Ediciones principales en un artículo
Todas las ediciones de un usuario en una página, en orden cronológico.
| Artículo | Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Cold fusion 2/Workshop (Registro · Historial de página) |
| Usuario | Abd (Contador de ediciones· Ediciones principales) |
| Ediciones totales | 228 |
| Ediciones menores | 30 (13,2 %) |
| Ediciones (semi)automatizadas | 0 (0 %) |
| Ediciones revertidas | 0 (0 %) |
| atbe1 | 0,1 |
| Añadidos (bytes)2 | 379.961 |
| Borrado (bytes) | -2.336 |
Ediciones menores
·
30 (13,2 %)
Principales ediciones
·
198 (86,8 %)
Ediciones (semi)automatizadas
·
0 (0 %)
Ediciones manuales
·
228 (100 %)
Ediciones revertidas
·
0 (0 %)
Ediciones no revertidas
·
228 (100 %)
1 Tiempo medio entre ediciones (días)
2 Texto añadido es cualquier adición positiva que no se revirtió (aproximado)
| Fecha | Enlaces | Tamaño | Resumen de edición |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2009-08-17 04:30 | Diferencias · Historial | 170 | →Recent disputes: attribute note to my comment to WMC |
| 2009-08-17 04:06 | Diferencias · Historial | -15 | →Recent disputes: sp |
| 2009-08-17 04:00 | Diferencias · Historial | 130 | →Recent disputes: sign it, add note re uncivil signing comment |
| 2009-08-13 13:38 | Diferencias · Historial | 933 | →William M. Connolley desysopped: add note of serious and blatant use of tools while involved, while in previous conflict involving me as well. |
| 2009-08-12 21:45 | Diferencias · Historial | 3.762 | →Edit warring is prohibited: r to Noren, start |
| 2009-08-12 20:15 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.445 | →General discussion: haven't done an analysis. No time. |
| 2009-08-12 20:01 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.126 | →Cold fusion talk page FAQ: quite, like a graveyard. |
| 2009-08-12 19:48 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.006 | →Cold fusion talk page FAQ: Support, of course. |
| 2009-08-12 19:38 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.433 | →Article talk page archives: Support. |
| 2009-08-12 19:25 | Diferencias · Historial | -1 | →Community topic ban confirmed for Abd: link |
| 2009-08-12 19:15 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.001 | →WP:TINC: responses |
| 2009-08-12 18:14 | Diferencias · Historial | 5.316 | →Community topic ban confirmed for Abd: Oppose, and describe alternative that should theoretically attract consensus. |
| 2009-08-12 17:21 | Diferencias · Historial | 2.610 | →Record-keeping of bans: support in part and oppose in part. |
| 2009-08-12 15:00 | Diferencias · Historial | 923 | →WMC blocking as involved admin: Support |
| 2009-08-12 14:49 | Diferencias · Historial | 2.248 | →Abd tendentious editing: Oppose and why. |
| 2009-08-12 14:11 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.003 | →Abd in violation of prior remedy: I fail often. |
| 2009-08-12 14:03 | Diferencias · Historial | 217 | →Cold fusion page ban: r to Beetstra about participation bias. This is a general truth about Wikipedia discussions. |
| 2009-08-12 13:56 | Diferencias · Historial | 741 | →Cold fusion page ban: r to Mathsci, this is even more a blatant denial of our fundamental decision-making system, the reason why Wikipedia works without a bureaucracy. |
| 2009-08-12 13:47 | Diferencias · Historial | 645 | →Cold fusion page ban: serious charge, and I can't think of an example. |
| 2009-08-12 13:38 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.332 | →Cold fusion page ban: r to Beetstra, there is a fundamental issue here of how Wikipedia makes decisions. |
| 2009-08-12 13:26 | Diferencias · Historial | 84 | →Cold fusion page ban: ce, add explicit support with qualification. |
| 2009-08-12 13:22 | Diferencias · Historial | 6.045 | →Cold fusion page ban: respond with history of the "one month" decision. |
