Talk:Alchemy - Revision history

Yevaul: New Article

2006-04-28T03:22:48Z

New Article

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:22, 28 April 2006
Line 3:		Line 3:
	* Granted that topics like [[alchemy]] may have many interpretations as it has a basis in belief, but the page also had [http://cunnan.sca.org.au/index.php?title=Alchemy&action=history many authors]. Such is the way of the [[wiki]]. Should you wish to summarise an alternative version of what [[medieval]] or [[renaissance]] alchemy broadly was, then you are welcome to add your own content to the page. Just be prepared for others to edit it. I do not know myself how accurate the page presently is, but it certainly matches my layman knowledge of the [[romanticism\|Romantic]] view of a [[period]] alchemist. - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]] 19:55, 2 Mar 2006 (CST)		* Granted that topics like [[alchemy]] may have many interpretations as it has a basis in belief, but the page also had [http://cunnan.sca.org.au/index.php?title=Alchemy&action=history many authors]. Such is the way of the [[wiki]]. Should you wish to summarise an alternative version of what [[medieval]] or [[renaissance]] alchemy broadly was, then you are welcome to add your own content to the page. Just be prepared for others to edit it. I do not know myself how accurate the page presently is, but it certainly matches my layman knowledge of the [[romanticism\|Romantic]] view of a [[period]] alchemist. - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]] 19:55, 2 Mar 2006 (CST)
	* Well, that answered my question as to how the articles are written. Thanks, I'll do my best to articulate what I know, as I study the subject, but am far from being a scholar of any sort.--[[User:Yevaul\|Yevaul]] 18:58, 5 Mar 2006 (CST)		* Well, that answered my question as to how the articles are written. Thanks, I'll do my best to articulate what I know, as I study the subject, but am far from being a scholar of any sort.--[[User:Yevaul\|Yevaul]] 18:58, 5 Mar 2006 (CST)

			== New Article ==

			Hello, fellow SCA enthusiasts!

			This article is presently under construction by yours truly, and will progress in stages. So, that being said, please be patient and understand that if something seems incomplete, it most probably is.

			Thank you!
			--[[User:Yevaul\|Yevaul]] 13:22, 28 Apr 2006 (EST)

Yevaul at 00:58, 6 March 2006

2006-03-06T00:58:11Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:58, 6 March 2006
Line 2:		Line 2:
	--[[User:Yevaul\|Yevaul]] 19:34, 2 Mar 2006 (CST)		--[[User:Yevaul\|Yevaul]] 19:34, 2 Mar 2006 (CST)
	* Granted that topics like [[alchemy]] may have many interpretations as it has a basis in belief, but the page also had [http://cunnan.sca.org.au/index.php?title=Alchemy&action=history many authors]. Such is the way of the [[wiki]]. Should you wish to summarise an alternative version of what [[medieval]] or [[renaissance]] alchemy broadly was, then you are welcome to add your own content to the page. Just be prepared for others to edit it. I do not know myself how accurate the page presently is, but it certainly matches my layman knowledge of the [[romanticism\|Romantic]] view of a [[period]] alchemist. - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]] 19:55, 2 Mar 2006 (CST)		* Granted that topics like [[alchemy]] may have many interpretations as it has a basis in belief, but the page also had [http://cunnan.sca.org.au/index.php?title=Alchemy&action=history many authors]. Such is the way of the [[wiki]]. Should you wish to summarise an alternative version of what [[medieval]] or [[renaissance]] alchemy broadly was, then you are welcome to add your own content to the page. Just be prepared for others to edit it. I do not know myself how accurate the page presently is, but it certainly matches my layman knowledge of the [[romanticism\|Romantic]] view of a [[period]] alchemist. - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]] 19:55, 2 Mar 2006 (CST)
			* Well, that answered my question as to how the articles are written. Thanks, I'll do my best to articulate what I know, as I study the subject, but am far from being a scholar of any sort.--[[User:Yevaul\|Yevaul]] 18:58, 5 Mar 2006 (CST)

