info-about copy-paste abuse-spam

-Gebhard, count of the Lahngau
-NN
-NN

I'm presuming you're ticked off because I overwrote the completely erroneous notes you'd made on NN changing her name to a wikipedia conjecture without sources - that I'd asked you about in the Discussion?
That's called updating with correct info, and your response to it is defamatory and bizarre.

As you yourself said you'd erroneously merged in another wife for Gebhard and then unmerged, I was presuming the other messed up About notes in the area were left over from that and you'd appreciate me cleaning it up behind you.

I overwrote any Medlands notes in the Abouts with the updated Medlands version that had links to all the profiles, as I fixed up the area you'd asked to have looked at. That's called not duplicating info in the About - it's also good standard practice if you're trying to do a good job and saving people from scrolling through reams of duplicated info.

This is standard policy and good genealogy. It takes hours to do.

I use one family template that has links that shows who the geni profiles for their family context are. This is to make sure all the profiles have matching cross reference info too.

If you have the time to customise each template by removing the extra info for other family members and just keeping the links to them, that would be fantastic. By the time I was finished following up for you it was midnight, so I didn't.

cf https://www.geni.com/discussions/228089?msg=1460466

Your erroneous info said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unruoch_II_of_Friuli ''(stub)''
**'''Ternois of Friuli''', a daughter (b. 825), who married Count Gebhard Nieder-Lahngau
-----------

*https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unruoch_II_del_Friuli ''(draft)''
**'''Ternois''' (825 – ?), che sposò il conte Gebhard Nieder-Lahngau;

no, you assume wrongly,
that matter of the profile bleached and reused elsewhere is another mistake
*https://www.geni.com/discussions/227804?msg=1460659

but completely different from the one well specified at this opening of the discussion.
it is well written and specified in a few lines at the beginning.

Livio if you think your English is typically comprehensible, you are mistaken. Whatever translation tool you use makes every post of yours a puzzle to English speakers.

Neither 'bleached' nor 'cloned' are geni terms anyone else uses, as has been pointed out to you by people you choose to mock.

On the question of the profile attached as a daughter of of Unruoch with a first name that you'd changed to the unlikely name of a territory of which he was count - with no primary sources to substantiate: https://www.geni.com/discussions/228089?msg=1460481 - I reverted to the NN that it had been correctly before.
If you find primary sources to back up the unlikely case of him naming his daughter after his land - please post them. Discredited wikipedia posts are not that, though.

So 'bleaching' out the incorrect info and replacing with it the primary sources that we have which tells us the NN child of Unruoch is not married to Gebhard, is good history. Just because you're used to bullying people into silence doesn't mean you're right.

Find the primary sources for the name and marriage you want for this child, and we can have a productive conversation that is about something other than your pride - which I would be more careful of, except I watch you insult other people's pride without a second thought on a daily basis.

Until this conversation is about historical sources instead of insults, please don't expect me to dignify it with any more answers.

will be, but now the profiles have been changed, and the info-about reduced by 90%

the easy cut and paste spam no, the one continues.
*https://www.geni.com/discussions/227804?msg=1460758