Talk:Agarttha - Revision history

Morbus Iff: Whitespacing and ResolvedTalk.

2005-05-21T14:45:40Z

Whitespacing and ResolvedTalk.

Snafu Bohica at 14:18, 19 May 2005

2005-05-19T14:18:39Z

Morbus Iff: There is one inline, actually...

2005-05-19T01:11:34Z

There is one inline, actually...

Lisa B. Underhalh: Note about citations

2005-05-19T00:35:27Z

Note about citations

New page

From the FAQ:

:Each turn after the first, you're required to cite two phantom entries (which may be existing phantoms, brand new phantoms, or a mixture of both) and '''one existing entry'''.

''Emphasis mine''. As of right now there are only two phantom entries and no existing entry. --[[User:Lisa B. Underhalh|Lisa B. Underhalh]] 20:35, 18 May 2005 (EDT)

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-From the FAQ:
+{{ResolvedTalk}}
-−
-:Each turn after the first, you're required to cite two phantom entries (which may be existing phantoms, brand new phantoms, or a mixture of both) and '''one existing entry'''.
-−
-''Emphasis mine''.  As of right now there are only two phantom entries and no existing entry. --[[User:Lisa B. Underhalh|Lisa B. Underhalh]] 20:35, 18 May 2005 (EDT)
-−
-:In this case, the existing entry is Occultologists, inline. The scholar just forgot to link it in his '''Citations''' line. --[[User:MorbusIff|Morbus Iff]] 21:11, 18 May 2005 (EDT)
-−
-Oy vey.  I've made a muddle of this one.  I do know my genitive case from my contraction, on my best days at least.  That's what I get for rushing it.  Sin in haste, repent at leisure, I guess.
---[[User:Snafu Bohica|Snafu Bohica]] 10:18, 19 May 2005 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:18, 19 May 2005
Line 6:		Line 6:

	:In this case, the existing entry is Occultologists, inline. The scholar just forgot to link it in his '''Citations''' line. --[[User:MorbusIff\|Morbus Iff]] 21:11, 18 May 2005 (EDT)		:In this case, the existing entry is Occultologists, inline. The scholar just forgot to link it in his '''Citations''' line. --[[User:MorbusIff\|Morbus Iff]] 21:11, 18 May 2005 (EDT)
		+
		+	Oy vey. I've made a muddle of this one. I do know my genitive case from my contraction, on my best days at least. That's what I get for rushing it. Sin in haste, repent at leisure, I guess.
		+	--[[User:Snafu Bohica\|Snafu Bohica]] 10:18, 19 May 2005 (EDT)

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:11, 19 May 2005
Line 4:		Line 4:

	''Emphasis mine''. As of right now there are only two phantom entries and no existing entry. --[[User:Lisa B. Underhalh\|Lisa B. Underhalh]] 20:35, 18 May 2005 (EDT)		''Emphasis mine''. As of right now there are only two phantom entries and no existing entry. --[[User:Lisa B. Underhalh\|Lisa B. Underhalh]] 20:35, 18 May 2005 (EDT)
		+
		+	:In this case, the existing entry is Occultologists, inline. The scholar just forgot to link it in his '''Citations''' line. --[[User:MorbusIff\|Morbus Iff]] 21:11, 18 May 2005 (EDT)