Misplaced Pages

30 August 2007

• curprev 00:1900:19, 30 August 2007 Odd nature talk contribs 64,529 bytes −63 Revert. Consensus amongst regular, credible contributors here is that the passage is accurate and self evident by the DI's own claim.

29 August 2007

• curprev 23:4023:40, 29 August 2007 63.215.27.117 talk 64,592 bytes +63 Undo. I can't answer the statement, "seems pretty clear to me." Give a reason that I can respond to -- either here, on the talk page, or both.
• curprev 22:4322:43, 29 August 2007 Guettarda talk contribs 64,529 bytes −63 seems pretty clear to me
• curprev 21:4921:49, 29 August 2007 4.68.248.69 talk 64,592 bytes +63 Revert. That does not mean that Judge Jones formally accepted the program even just for the purpose of word finding/counting, let alone for comparison of ideas of two texts. See talk page.
• curprev 21:2321:23, 29 August 2007 Odd nature talk contribs 64,529 bytes −63 Reverting. Judge Jones accepted the plaintiffs arguments, which used the program, by the DI's own admission. Read the section.
• curprev 19:3119:31, 29 August 2007 4.68.248.69 talk 64,592 bytes +63 Reverting to wording proposed by Elsberry. No evidence that Judge Jones "accepted" program even just for word finding/counting, let alone for comparison of ideas in two texts. See talk page.
• curprev 17:4817:48, 29 August 2007 Odd nature talk contribs m 64,529 bytes +7 →"Study" criticizing Judge Jones: Minor edit to clarify sections being compared.
• curprev 17:4517:45, 29 August 2007 Odd nature talk contribs m 64,522 bytes +2 →"Study" criticizing Judge Jones: 'a' to 'the'
• curprev 17:4417:44, 29 August 2007 Odd nature talk contribs 64,520 bytes −15 →"Study" criticizing Judge Jones: Minor alterations to grammar and tone, gist is still the same.
• curprev 17:1117:11, 29 August 2007 Hrafn talk contribs 64,535 bytes −5 →"Study" criticizing Judge Jones: authoritative is too strong a word, given the context
• curprev 16:4716:47, 29 August 2007 Odd nature talk contribs 64,540 bytes +49 →"Study" criticizing Judge Jones: Per Wes's insight.
• curprev 16:3316:33, 29 August 2007 Odd nature talk contribs 64,491 bytes −102 Reverting. Papers over significant point.
• curprev 14:4214:42, 29 August 2007 Veritasjohn talk contribs 64,593 bytes +165 →Controversy: change Elsberry text program description - see discussion
• curprev 12:2412:24, 29 August 2007 63.215.27.117 talk 64,428 bytes −63 Undid revision by ConfuciusOrnis. Brayton (Ref. #88) and Elsberry say Elsberry wrote program. Anyway, doesn't matter who wrote the program -- the program has not been approved by the courts.
• curprev 11:3111:31, 29 August 2007 ConfuciusOrnis talk contribs m 64,491 bytes +63 Reverted 1 edit by 63.215.27.117 to last revision by FeloniousMonk; What COI fm didn't write the prog.
• curprev 11:2311:23, 29 August 2007 63.215.27.117 talk 64,428 bytes −63 Undid revision by FeloniousMonk. Conflict of interest, self-promotion by program author. WP:COI. Program was never approved by any court for any purpose. See talk page.
• curprev 03:4803:48, 29 August 2007 FeloniousMonk talk contribs 64,491 bytes +63 rv. not quite
• curprev 00:5800:58, 29 August 2007 4.68.248.69 talk 64,428 bytes −63 There is no evidence that this text comparison program or any other text comparison program is approved for use and considered authoritative in Federal court.

28 August 2007

• curprev 19:3719:37, 28 August 2007 Filll talk contribs 64,491 bytes +68 →Intelligent design and Teach the Controversy: wikilink
• curprev 19:2819:28, 28 August 2007 Filll talk contribs 64,423 bytes +23 →Biologic Institute
• curprev 19:1919:19, 28 August 2007 Filll talk contribs 64,400 bytes +57 →History: wikify and fix some grammar
• curprev 18:1018:10, 28 August 2007 LordAnubisBOT talk contribs m 64,343 bytes +27 robot Adding: it:Discovery Institute
• curprev 15:3415:34, 28 August 2007 ConfuciusOrnis talk contribs m 64,316 bytes −389 Reverted 1 edit by 63.215.27.117 to last revision by Orangemarlin; Per talk.
• curprev 15:2715:27, 28 August 2007 63.215.27.117 talk 64,705 bytes +389 Undid arbitrary reversion by Orangemarlin. Did not answer any of my arguments for keeping the entry. Summary is in Luskin's article. The DI has the right to defend its report.
• curprev 14:4114:41, 28 August 2007 Orangemarlin talk contribs 64,316 bytes −389 Undid revision 154173623 by 63.215.27.117 (talk)Reverted per Guettarda
• curprev 14:1214:12, 28 August 2007 63.215.27.117 talk 64,705 bytes +389 Undid revision by Guettarda. Summary unnecessary because reference is only six pages long. No Wiki rule requires summaries of references. Rebutted Wiki text is itself a summary.
• curprev 03:3103:31, 28 August 2007 Guettarda talk contribs 64,316 bytes −389 →"Study" criticizing Judge Jones: rm random bit of text - a summary of the DI's response might be useful, but this isn't

