Re: [WikiEN-l] Let's follow Wikipedia rules...just an add-on and correction

--- Royal We <rkscience100(a)yahoo.com> wrote: Wrong. We do not have Gaia (goddess). We have Gaia. As such, it does not necessarily imply it is about the goddess only. And since the word Gaia is evocating the hypothesis to more and more "english speakers" as compared to the goddess, it is perfectly relevant to introduce the topic here Wikipedia was stuck, so I add the info now, since you appear to claim I am also responsible for the existence of the [[Gaia]] article. The Gaia article was set on the 25th of february 2002, by The Epopt. I am not the creator of it. Unless I am The Epopt ? And The Epopt put the initial link to the [[Gaia Hypothesis]]. I just improved it in march. But nobody complained about me improving it. And I don't think this is a tribunal where I need to justify any of my edits. I stand by it. However, Eloquence rephrase is fine by me. All you are asking is that you remain the only author of these articles, and can remove everything that does not suit your pov. That is very sad. This is what you have started to do here http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Gaia_theory&diff=1039281&am… But I will let you do it entirely and remove everything non scientific on the topic. The english wikipedia is not only about science. Of course, I meant to write "I will not let you do it entirely and remove everything non scientific on the topic" But, of course, my poor english is responsible of my typos. You suffer no such typos problems. __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com