User talk:Jeppiz/Archives/2015/February

CMT
Any opinion about this version? Bladesmulti (talk) 04:23, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Rollbacker
I have [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=rights&user=&page=User%3AJeppiz granted] rollback rights to your account. After a review of some of your contributions, I believe you can be trusted to use rollback for its intended usage of reverting vandalism, and that you will not abuse it by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see New admin school/Rollback and Rollback feature. If you do not want rollback, contact me and I will remove it. Good luck and thanks. – Gilliam (talk) 12:33, 14 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your kind words, very much appreciated!Jeppiz (talk) 12:34, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Talk: CMT

 * Jeppiz, I'm not actually a sock or a blocked user, although I appreciate you have only my word for that. The book in question is a critical study of the decidedly unhistorical methods of the CMT and some of its leading proponents, with a major emphasis on Carrier (including some rather alarming links to Holocaust deniers, which I didn't include in the comment because they are not relevant). The only reason I put forward that information was to inform debate because I thought it might be useful in the discussion, although it is clearly not useful in the article itself.
 * I have contributed to that talk page before, about the Grant quote (including the non-NPOV edits by Cole) and criticizing Carrier, and you may notice that dear old René was very annoyed with me for describing Carrier's methodology as 'implausible', describing it as 'wildly NPOV' (which given his record was almost as funny as being accused by Gordon Brown of reckless spending). However, if you feel it's not relevant, by all means remove it.
 * I am however more than slightly puzzled and a bit hurt that you confused me with René Salm, a notorious forger and liar whose work has been so regularly bashed by actual professional archaeologists (whom he describes as 'conspiracy theorists') that it is a wonder even AAP keep publishing it! I am actually a professional historian and work at a college in the West Midlands of the UK. However, again, since I keep my identity a closely guarded secret I know you have only my word for that.
 * Happy hunting.109.156.158.20 (talk) 11:07, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

It is however quite funny and richly ironic that Salm has been blocked for a further two weeks as a result of this error, when actually for once - literally for once - he had done nothing wrong! However, that should make all your lives a bit easier for a while. Good luck with making the changes.109.156.158.20 (talk) 13:51, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

The Harmed Brothers
My page for band The Harmed Brothers is not advertising. It is merely a band history. Don't understand why it's tagged for deletion. Gobloots (talk) 01:25, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Your Work at CMT
Just wanted to drop by and say thanks for all of your work with this article. I can only imagine how frustrated you've been at times. It's greatly appreciated that you've worked so hard to maintain a NPOV throughout. Kudos good sir! Zarcusian (talk) 06:24, 17 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot Zarcusian, I really appreciate that!Jeppiz (talk) 14:48, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 21
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Priestly source, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Harper. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:54, 21 February 2015 (UTC)