Search for contributionsshowhide

⧼contribs-top⧽

Username, IP address or CIDR range:

Namespace:

Invert selection

Associated namespace

Tag filter:

Invert selection

Only show edits that are latest revisions

Only show edits that are page creations

Hide minor edits

⧼contribs-date⧽

From date:

To date:

Show only edits pending review

Hide probably good edits

12:0712:07, 15 December 2016 diff hist +1‎ User talk:Ian.thomson ‎ →‎NPOV
12:0712:07, 15 December 2016 diff hist +317‎ User talk:Ian.thomson ‎ →‎NPOV
11:5711:57, 15 December 2016 diff hist −6‎ Alex Jones ‎ →‎Controversies
11:5611:56, 15 December 2016 diff hist +2‎ Alex Jones ‎ →‎Controversies
11:5311:53, 15 December 2016 diff hist +452‎ User talk:Ian.thomson ‎ →‎NPOV
11:3911:39, 15 December 2016 diff hist +388‎ User talk:Ian.thomson ‎No edit summary
11:3411:34, 15 December 2016 diff hist +63‎ Alex Jones ‎ Undid revision 754950708 by Ian.thomson (talk) You are applying your point of view to this issue rather than applying fact. reverted
11:0611:06, 15 December 2016 diff hist +63‎ Alex Jones ‎ Moved controversy to relevant sub heading and also amended wording to reflect who was making accusation so that it does not appear as fact.

08:1408:14, 27 October 2016 diff hist +36‎ Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov ‎ →‎2016 deployment

20:5520:55, 16 November 2015 diff hist 0‎ Björk ‎No edit summary
20:5420:54, 16 November 2015 diff hist 0‎ Björk ‎No edit summary
20:5420:54, 16 November 2015 diff hist 0‎ Björk ‎No edit summary

22:2722:27, 13 April 2014 diff hist −396‎ PlayStation 4 ‎No edit summary

17:3017:30, 6 March 2014 diff hist +192‎ User talk:25162995 ‎ →‎Edit warring at Amanda Knox
17:1617:16, 6 March 2014 diff hist +220‎ User talk:25162995 ‎ →‎Edit warring at Amanda Knox
17:1517:15, 6 March 2014 diff hist +219‎ User talk:25162995 ‎ →‎Edit warring at Amanda Knox
15:3615:36, 6 March 2014 diff hist +516‎ User talk:25162995 ‎No edit summary
15:0215:02, 6 March 2014 diff hist +1,089‎ User talk:25162995 ‎ →‎Edit warring at Amanda Knox
09:5609:56, 6 March 2014 diff hist +538‎ User talk:25162995 ‎ →‎Edit warring at Amanda Knox
09:2009:20, 6 March 2014 diff hist +1,383‎ User talk:25162995 ‎ →‎Edit warring at Amanda Knox
09:0709:07, 6 March 2014 diff hist +251‎ m User talk:25162995 ‎ →‎Edit warring at Amanda Knox
09:0409:04, 6 March 2014 diff hist +386‎ User talk:25162995 ‎ →‎Edit warring at Amanda Knox

23:4323:43, 5 March 2014 diff hist +440‎ Talk:Amanda Knox ‎ →‎Use of the word convicted in the lede
23:3923:39, 5 March 2014 diff hist +435‎ Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring ‎ →‎User:25162995 reported by User:Ravensfire (Result: )
23:3723:37, 5 March 2014 diff hist +191‎ Talk:Amanda Knox ‎ →‎Use of the word convicted in the lede
23:3523:35, 5 March 2014 diff hist +292‎ Talk:Amanda Knox ‎ →‎Use of the word convicted in the lede
23:3323:33, 5 March 2014 diff hist +98‎ Amanda Knox ‎ Reverted yet again citing WP:BOLD. You are clearly editing warring and antagonising an issue that you cannot back up. Again stop reverting clearly sourced fact, See WP NOR and 3RR
23:3223:32, 5 March 2014 diff hist +1,613‎ User talk:Binksternet ‎No edit summary
23:3023:30, 5 March 2014 diff hist +98‎ Amanda Knox ‎ Reverted yet again citing WP:BOLD. You are clearly editing warring and antagonising an issue that you cannot back up. Again stop reverting clearly sourced fact, See WP NOR and 3RR
23:2923:29, 5 March 2014 diff hist +1‎ Talk:Amanda Knox ‎ →‎Use of the word convicted in the lede
23:2823:28, 5 March 2014 diff hist +367‎ Talk:Amanda Knox ‎ →‎Use of the word convicted in the lede
23:2523:25, 5 March 2014 diff hist +98‎ Amanda Knox ‎ Go to talk. Do no start an edit war. Provide a source that says she was not convicted and prove this in talk. Then revert when you have proven your case in comparison to black and white facts. WP:BOLD
23:2123:21, 5 March 2014 diff hist +427‎ Talk:Amanda Knox ‎ →‎Use of the word convicted in the lede
23:1923:19, 5 March 2014 diff hist +98‎ Amanda Knox ‎ Again reverted back to sources. No consensus is needed because it is clearly stated that conviction stands. This is stated in sources in black and white. DO NOT 3rr
22:5622:56, 5 March 2014 diff hist +94‎ m Amanda Knox ‎No edit summary
22:5322:53, 5 March 2014 diff hist +241‎ Amanda Knox ‎ Highly reputable sources added REF Conviction
22:5022:50, 5 March 2014 diff hist −237‎ Amanda Knox ‎ WP:NOR:Sources cleary state conviction. Users attempts at interpretation of this fact are contentious and clear example of WP:NOR
22:4922:49, 5 March 2014 diff hist +294‎ Talk:Amanda Knox ‎ →‎Use of the word convicted in the lede

12:0212:02, 3 March 2014 diff hist −5‎ User:25162995 ‎No edit summary
11:2611:26, 3 March 2014 diff hist −545‎ Amanda Knox ‎ WP:NOR:Sentence does not reflect content of source:
11:1811:18, 3 March 2014 diff hist +4‎ Amanda Knox ‎ revert of User:Binksternet. Latter User stated in original revert "redundant and overly reliant on highly criticized Italian court system" - Reason:WP:SOAP section 2:"Opinion pieces" Sources factually state conviction.

15:5715:57, 28 February 2014 diff hist +2‎ m Amanda Knox ‎No edit summary

00:1900:19, 3 February 2014 diff hist +465‎ Talk:Religion in the United Kingdom ‎ →‎State religion - UK
00:1200:12, 3 February 2014 diff hist +491‎ Religion in the United Kingdom ‎ reverted removal of sourced lead by user Sabrebd. Latter user removal of content is not warranted. As stated in talk page citations for lead have been provided and reversion has taken place without consensus . Please see RITUK talk for more info.