User talk:SeanS
From Conservapedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by SeanS (Talk | contribs) at 17:35, September 25, 2011. It may differ significantly from current revision.
Hi there.
Machismo Article
I am sorry about that but you should have a look at this article then: pride. --ARamis 22:34, 19 September 2011 (EDT)
- I know what it is and I know what the Sins are, but they aren't biblical. --SeanS 22:35, 19 September 2011 (EDT)
- Ok. Are you saying that I should have named the category Machismo and Christianity instead ?--ARamis 22:38, 19 September 2011 (EDT)
- No, its fine. I was removing the 7 deadly sins thing simply because those arent biblical, they are sins, but not "seven deadly"--SeanS 22:40, 19 September 2011 (EDT)
- I'm sorry but I'm confused. What do you mean ? Is it wrong to say that those are biblical or to say that there are deadly ?--ARamis 22:44, 19 September 2011 (EDT)
- No, its fine. I was removing the 7 deadly sins thing simply because those arent biblical, they are sins, but not "seven deadly"--SeanS 22:40, 19 September 2011 (EDT)
- Ok. Are you saying that I should have named the category Machismo and Christianity instead ?--ARamis 22:38, 19 September 2011 (EDT)
Earthquakes
Can you have a look at the Earthquake article and the discussion about it on the main talk page? There is a claim that severe earthquakes are doubling every 40 years, which just isn't true. DavidZa and I have both demonstrated that the cited source is incorrect, but nobody seems interested and all attempts to fix the error just get instantly reverted. Here is a link to the actual data so that the reference can be checked: [1]. --FindlayT 14:24, 21 September 2011 (EDT)
Wikipedia
Sean, we don't copy from Wikipedia. Was your edit comment what you meant to say a few minutes ago?--Andy Schlafly 13:05, 25 September 2011 (EDT)
- Well, i didn't have anything to put into the article, so i took the basic info about the name, who they are and birth date. better then a blank article at least.--SeanS 13:22, 25 September 2011 (EDT)
- The vast internet has better sources than Wikipedia. I'll take a look at the entry.--Andy Schlafly 13:34, 25 September 2011 (EDT)
- Probably, but i figured I could trust the information I used. Better then the unrelated vandalism it was created as.--SeanS 13:35, 25 September 2011 (EDT)
- The vast internet has better sources than Wikipedia. I'll take a look at the entry.--Andy Schlafly 13:34, 25 September 2011 (EDT)
