Talk:Vienna Dioscurides

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.BooksWikipedia:WikiProject BooksTemplate:WikiProject BooksBook articles

History of Science Low‑importance

	History of science portal This article is part of the History of Science WikiProject, an attempt to improve and organize the history of science content on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. You can also help with the History of Science Collaboration of the Month.History of ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject History of ScienceTemplate:WikiProject History of Sciencehistory of science articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Middle Ages Low‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Reference works (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Reference works, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Reference worksWikipedia:WikiProject Reference worksTemplate:WikiProject Reference worksReference works articles

Untitled[edit]

The History of this article is false and misleading: it makes it look as if I rewrote the article, when in fact all I did was fix the Category (a minor edit). This was my first and only edit to this article, 1:51 26 March (earlier today). The earlier article was much better and I wouldn't have rewritten it at all. See my History of Contributions which proves what I'm saying. Alexander 007 03:45, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Looking at the history, you somehow ended up editing the first revision of the article, the only version in which the category was broken. I offer no explanation as to how this happened. -- Cyrius|✎ 04:34, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

When I first discovered the article (just before my first edit to it), the article that was displayed was that old version. I saw the broken category, and I fixed it. Some one must have reverted it to that old version before I came upon it. Alexander 007 05:00, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I still have no explanation for this, and have never heard of it happening. If it was reverted, it should have shown up in the edit history. -- Cyrius|✎ 15:38, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Strange things happen in my presence. Alexander 007 06:49, 27 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]