27 August 2007

• curprev 17:2817:28, 27 August 2007 Dave souza talk contribs 64,705 bytes +1,391 →History: clarify
• curprev 14:4114:41, 27 August 2007 H2g2bob talk contribs m 63,314 bytes −8 →Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture: bold to italic, and de-link as it has a {{main}}
• curprev 14:4014:40, 27 August 2007 H2g2bob talk contribs m 63,322 bytes −4 →History: bold to italic
• curprev 13:1013:10, 27 August 2007 4.68.248.69 talk 63,326 bytes +389 Undid revision 153941617 by Hrafn42. Cut it out. The Discovery Institute has a right to defend its report.
• curprev 12:4212:42, 27 August 2007 Hrafn talk contribs 62,937 bytes −389 Undid revision 153938799 by RucasHost (talk)
• curprev 12:1712:17, 27 August 2007 RucasHost talk contribs 63,326 bytes +389 Undid revision 153937262 by ConfuciusOrnis (talk)
• curprev 12:0312:03, 27 August 2007 ConfuciusOrnis talk contribs m 62,937 bytes −389 Reverted 1 edit by 4.68.248.69 identified as vandalism to last revision by ZayZayEM.
• curprev 11:5611:56, 27 August 2007 4.68.248.69 talk 63,326 bytes +389 Casey Luskin is an attorney who is an expert on the Dover case. Other people cited are not neutral, e.g., the ACLU's lead attorney in the case.
• curprev 11:5311:53, 27 August 2007 ZayZayEM talk contribs 62,937 bytes −32 →Funding: Anschutz and Scaife are not mentioned in W.Pos article. Please cite the source for these two contributors - changed wording, not an "admission", minor editing of sentance
• curprev 11:3211:32, 27 August 2007 Hrafn talk contribs 62,969 bytes −389 Undid revision 153909985 by 4.68.248.69 (talk)Luskin is neither neutral nor a legal expert
• curprev 08:0908:09, 27 August 2007 4.68.248.69 talk 63,358 bytes +389 Adding Discovery Institute's rebuttal of criticisms of the DI study of Judge Jones' copying

26 August 2007

• curprev 23:2923:29, 26 August 2007 TheNewPhobia talk contribs m 62,969 bytes +1 →Funding: spelling
• curprev 13:3513:35, 26 August 2007 Filll talk contribs 62,968 bytes −2 →Biologic Institute
• curprev 13:3413:34, 26 August 2007 Filll talk contribs 62,970 bytes +49 →Biologic Institute: correct some factual errors; see main article for more details
• curprev 04:1104:11, 26 August 2007 Filll talk contribs 62,921 bytes +29 →Biologic Institute

11 August 2007

• curprev 05:3405:34, 11 August 2007 FeloniousMonk talk contribs 62,892 bytes +99 →Controversy: full quote
• curprev 05:3305:33, 11 August 2007 FeloniousMonk talk contribs 62,793 bytes 0 →Controversy: fmt
• curprev 05:3205:32, 11 August 2007 FeloniousMonk talk contribs 62,793 bytes 0 →Controversy: fmt
• curprev 05:3105:31, 11 August 2007 FeloniousMonk talk contribs 62,793 bytes +1 →Controversy: fmt
• curprev 05:3005:30, 11 August 2007 FeloniousMonk talk contribs 62,792 bytes +421 →Controversy: dover ruling on the DI's agenda with source

7 August 2007

• curprev 06:1006:10, 7 August 2007 Pasado talk contribs m 62,371 bytes +227 Update Forrest paper location and use citation format

6 August 2007

• curprev 00:5200:52, 6 August 2007 Discospinster talk contribs m 62,144 bytes +6,169 Revert to revision 149227151 dated 2007-08-04 22:29:45 by FeloniousMonk using popups
• curprev 00:5000:50, 6 August 2007 71.112.151.90 talk 55,975 bytes −6,169 No edit summary