User talk:Fredmont

May 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Armeniac Theme. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. ''The information comes from a credible source. It may be possible that there is a mistake, but your own personal experience, as one user among millions who use this site, is not admissible per WP:OR and WP:RS. Regards.'' Constantine  ✍  20:16, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Late Roman army
As the main author of Late Roman army, and of the army organisation charts in it, I am fed up with your repeated unilateral removal of the East Roman chart, simply because you think it's wrong. You are totally in breach of Wikipedia etiquette, which requires that before making changes, especially to an A-rated article, you should first propose those changes on the discussion page, with supporting ecidence, and give the main author, and others, the chance to comment. As it is, you have not provided a shred of hard evidence to support your contention that eastern duces did not report to magistri. If you do so on the discussion page, I shall be happy to debate the point with you. in the meantime, I suggest you stop your arragant behaviour. EraNavigator (talk) 13:09, 1 August 2010 (UTC)


 * I object to your personal attack on me in the Late Roman army Discussion Page. If you have any complaints about my behaviour, the appropriate place is my Talk Page. An article's Discussion Page is for civilised debate on issues arising from the article. As regards the latter, see my latest post there. You have already been warned (by me and above) about placing your own unreferenced opinions in the article. EraNavigator (talk) 20:35, 23 November 2010 (UTC)


 * 1) That was no personal attack. 2) I won't certainly let you tell me what the appropriate place for my complaints is. 3) As for the warning above, my "unreferenced opinion" was finally upheld, because it wasn't an "opinion" but the discovery that a source quoted in the article, however plausibly "referenced", did not exist. 4) Please, refrain from writing on my page again, especially if what you have to say is so trivial Fredmont (talk) 01:54, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Monkey hanger
Thank you for your recent contributions to. While the Wikipedia community appreciates your efforts to increase the amount of information on the site, we cannot accept sources that appear to be the original work of the editor. If the material you added can be attributed to a reliable source, you may add it back if you cite it. This increases the reputation of Wikipedia as a whole and aids in the verifiability of the article.~Pyb (talk) 09:49, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Page moves
Please, in future don't perform cut-and-paste moves. Go through regular channels, per WP:RM, instead. Otherwise the page history is lost. Cheers, Constantine  ✍  18:53, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, I didn't know there was a possibility of requesting technical moves. Cheers, Fredmont (talk) 19:11, 26 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Don't worry, it took me some time to find it out too. And thanks for the additions on the chronology as well :) Constantine  ✍  19:57, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:06, 24 November 2015 (UTC)