User contributions for Geogene
Results for Geogene talk block log uploads logs global block log global account filter log
A user with 11,017 edits. Account created on 3 June 2009.
2 November 2025
- 23:1523:15, 2 November 2025 diff hist +375 Talk:Earthquake light →Mass poorly explained removals: more background on "Freund physics"
- 21:0421:04, 2 November 2025 diff hist +1,161 Talk:Earthquake light →Mass poorly explained removals: Reply Tag: Reply
- 18:2118:21, 2 November 2025 diff hist +442 Talk:Earthquake light →Mass poorly explained removals: Reply Tag: Reply
- 18:1718:17, 2 November 2025 diff hist −9,802 Earthquake light Undid revision 1320082113 by Very Polite Person (talk). WP:ONUS Tag: Undo
- 17:3117:31, 2 November 2025 diff hist +414 Talk:Earthquake light →Mass poorly explained removals: Reply Tag: Reply
- 17:2017:20, 2 November 2025 diff hist +403 Talk:Earthquake light →Mass poorly explained removals: Reply Tag: Reply
- 17:0217:02, 2 November 2025 diff hist +278 Talk:Earthquake light →Mass poorly explained removals: add
- 16:5816:58, 2 November 2025 diff hist +152 Talk:Earthquake light →Mass poorly explained removals: Reply Tag: Reply
- 16:5116:51, 2 November 2025 diff hist −1,456 Earthquake light →Types: More primary-sourced pro-fringe content, largely debunked by the Skeptical Inquirer source. If you want to explain how something works in WP:VOICE, use a textbook or a review article for that, not a primary paper Tag: Reverted
- 16:4816:48, 2 November 2025 diff hist −4,926 Earthquake light →History and background: NatGeo is not a reliable source; it's primary and pro-fringe. Also removing cherry picked opinions from 50 year old papers Tag: Reverted
- 16:4616:46, 2 November 2025 diff hist −3,420 Earthquake light Undid revision 1320080711 by Very Polite Person (talk) "The responsibility for achieving consensus for inclusion is on those seeking to include disputed content." WP:ONUS Tags: Undo Reverted
- 16:3616:36, 2 November 2025 diff hist −3,420 Earthquake light →History and background: delete pro-fringe, WP:PRIMARYNEWS sources with no analysis Tag: Reverted
- 16:3116:31, 2 November 2025 diff hist +344 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard →USGS vs. National Geographic at Earthquake light: Reply Tag: Reply
31 October 2025
- 04:4304:43, 31 October 2025 diff hist +607 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard →USGS vs. National Geographic at Earthquake light: Skeptical Inquirer may be the only reliable secondary source in that article
- 04:2804:28, 31 October 2025 diff hist −8 Earthquake light the USGS source said that geophysicists don't agree whether EQLs exist, so no need to act like it's just the scientific skeptics, whose POVs are currently quarantined at the end of the article
- 04:2504:25, 31 October 2025 diff hist +24 Earthquake light →History and background: curiously, the editors who are ultra-critical of scientific skeptics as sources don't seem to mind that we're citing a book by spies and diplomats. See: Warnings (book)
- 04:2104:21, 31 October 2025 diff hist +18 Earthquake light →Criticism: "Writer" is needlessly vague, he's a skeptic and UFO debunker
- 04:1904:19, 31 October 2025 diff hist −3 Earthquake light →Criticism: let's try a wording that isn't pejorative toward scientific skeptics. "Framing" is an ugly word in rhetoric. Was "not proven" the most significant criticism Sheaffer presented, or is this a watered down summary?
