18:1418:14, 17 May 2024diffhist+607
Rachel Riley
reverting once again. Single account with a history of agenda editing on topics regarding jews. Again - where are the ANI's for these accounts?current
14:1614:16, 5 May 2024diffhist+997
Rachel Riley
This should be referenced in the lede too. It's recongition she has received from the British state in reference to her antiracism campaigning.
09:4109:41, 5 May 2024diffhist+93
Rachel Riley
Undid revision 1222320837 by Iskandar323 (talk) Right here: "Rachel Riley on combating antisemitism, 10 years on Countdown and getting girls into maths" amongst other sources. Although it is now noted that some wiki editors don't classify antisemitsm as racism.Tags: UndoReverted
08:2708:27, 5 May 2024diffhist+93
Rachel Riley
Undid revision 1222277776 by Peleio Aquiles (talk) Again - incredible this edit was allowed to stand and the editor has still not recieved an official warning. FYI, her anti-racist campaigning is referenced in the article. It shouldn't be to jewish editors on wikipedia to point out antisemitism on wiki and start ANIs. We should feel that patrolling admins have our backs.Tags: UndoReverted
4 May 2024
13:4213:42, 4 May 2024diffhist+93
Rachel Riley
Really incredible that these kind of edits are getting through. Patrolling admins are where? Why hasn't that user been warned?Tags: UndoReverted
14:5714:57, 8 March 2024diffhist−264
Ursula von der Leyen
The qoute added in a source should support the text of the article. That wasn't the case here. Perhaps the previous editor wants to add that into the text?
02:4702:47, 2 February 2024diffhist−875
Ursula von der Leyen
In the grand scheme of VDL's commission mandate, I somehow don't think this (non)-viral speech from a far-left MEP bares mentioning. I also somehow doubt it went viral or that "middle east eye" is a good source for thatTag: Undo
01:3501:35, 2 February 2024diffhist+1,891
Hamas
Restoring peer reviewed published journa (and we can all guess why it was removed)l. There is a very clear effort by a group of users who have been active since Oct 7 who believe they are on a "mission" in their view, to right a wrong: there are several disturbing trends they have been engaging in; one is the clear attempt to "sanitise" Hamas. The other is using talk pages to wave away and decide for jews what is and isn't antisemtic. This behaviour is unacceptable.Tag: Reverted
08:0608:06, 27 January 2024diffhist−289
Hamas
we don't take racists saying they are not racist as a reliable source of their lack of racist beliefs. Maybe for the body where we can expand on what they claim they are vs what experts asses them as being, but certainly not the lede.
08:0408:04, 27 January 2024diffhist+1,625
Hamas
added reliable source, removed absurd one. we don't cite racists stating they are not racists as proof they are not racist.
07:0107:01, 27 January 2024diffhist−2
Hamas
Supression of a source. Also this is NOT controversial in anyway (except for people who perhaps might be antisemites). It is not controversial to say that a charaterisation of antisemtism as a "global plot", which the charter does, as pointed out by the source - is an antisemtic trope, directly reminscient of that famous antisemtic 20th century document the "protocols of elders of zion". This doesn't go to a talk page for a muddying of the waters. It is
14:4814:48, 25 January 2024diffhist−114
Hamas
Undid revision 1198968800 by Selfstudier (talk) There is no argument to be made. Something is either racist or is not. Something is either antisemitic or it is not. There will be no sophistry on this point. No dragging it out through edit wars. No back and forths. It is either a or b.Tags: UndoReverted
14:0914:09, 25 January 2024diffhist−2
Hamas
Extremely misleading to claim that the 2017 charter isn't antisemtiic. As the article further expands it couches its antisemitism by referring to a "worldwide" zionist plot - a well-known antiemtitic conspiracy theory.
09:4709:47, 7 November 2023diffhist+22
European Commission
Undid revision 1183865146 by 85.208.7.26 This isn't true. It certain isn't true according to the EU's own public web portal: https://european-union.europa.eu/institutions-law-budget/institutions-and-bodies/types-institutions-and-bodies_enTag: Undo