Cian: spelling

2006-03-03T02:42:13Z

spelling

← Older revision		Revision as of 12:42, 3 March 2006
Line 1:		Line 1:
	With all due respect, the author of this article is completely misinformed, and espouses to the most common misunderstandings concerning alchemy. If the author had bothered to explore the topic without any modern scientific bias (a good start would've been the link attached at the end), then this article might have more merit.		With all due respect, the author of this article is completely misinformed, and espouses to the most common misunderstandings concerning alchemy. If the author had bothered to explore the topic without any modern scientific bias (a good start would've been the link attached at the end), then this article might have more merit.
	--[[User:Yevaul\|Yevaul]] 19:34, 2 Mar 2006 (CST)		--[[User:Yevaul\|Yevaul]] 19:34, 2 Mar 2006 (CST)
	* Granted that topics like [[alchemy]] may have many interpretations as it has a basis in belief, but the page also had [http://cunnan.sca.org.au/index.php?title=Alchemy&action=history many authors]. Such is the way of the [[wiki]]. Should you wish to summarise an alternative version of what [[medieval]] or [[~~rennaissance~~]] alchemy broadly was, then you are welcome to add your own content to the page. Just be prepared for others to edit it. I do not know myself how accurate the page presently is, but it certainly matches my layman knowledge of the Romantic view of a [[period]] alchemist. - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]] 19:55, 2 Mar 2006 (CST)		* Granted that topics like [[alchemy]] may have many interpretations as it has a basis in belief, but the page also had [http://cunnan.sca.org.au/index.php?title=Alchemy&action=history many authors]. Such is the way of the [[wiki]]. Should you wish to summarise an alternative version of what [[medieval]] or [[renaissance]] alchemy broadly was, then you are welcome to add your own content to the page. Just be prepared for others to edit it. I do not know myself how accurate the page presently is, but it certainly matches my layman knowledge of the [[romanticism\|Romantic]] view of a [[period]] alchemist. - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]] 19:55, 2 Mar 2006 (CST)

Cian: an alternative alchemy

2006-03-03T01:55:39Z

an alternative alchemy

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:55, 3 March 2006
Line 1:		Line 1:
	With all due respect, the author of this article is completely misinformed, and espouses to the most common misunderstandings concerning alchemy. If the author had bothered to explore the topic without any modern scientific bias (a good start would've been the link attached at the end), then this article might have more merit.		With all due respect, the author of this article is completely misinformed, and espouses to the most common misunderstandings concerning alchemy. If the author had bothered to explore the topic without any modern scientific bias (a good start would've been the link attached at the end), then this article might have more merit.
	--[[User:Yevaul\|Yevaul]] 19:34, 2 Mar 2006 (CST)		--[[User:Yevaul\|Yevaul]] 19:34, 2 Mar 2006 (CST)
			* Granted that topics like [[alchemy]] may have many interpretations as it has a basis in belief, but the page also had [http://cunnan.sca.org.au/index.php?title=Alchemy&action=history many authors]. Such is the way of the [[wiki]]. Should you wish to summarise an alternative version of what [[medieval]] or [[rennaissance]] alchemy broadly was, then you are welcome to add your own content to the page. Just be prepared for others to edit it. I do not know myself how accurate the page presently is, but it certainly matches my layman knowledge of the Romantic view of a [[period]] alchemist. - [[User:Cian\|Cian Gillebhrath]] 19:55, 2 Mar 2006 (CST)

Yevaul at 01:34, 3 March 2006

2006-03-03T01:34:56Z

New page

With all due respect, the author of this article is completely misinformed, and espouses to the most common misunderstandings concerning alchemy. If the author had bothered to explore the topic without any modern scientific bias (a good start would've been the link attached at the end), then this article might have more merit.
--[[User:Yevaul|Yevaul]] 19:34, 2 Mar 2006 (CST)