–[[User:Guy Macon|Guy Macon]] ([[User talk:Guy Macon#top|talk]]) 11:03, 21 December 2025 (UTC)
–[[User:Guy Macon|Guy Macon]] ([[User talk:Guy Macon#top|talk]]) 11:03, 21 December 2025 (UTC)
:Related:
:* [https://sites.psu.edu/astrowright/2025/12/07/loebs-behavior-is-reckless/ Loeb’s Behavior is Reckless]
:* [https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2023/11/27/avi-loeb-has-an-opinion/ Avi Loeb has an opinion]
: –[[User:Guy Macon|Guy Macon]] ([[User talk:Guy Macon#top|talk]]) 11:40, 21 December 2025 (UTC)
 |
This user talk page might be watched by friendly talk page stalkers, which means that someone other than me might reply to your query. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated. |
 |
|
Welcome to Guy Macon‘s Wikipedia talk page.
|
“Wikipedia’s articles are no place for strong views. Or rather, we feel about strong views the way that a natural history museum feels about tigers. We admire them and want our visitors to see how fierce and clever they are, so we stuff them and mount them for close inspection. We put up all sorts of carefully worded signs to get people to appreciate them as much as we do. But however much we adore tigers, a live tiger loose in the museum is seen as an urgent problem.” —WP:TIGER
We are only 992,890,945 articles away from our 1,000,000,000th article —Guy Macon
- “A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction into a battle of wills and add drama to an otherwise dull day.” — Calvin, of Calvin and Hobbes. —Guy Macon
“Arguing with anonymous strangers on the Internet is a sucker’s game because they almost always turn out to be — or to be indistinguishable from — self-righteous sixteen-year-olds possessing infinite amounts of free time.” –Neil Stephenson, Cryptonomicon
—Guy Macon
User:Guy Macon/On the Diameter of the Sewer cover in front of Greg L’s house —Guy Macon
- I can see why this has not been added yet; it does not have an “…in popular culture” section! For shame. —IanOsgood (talk) 12:58, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
-
- Try clicking on the “Citation Needed” in the title… –Guy Macon (talk) 11:56, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
Donations Needed: Wikipedia Has Posted An Appeal Asking For One Night Of Physical Intimacy From Each User —Guy Macon
“The Revolution’s main adversaries were the patriots and the people from Braveheart,” said speaker Tim Capodice, who has edited hundreds of Wikipedia entries on subjects as diverse as Euclidian geometry and Ratfucking. “The patriots, being a rag-tag group of misfits, almost lost on several occasions. But after a string of military antics and a convoluted scheme involving chicken feathers and an inflatable woman, the British were eventually defeated despite a last-minute surge, by a score of 89–87.”[1]
—Guy Macon
- I keep reading that speaker’s name as “Codpiece”. I have a similar problem with Shepseskare.
- Welcome back from retirement.
- Coincidentally, I recently retired in real life, and I highly recommend it. ~Anachronist (who / me) (talk) 05:50, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
Thank you for your recent contributions to one of Wikipedia’s articles related to the Scientology topic. Given the interest you’ve expressed by your edits, have you considered joining WikiProject Scientology? We are a group of editors dedicated to improving the overall coverage of the Scientology topic on Wikipedia. If you would like to join, simply add your name to the list of participants. If you have any questions, don’t hesitate to ask at the project talk page. We look forward to working with you in the future! ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 22:36, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
- I have started a new thread at § Invitation and open discussion on Scientology-topic. ▶ I am Grorp ◀ 22:36, 13 December 2025 (UTC)
I want to defend myself a bit. Feoffer has heavily insinuated several times that I have a pro-Mormon bias, which is why I am introducing a table of facts … in order to muddle the picture and present Joseph Smith in a much more positive light. I think if you look at my contributions to Anachronisms and the Book of Mormon you will see pretty quickly that is not the case. I made the entire anachronisms section about the Book of Abraham Criticism_of_the_Book_of_Abraham#Anachronisms anachronisms. I always try to be fair and NPOV, and present the most accurate picture possible, based on the most reliable sources.
Feoffer accused me of introducing a Fringe claim, which turned out to be wrong, and the ‘fringe claims’ are no longer in the article being ‘solved’.
Feoffer accused me of being a single purpose account. This is also inaccurate. I edit a broad range of wikipedia articles. I made the articles on Fukui cave, Key_Transparency, Trichia dromiaeformis, List of lava tubes, McHenry Mansion, among many others and I have made significant contributions to Block cipher mode of operation, Diffie–Hellman key exchange, Horn clause, Terminal and nonterminal symbols, etc. I know what I’m doing. I always try to use the best, highest quality sources.
These latest insinuations, that I am trying to make a separate article just so that I can introduce a table I made are also similarly ridiculous. Even if there is never any ‘table’, there should be a separate article that covers a holistic view of Joseph Smith’s legal history. The idea that this table as being controversial in a way that I am too dense to understand. There is no controversy. I have been a student of Mormon history for over three decades. The most hard core anti-mormon to the most true blue believing mormon agree on the numbers on the table, and respect the work the JSP has done in compiling all the sources. The controversy is in the interpretations of what the legal cases mean for Joseph Smith. Not the number of cases themselves.
Bottom line, I do not appreciate the narrative that Feoffer has painted of myself or my work, and I hope I’ve convinced you that these accusations are baseless. I appreciate the work you have done on Anachronisms in the Book of Mormon, and for trying to interject yourself here. Mormon history is endlessly fascinating, and your contributions are much appreciated. Epachamo (talk) 04:57, 18 December 2025 (UTC)
- Hi! Thanks for sharing. I am not going to agree or disagree with the above, but my opinion is that everyone involved really does want to do the right thing, and that some things have been said that should not have been said. My advice is this: First, stop responding. From this moment on if you feel that there are any violations of WP:CIVIL, don’t engage. Instead come back here and tell me. I might end up telling you that I don’t see it, but I am also very likely to tell them to knock it off, and to escalate the issue to someone with actual authority if they don’t. To anyone else reading this, the same advice applies if you think Epachamo is not being civil.
- I am going to have to rely on reports because all of you like to write a lot and I don’t have time to monitor every thread. Finally, let’s all try to put the past behind us and make a fresh start. —Guy Macon (talk) 05:18, 18 December 2025 (UTC)
—Guy Macon (talk) 11:03, 21 December 2025 (UTC)
- Related:
- —Guy Macon (talk) 11:40, 21 December 2025 (UTC)