| 2009-08-12 04:44 | Diferencias · Historial | 58 | →Locus of dispute: support. |
| 2009-08-12 04:42 | Diferencias · Historial | 31 | →Edit warring is prohibited: clarify |
| 2009-08-12 04:37 | Diferencias · Historial | 5.749 | →Edit warring is prohibited: Support. |
| 2009-08-12 03:16 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.516 | →Administrator conduct: Support. |
| 2009-08-12 02:50 | Diferencias · Historial | 5.105 | →Avoiding apparent impropriety: Support and respond to "other" comments. |
| 2009-08-12 01:51 | Diferencias · Historial | 359 | →Good faith and disruption: please remove disruptive comment or at least move to proper section -- but it is completely off-topic here. |
| 2009-08-12 01:49 | Diferencias · Historial | 952 | →Good faith and disruption: Support |
| 2009-08-12 01:34 | Diferencias · Historial | 544 | →Wikipedia topic bans: Support. "bans," not "topic bans." |
| 2009-08-12 01:24 | Diferencias · Historial | 3.093 | →Neutrality and conflicts of interest: Support, and caveats |
| 2009-08-12 00:56 | Diferencias · Historial | 101 | →Purpose of Wikipedia 3: Support |
| 2009-08-11 18:32 | Diferencias · Historial | 460 | →Loss of trust: support |
| 2009-08-11 18:14 | Diferencias · Historial | 61 | →Abd's presentation of evidence is inappropriate: ce |
| 2009-08-11 18:10 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.895 | →Abd's presentation of evidence is inappropriate: Response. |
| 2009-08-11 17:57 | Diferencias · Historial | 78 | →Extraordinary length of case material: Support |
| 2009-08-11 17:56 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.595 | →Admissible evidence: Support. |
| 2009-08-11 17:46 | Diferencias · Historial | 973 | →Decorum in Arbitration proceedings: support and suggest |
| 2009-08-11 17:40 | Diferencias · Historial | 862 | →Timely communication: good proposal TOAT |
| 2009-08-11 17:35 | Diferencias · Historial | 86 | →Operation of the Arbitration process: Support |
| 2009-08-11 17:34 | Diferencias · Historial | 971 | →Abd and William M. Connolley instructed to disengage: Oppose, both for myself and WMC |
| 2009-08-11 17:28 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.806 | →Abd is topic banned: Oppose, and why this would be so dangerous. |
| 2009-08-11 17:14 | Diferencias · Historial | 2 | →Abd's treatment of cold fusion: fmt |
| 2009-08-11 17:14 | Diferencias · Historial | 2.330 | →Abd's treatment of cold fusion: Oppose. |
| 2009-08-11 16:58 | Diferencias · Historial | 921 | →Coverage in articles should be appropriately weighted: Support, in itself. |
| 2009-08-11 03:47 | Diferencias · Historial | 109 | →Community bans: collapse, this was off-topic in this section , but there may have been some response to it.... |
| 2009-08-11 03:19 | Diferencias · Historial | 2.164 | →William M. Connolley desysopped: advice for WMC |
| 2009-08-11 01:35 | Diferencias · Historial | 2.028 | →Community bans: my position on bans. |
| 2009-08-11 01:16 | Diferencias · Historial | 3.759 | →Decorum: read it carefully, SBHB. |
| 2009-08-10 21:36 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.206 | →William M. Connolley banned: Sigh. |
| 2009-08-10 21:17 | Diferencias · Historial | 727 | →Abd placed under mentorship: easy to enforce, actually. |
| 2009-08-10 21:03 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.446 | →Abd placed under mentorship: r to Beetstra. |
| 2009-08-10 20:43 | Diferencias · Historial | 2.313 | →Abd placed under mentorship: about supervision of mentorship. |
| 2009-08-10 20:29 | Diferencias · Historial | 7 | →Abd placed under mentorship: okay, too much? strike |
| 2009-08-10 20:03 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.866 | →William M. Connolley desysopped: The record does not support a claim that I seek out admins to haul before ArbComm. |
| 2009-08-10 19:40 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.375 | →Abd placed under mentorship: okay, to make this even, desysop me too, okay? |
