<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
	<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=Mm444</id>
	<title>Conservapedia - User contributions [en]</title>
	<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=Mm444"/>
	<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/Special:Contributions/Mm444"/>
	<updated>2026-09-23T23:54:14Z</updated>
	<subtitle>User contributions</subtitle>
	<generator>MediaWiki 1.35.14</generator>
	<entry>
		<id>https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia:Contact_Us&amp;diff=429143</id>
		<title>Conservapedia:Contact Us</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Conservapedia:Contact_Us&amp;diff=429143"/>
		<updated>2008-04-12T02:13:09Z</updated>

		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Mm444: /* To Kill The Child/Leaving Beirut */&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;I would like to post the following to the Jesse Helms article after &amp;quot;Foreign Policy&amp;quot; but am locked out. I don't know why.  {{unsigned|BertSchlossberg}}&lt;br /&gt;
: Editing is often turned off overnight (U.S. time), which may have been your problem, although that means that you shouldn't have been able to post here, so unless it was turned back on in the meantime, I can't explain it.  Would you like to try it again?  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 08:47, 19 December 2007 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:: Right.  The [[Jesse Helms]] entry is not locked.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 09:06, 19 December 2007 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==When only part of an article is accepted==&lt;br /&gt;
I recently posted an entry, [[F-105 Thunderchief]], and included a references section and a category, but in the final article, neither section shows up, although they are clearly present when the &amp;quot;Edit&amp;quot; button is clicked.  Just now, this happened again with another entry I tried to make.  What gives?  Does the site only accept so much information in a new entry?  --[[User:Frey|Frey]] 17:58, 27 February 2008 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
:You had a bad &amp;lt;nowiki&amp;gt;&amp;lt;ref&amp;gt;&amp;lt;/nowiki&amp;gt; tag which I have fixed.  [[User:BrianCo|BrianCo]] 18:02, 27 February 2008 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
::I did?  Oopsie.  And thanks.--[[User:Frey|Frey]] 18:09, 27 February 2008 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==KAL 007 article on Main page==&lt;br /&gt;
I would like to propose having the article [[Korean Airlines Flight 007]] as a featured article on the Main page. Thanks.[[User:BertSchlossberg|BertSchlossberg]] 15:32, 1 March 2008 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
(finally got it right!)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
: I'd like to review it in detail and hear what others think about it.  On its surface, without yet studying it, it appears to be a major work.  Congratulations!--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:58, 1 March 2008 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
:: There's a [[Conservapedia:Featured articles|page]] for listing proposed featured articles.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 17:52, 1 March 2008 (EST)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
==To Kill The Child/Leaving Beirut==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I just wrote an exteremly long and extensive artical about these two songs. Then, when I went to save the page, it said that it did not save it because there was a quote in their to explain about the song that contained a profanity. What gives? I thought that this website was supposed to educate people, yet people cannot be educated if they cannot know what the artical is talking about and what the proof is.  {{unsigned|Std}}&lt;br /&gt;
: We have a profanity filter for good reason, but sometimes exceptions need to be made.  You haven't supplied enough information for us to judge if this warrants an exception.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 22:47, 10 April 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
What exactly are the exeptions that would get me the warrent?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
How do you upload an image?&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
{{unsigned|Std}}&lt;br /&gt;
:You have to ask an administrator.  There was a problem with people uploading obscene materials. [[User:HenryS|HenryS]] 00:42, 11 April 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
: An exception would be warranted if, for example, the word caught by the filter was not objectionable in the context.  [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 02:57, 11 April 2008 (EDT)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Question for the Editor --&lt;br /&gt;
I just found my way to your site via Google, and read &amp;quot;Feminism.&amp;quot;  I noticed that your editorial policy says that you're not allowing the use of material that isn't accurate. That site says that early feminists were &amp;quot;suffragettes.&amp;quot;  The suffragettes were English, in fact -- in the use, the folks who supported the right to vote for women were suffragists, from Woodrow Wilson to good ol' Theodore Roosevelt.  Your writers also have no idea that the term &amp;quot;feminist&amp;quot; at times has been somewhat conservative (hey! surprise!), as when the National Women's Party supported an Equal Rights Amendment while most women opposed it.  In the meantime, in the twentieth century, some Republican women would have been comfortable calling themselves &amp;quot;feminists,&amp;quot; from Margaret Chase Smith to Oveta Culp Hobby.  The term has had somewhat varied meanings over the course of the century, and any accurate description should reflect that.  Interested readers could check out Catherine Rymph's Republican Women, published by the very reputable U.North Carolina Press.&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Mm444</name></author>
	</entry>
</feed>