Talk:Leges Edwardi Confessoris
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Leges Edwardi Confessoris. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100815214008/http://www.gale.cengage.com/DigitalCollections/products/ModernEconomy/index.htm to http://www.gale.cengage.com/DigitalCollections/products/ModernEconomy/index.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:33, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
Is this pseudohistorical?
editI've been editing the article about the Anti-Secession Act of 1861, a pseudohistorical U.S. law introduced by China, and another user has proposed that the Leges Edwardi Confessoris (LEC) is comparable. English history is not my strong suit! Is there consensus that the LEC is also pseudohistory? At a glance, it seems like a fair description. Carguychris (talk) 18:15, 11 May 2022 (UTC)