| 2009-08-10 19:26 | Diferencias · Historial | 4.070 | →Abd admonished: on edit warring and inciviltiy and context and "admonishment." |
| 2009-08-10 18:36 | Diferencias · Historial | 3 | →Allegations of a cabal: ce |
| 2009-08-10 18:35 | Diferencias · Historial | 108 | →Allegations of a cabal: eek! out damn bold! |
| 2009-08-10 18:30 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.583 | →Allegations of a cabal: ce explanation of 'cabal' |
| 2009-08-10 18:12 | Diferencias · Historial | 4.517 | →Allegations of a cabal: r to Crohnie |
| 2009-08-10 17:35 | Diferencias · Historial | 7.335 | →Second block of Abd: respond to TenOfAllTrades, who rejected an opportunity to mediate this dispute out of the same ABF that he shows here. |
| 2009-08-10 10:24 | Diferencias · Historial | -2 | →Allegations of a cabal: fmt |
| 2009-08-10 10:13 | Diferencias · Historial | 3 | →Abd admonished: bold |
| 2009-08-10 10:08 | Diferencias · Historial | 422 | →Mathsci admonished: Recuse. |
| 2009-08-10 10:03 | Diferencias · Historial | 444 | →Abd admonished: r to Shell |
| 2009-08-10 09:59 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.433 | →Abd admonished: Oppose. |
| 2009-08-10 09:44 | Diferencias · Historial | 856 | →Abd placed under mentorship: Support. Thanks!!! |
| 2009-08-10 09:33 | Diferencias · Historial | 544 | →William M. Connolley banned: comment |
| 2009-08-10 09:27 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.330 | →William M. Connolley desysopped: Recuse |
| 2009-08-10 09:14 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.132 | →Allegations of a cabal: r to MastCell. |
| 2009-08-10 09:03 | Diferencias · Historial | 3.031 | →Allegations of a cabal: Support. With a reservation. |
| 2009-08-10 08:31 | Diferencias · Historial | 649 | →Abd's style of discussion: Support. |
| 2009-08-10 08:26 | Diferencias · Historial | 937 | →Personal attacks: It's true. |
| 2009-08-10 08:17 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.909 | →Second block of Abd: Support. |
| 2009-08-10 08:00 | Diferencias · Historial | 132 | →Editing comments of other editors and edit-warring on case pages: Support. |
| 2009-08-10 07:58 | Diferencias · Historial | 955 | →Edit-warring on the request for arbitration: Support |
| 2009-08-10 07:48 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.749 | →First block of Abd: Support. |
| 2009-08-10 07:35 | Diferencias · Historial | 638 | →Purported topic bans: Support. |
| 2009-08-10 07:23 | Diferencias · Historial | 3.671 | →William M. Connolley's reversion: Disagree because of the issue of consensus. It was there, but made difficult to see by disruption over the polls. |
| 2009-08-10 06:58 | Diferencias · Historial | 734 | →Recent disputes: Support. The gaming of RfPP by Hipocrite created the need for a rapid finding of consensus, it should be mentioned. |
| 2009-08-10 06:46 | Diferencias · Historial | 539 | →Locus of dispute: response to Shell. |
| 2009-08-10 06:38 | Diferencias · Historial | 345 | →Locus of dispute: Support with correction. |
| 2009-08-10 06:32 | Diferencias · Historial | 987 | →Use of administrative tools in a dispute: support |
| 2009-08-10 06:03 | Diferencias · Historial | 165 | →Implementation of discretionary sanctions: Moot. |
| 2009-08-10 06:00 | Diferencias · Historial | 81 | →Bans: sign and ce |
| 2009-08-10 05:58 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.607 | →Community bans: Support as actual practice, but some expression of caution. The involvement of editors supporting a ban is routinely not considered. |
| 2009-08-10 05:37 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.265 | →Bans: support, respond to Beetstra |
| 2009-08-10 04:48 | Diferencias · Historial | 639 | →Conduct on arbitration pages: support. comment on enforcement of order. |