28 October 2025
- 18:5518:55, 28 October 2025 diff hist +680 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard →USGS vs. National Geographic at Earthquake light: Reply Tag: Reply
- 18:4418:44, 28 October 2025 diff hist +356 User talk:Very Polite Person →DYK for Abigail Becker: RSNB notice
- 18:4218:42, 28 October 2025 diff hist +1 m Talk:Earthquake light →What secondary sources do we have of geologists and SMEs who dispute EQL: thread
- 18:4218:42, 28 October 2025 diff hist +219 Talk:Earthquake light →What secondary sources do we have of geologists and SMEs who dispute EQL
- 18:4118:41, 28 October 2025 diff hist +4 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard →USGS vs. National Geographic at Earthquake light
- 18:4118:41, 28 October 2025 diff hist +5,135 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard →USGS vs. National Geographic at Earthquake light: new section Tags: Disambiguation links added New topic
- 18:0618:06, 28 October 2025 diff hist +1,667 Talk:Earthquake light →What secondary sources do we have of geologists and SMEs who dispute EQL: Reply Tag: Reply
27 October 2025
- 16:5716:57, 27 October 2025 diff hist +181 Earthquake light fix USGS reference
- 16:5416:54, 27 October 2025 diff hist −72 Earthquake light Restore the quoted version of the USGS, the previous attempt at paraphrasing it was inadequate
- 16:5216:52, 27 October 2025 diff hist +2 Earthquake light Restore the USGS summary to the lead, it is the best source in the article, and it establishes that not all geophysicists believe that stuff
25 October 2025
- 01:1701:17, 25 October 2025 diff hist −42 m Talk:Earthquake light →Canadian 65 seems fine
- 01:1101:11, 25 October 2025 diff hist +68 Talk:Earthquake light →Canadian 65 seems fine: add
- 01:1001:10, 25 October 2025 diff hist +47 Talk:Earthquake light →Canadian 65 seems fine: add
- 00:5900:59, 25 October 2025 diff hist +1,556 Talk:Earthquake light →Canadian 65 seems fine: Reply Tag: Reply
24 October 2025
- 18:1818:18, 24 October 2025 diff hist −1,352 Earthquake light There's a few problems with this "Cofield APS 2024-05-13". It's primary news from the APS. The Canadian government did not participate in the publication, one or more of the authors is affiliated with the Canadian government. APS did not conduct the research, the research was published in an APS conference paper. The material in question is Troy Shinbrot's experiment on unexpected voltages in a rotating Tupperware container of flour, already has UNDUE emphasis in the article
- 00:2900:29, 24 October 2025 diff hist +6 m Talk:Earthquake light →Removed External links: threading
- 00:2900:29, 24 October 2025 diff hist +1,618 Talk:Earthquake light →Removed External links: Reply Tag: Reply
- 00:0700:07, 24 October 2025 diff hist +406 Talk:Earthquake light →Removed External links: Reply Tag: Reply
23 October 2025
- 23:0923:09, 23 October 2025 diff hist +810 Talk:Earthquake light →Removed External links: Reply Tag: Reply
- 22:3122:31, 23 October 2025 diff hist +1,043 Talk:Earthquake light →Skepticism section: Reply Tag: Reply
- 21:1921:19, 23 October 2025 diff hist −7 m Talk:Earthquake light →Skepticism section: fix a link
- 21:1721:17, 23 October 2025 diff hist +191 Talk:Earthquake light →Skepticism section: Reply I'm puzzled too. I'm patiently citing the guidelines and policies and apparently that isn't enough? Tag: Reply
- 21:1621:16, 23 October 2025 diff hist +238 Talk:Earthquake light →Skepticism section: Reply Tag: Reply
- 21:1421:14, 23 October 2025 diff hist +454 Talk:Earthquake light →Skepticism section: Reply Tag: Reply
- 21:0721:07, 23 October 2025 diff hist +769 Talk:Earthquake light →Skepticism section: Reply Tag: Reply
- 20:5920:59, 23 October 2025 diff hist +278 Talk:Earthquake light →Skepticism section: Reply Tag: Reply
- 20:5220:52, 23 October 2025 diff hist +346 Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard →Earthquake light: Reply Tag: Reply
- 20:1520:15, 23 October 2025 diff hist +2,642 Talk:Earthquake light →Skepticism section: Reply Tag: Reply
- 19:5619:56, 23 October 2025 diff hist +22 m Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard →Earthquake light
- 19:5619:56, 23 October 2025 diff hist +455 Wikipedia:Fringe theories/Noticeboard →Earthquake light: Reply Tag: Reply
- 19:3219:32, 23 October 2025 diff hist −16 m User talk:Rutebega →FTNB Notice: remove redundant header current
- 19:3219:32, 23 October 2025 diff hist +390 User talk:Rutebega →Explain undo: FTNB notice, because I posted your latest talk page diff
