edits
- 08:21 08:21, 22 April 2011 diff hist +1 m Oxfordian theory of Shakespeare authorship →History of the Oxfordian theory
- 08:19 08:19, 22 April 2011 diff hist +505 Oxfordian theory of Shakespeare authorship →History of the Oxfordian theory: moved bit I cut about Ogburn down here for now. This section needs serious help!
- 08:16 08:16, 22 April 2011 diff hist +1,317 Oxfordian theory of Shakespeare authorship →History of the Oxfordian theory: moving the bit I cut down here for now. This section needs more attention. It's woefully incomplete.
- 08:10 08:10, 22 April 2011 diff hist −1,118 Oxfordian theory of Shakespeare authorship deleting this section, which has nothing to do with Oxford. Maybe it can go elsewhere, but it is out of place here. Tag: references removed
- 08:07 08:07, 22 April 2011 diff hist −582 Oxfordian theory of Shakespeare authorship issues discussed at talk seem to have been resolved. Flag no longer needed. Tag: references removed
- 08:05 08:05, 22 April 2011 diff hist +91 Oxfordian theory of Shakespeare authorship →Additional objections: attributing opinons to Nelson, etc. We must be careful not to state opinions as facts and to attribute these opinions.
- 07:43 07:43, 22 April 2011 diff hist +467 Oxfordian theory of Shakespeare authorship →History of the Oxfordian theory: putting what I cut back into the section that mentions Ogburn. Perhaps there is still a better location for this (if at all)?
- 07:36 07:36, 22 April 2011 diff hist −495 Oxfordian theory of Shakespeare authorship cutting non-secquitor. Perhaps move this to body of article? Tag: references removed
- 07:33 07:33, 22 April 2011 diff hist −13 Oxfordian theory of Shakespeare authorship the first reference uses "strongest". It's not a popularity contest. Adjusting to match the reference (Encyclopedia Britannica)