User contributions for 4.34.50.170

24 February 2019

• 09:2309:23, 24 February 2019 diff hist +191‎ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard ‎ →‎Is the SPLC reliable? It is reliable
• 09:2109:21, 24 February 2019 diff hist +1,514‎ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ cite your sources. there is no consensus.
  Undo
• 09:2009:20, 24 February 2019 diff hist +237‎ Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ →‎SPLC
• 09:1709:17, 24 February 2019 diff hist +1,514‎ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ the talk page and sources clearly show there is NOT consensus, stop vandalizing.
  Undo
• 09:1309:13, 24 February 2019 diff hist +1,606‎ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ ridiculous... US courts are among the most authoritative and reliable sources; furthermore, i listed newsweek as a source on it which is listed here in this very page as a reliable source. you can't have newsweek be reliable and SPLC be reliable when newsweek is saying SPLC is not reliable.
  Undo
• 08:5908:59, 24 February 2019 diff hist +1,606‎ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ I literally labeled this no-consensus. You cannot say there is consensus when a US court has rejected your assertion.
  Undo
• 08:5808:58, 24 February 2019 diff hist +189‎ Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ →‎SPLC
• 08:5608:56, 24 February 2019 diff hist +111‎ Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ →‎SPLC
• 08:5508:55, 24 February 2019 diff hist +23‎ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard ‎ SPLC is has been ruled in court to be unreliable
• 08:5408:54, 24 February 2019 diff hist +1,802‎ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard ‎ SPLC is has been ruled in court to be unreliable
• 08:2608:26, 24 February 2019 diff hist +1,606‎ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ SPLC defamation lawsuit updates with sources like newsweek and law.com regarded as "reliable" on this very list, and even SPLC themselves
• 08:1608:16, 24 February 2019 diff hist +459‎ Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ →‎SPLC

22 February 2019

• 13:3413:34, 22 February 2019 diff hist +660‎ User talk:4.34.50.170 ‎ →‎February 2019
• 03:4403:44, 22 February 2019 diff hist −231‎ User talk:4.34.50.170 ‎ →‎Rebuttal
• 03:4403:44, 22 February 2019 diff hist +242‎ User talk:4.34.50.170 ‎ →‎February 2019
• 03:4303:43, 22 February 2019 diff hist +231‎ User talk:4.34.50.170 ‎ →‎February 2019
• 03:3503:35, 22 February 2019 diff hist +901‎ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ Undid revision 884512818 by NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) vandalism
  Undo
• 03:3403:34, 22 February 2019 diff hist +140‎ Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring ‎ →‎User:4.34.50.170 reported by User:NorthBySouthBaranof (Result: )
• 03:3103:31, 22 February 2019 diff hist +306‎ Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring ‎ →‎User:4.34.50.170 reported by User:NorthBySouthBaranof (Result: )
• 03:2803:28, 22 February 2019 diff hist +901‎ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ Undid revision 884512490 by NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) vandalism
  Undo
• 03:2503:25, 22 February 2019 diff hist +901‎ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ Undid revision 884512103 by NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) vandalism. There's literally a US court case showing the position that SPLC is reliable is false. This MUST be at least NC.
  Undo
• 03:2203:22, 22 February 2019 diff hist +901‎ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ Undid revision 884510470 by NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) vandalism
  Undo
• 03:2103:21, 22 February 2019 diff hist +431‎ Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ →‎SPLC
• 03:0603:06, 22 February 2019 diff hist +901‎ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ Undid revision 884509995 by NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) vandalism
  Undo
• 03:0503:05, 22 February 2019 diff hist +527‎ Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ →‎SPLC
• 03:0203:02, 22 February 2019 diff hist +2‎ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ fixed language re SPLC
• 03:0103:01, 22 February 2019 diff hist +344‎ Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ →‎SPLC
• 02:5902:59, 22 February 2019 diff hist +899‎ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ Undid revision 884509472 by DemocraticLuntz (talk) stop vandalising a united states court ruling
  Undo
• 02:5802:58, 22 February 2019 diff hist +9‎ Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring ‎ →‎User:4.34.50.170 reported by User:MrX (Result: )
• 02:5702:57, 22 February 2019 diff hist +303‎ Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring ‎ →‎User:4.34.50.170 reported by User:NorthBySouthBaranof (Result: )
• 02:5202:52, 22 February 2019 diff hist +899‎ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ Undid revision 884508772 by DemocraticLuntz (talk) vandalism, see talk page
  Undo
• 02:5002:50, 22 February 2019 diff hist +899‎ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ Undid revision 884508304 by NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) vandalism, see talk page. I labeled this NC, you are saying there is consensus when a US court has objectively rejected your position.
  Undo
• 02:4802:48, 22 February 2019 diff hist +169‎ Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ →‎SPLC
• 02:4602:46, 22 February 2019 diff hist +220‎ Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring ‎ →‎User:4.34.50.170 reported by User:NorthBySouthBaranof (Result: )
• 02:4102:41, 22 February 2019 diff hist +899‎ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ Undid revision 884507754 by NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) see talk page. NONE of you have countered the UNITED STATES COURT CASE REJECTING SPLC's reliability.
  Undo
• 02:4002:40, 22 February 2019 diff hist 0‎ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ fixed NC tag
• 02:3902:39, 22 February 2019 diff hist +899‎ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ Undid revision 884506881 by Grayfell (talk) YOU ARE JUST VANDALIZING AT THIS POINT. THERE'S LITERALLY A UNITED STATES COURT WHICH HAS HEARD THE EVIDENCE ON YOUR POSITION AND REJECTED IT WHOLESALE. STOP VANDALIZING.
  Undo
• 02:3302:33, 22 February 2019 diff hist +745‎ User talk:Grayfell ‎ SPLC (southern poverty law center)
• 02:3002:30, 22 February 2019 diff hist +899‎ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ Undid revision 884502537 by Grayfell (talk) STOP VANDALISING. THERE'S LITERALLY A COURT OPINION REJECTING YOUR POSITION. SEE TALK PAGE OR YOU WILL BE REFERRED TO WP ADMINS FOR A BAN
  Undo
• 02:2902:29, 22 February 2019 diff hist 0‎ Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ →‎SPLC
• 02:2802:28, 22 February 2019 diff hist −1‎ Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ →‎SPLC
• 02:2802:28, 22 February 2019 diff hist +926‎ Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ SPLC (southern poverty law center)
• 01:5301:53, 22 February 2019 diff hist +899‎ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ Undid revision 884450424 by MrX (talk) the fact that we're discussing this seriously is proof there is NOT consensus. there is no reason to not label it NC.
  Undo

21 February 2019

• 18:1418:14, 21 February 2019 diff hist +821‎ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ SPLC vandalism, stop removing the court case showing they're not reliable
• 18:0918:09, 21 February 2019 diff hist +637‎ User talk:Grayfell ‎ SPLC on perennial sources list

20 February 2019

• 23:5823:58, 20 February 2019 diff hist +828‎ Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ‎ SPLC is has been ruled in court to be unreliable
• 23:5023:50, 20 February 2019 diff hist +525‎ Talk:Center for Immigration Studies ‎ SPLC is objectively not reliable