User contributions for 49.130.9.100

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

17:0717:07, 19 February 2024 diff hist +41 BNN Breaking Undid revision 1208947875 by MrOllie (talk) I would appreciate others to "read" English. CHANGING CRITICISM to RECEPTION doesn't allow removal for the CRITICISM template when the content is EXACTLY the same. Tags: Undo Reverted
17:0617:06, 19 February 2024 diff hist +225 Talk:BNN Breaking →External link: Reply Tag: Reply
17:0517:05, 19 February 2024 diff hist +436 Talk:BNN Breaking →External link: Reply Tag: Reply
17:0217:02, 19 February 2024 diff hist +356 Talk:BNN Breaking →External link: Reply Tag: Reply
16:5816:58, 19 February 2024 diff hist +41 BNN Breaking Undid revision 1208946237 by Drmies (talk) Please stop disruptive editing, you may join talk page to discuss, rather than simply changing the title of the article from Criticism to Reception to simply remove the "Criticism and Controversy" template. Do not engage in this disruptive editing. Tags: Manual revert Reverted
16:5616:56, 19 February 2024 diff hist −622 BNN Breaking Undid revision 1208945965 by Drmies (talk) The subject matter is the publication not the founder. If you follow BLP guidelines the inclusion of this is purely part of a "hit piece" and no relevance to the article. Nor is it a NPOV if you include anything related to the founder. I suggest to stop the disruptive editing. Tags: Undo Reverted
16:5116:51, 19 February 2024 diff hist −622 BNN Breaking →Twitter suspension: The selective emphasis and lack of relevance on the founder's negative history, without a balanced view that includes positive achievements, deviates from Wikipedia's guidelines on biographies of living persons (BLP). Wikipedia is not a repository for only negative information. If the founder's history is relevant, then a balanced approach that includes both positive and negative aspects areapplied, similar to how other public figures' pages are structured. Tag: Reverted
16:4916:49, 19 February 2024 diff hist +480 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard →bnnbreaking.com ?: Reply Tag: Reply
16:4716:47, 19 February 2024 diff hist +249 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard →bnnbreaking.com ?: Reply Tag: Reply
16:4116:41, 19 February 2024 diff hist +895 Talk:BNN Breaking →Shame the site is under attack.: Reply Tag: Reply
16:3616:36, 19 February 2024 diff hist +151 Talk:BNN Breaking →Shame the site is under attack.: Reply Tag: Reply
16:3616:36, 19 February 2024 diff hist +237 Talk:BNN Breaking →Shame the site is under attack.: Reply Tag: Reply
16:3416:34, 19 February 2024 diff hist +655 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard →bnnbreaking.com ?: Reply Tag: Reply
16:3316:33, 19 February 2024 diff hist +623 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard →bnnbreaking.com ?: Reply Tag: Reply
16:2816:28, 19 February 2024 diff hist +41 BNN Breaking Undid revision 1208939553 by Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) Again, stop engaging in disruptive editing. And disclose if you are getting paid for these disruptive practices. Read note on tag again. Tag: Undo
16:2516:25, 19 February 2024 diff hist +41 BNN Breaking Undid revision 1208935663 by Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) Stop engaging in disruptive editing. You cannot say wrong tag, when you simply changed Criticism to Reception with the entire content being criticism and controversy. Try harder. Tags: Undo Reverted
16:2416:24, 19 February 2024 diff hist +2,188 Talk:BNN Breaking →Shame the site is under attack.: Reply Tag: Reply
16:2116:21, 19 February 2024 diff hist +2,167 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard →bnnbreaking.com ?: Reply Tag: Reply

19 February 2024