| 2009-08-10 04:41 | Diferencias · Historial | 169 | →Decorum: Support |
| 2009-08-10 01:15 | Diferencias · Historial | 980 | →William M. Connolley an uninvolved administrator with respect to Cold fusion: r to Ikip and Enric. |
| 2009-08-10 01:09 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.687 | →William M. Connolley an uninvolved administrator with respect to Cold fusion: Support, but irrelevant. |
| 2009-08-09 05:51 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.253 | →The community found no problem with WMC's blocks when they were brought up for review: finding on majority of editors commenting at AN/I were concerned about WMC's block, opposite to Enric's claim. |
| 2009-08-09 04:03 | Diferencias · Historial | 1 | →The community found no problem with WMC's blocks when they were brought up for review: fmt |
| 2009-08-09 04:03 | Diferencias · Historial | 252 | →The community found no problem with WMC's blocks when they were brought up for review: most editors confused about this FoF. It is not about WMC's ban or block of me. |
| 2009-08-09 03:51 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.044 | →The community found no problem with WMC's blocks when they were brought up for review: on ArbComm as a representative body. |
| 2009-08-09 03:34 | Diferencias · Historial | 8 | →The community found no problem with WMC's blocks when they were brought up for review: close de small |
| 2009-08-09 03:34 | Diferencias · Historial | 498 | →The community found no problem with WMC's blocks when they were brought up for review: edit per request by Enric Naval. |
| 2009-08-07 04:40 | Diferencias · Historial | 438 | →A proxy for Abd: backwards, Shell |
| 2009-08-07 04:36 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.346 | →A proxy for Abd: Oppose. But thanks for the thought, Coppertwig. This just doesn't need to be in an ArbComm decision! |
| 2009-08-07 04:19 | Diferencias · Historial | 3.829 | →Record-keeping of bans: Oppose. Once we understand an administrative ban as a warning, the problem with setting up automatic enforcement becomes visible. |
| 2009-08-07 03:46 | Diferencias · Historial | 3.246 | →Abd block: respond to Beetstra and Fritzpoll |
| 2009-08-07 03:18 | Diferencias · Historial | 2.449 | →Abd block: Oppose. The block decision should be made by a neutral administrator. |
| 2009-08-07 02:48 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.992 | →Timeline: Enactment of ban: Support, plus suggest more detailed, more neutral version |
| 2009-08-07 01:59 | Diferencias · Historial | 3.601 | →Bans mean no editing: respond to Beestra and Shell Kinney |
| 2009-08-06 22:37 | Diferencias · Historial | 0 | →Bans mean no editing: sp |
| 2009-08-06 22:29 | Diferencias · Historial | 6 | →Bans mean no editing: bold |
| 2009-08-06 22:26 | Diferencias · Historial | 12.145 | →Bans mean no editing: bad idea based on a good idea that is almost always true, but we can do better, and, in fact, do. |
| 2009-08-06 20:45 | Diferencias · Historial | 3.622 | →Ban notification: Support and extended comment |
| 2009-08-06 20:12 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.145 | →Policy descriptive not prescriptive - policy may not be up to date: reply to Beetstra |
| 2009-08-06 16:59 | Diferencias · Historial | 592 | →Policy descriptive not prescriptive - policy may not be up to date: support and comment. |
| 2009-08-06 16:54 | Diferencias · Historial | 85 | →Wikipedia bans: support |
| 2009-08-05 21:42 | Diferencias · Historial | 10.377 | →Administrators blocks can be brought up for review by any editor: extended response examines this issue in detail. Conflicts with WP:DR. |
| 2009-08-05 14:36 | Diferencias · Historial | 4.250 | →Abd's Evidence for consensus: r to Enric Naval |
| 2009-08-05 12:16 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.735 | →Abd's Evidence for consensus: bottom line, at the top |
| 2009-08-05 01:53 | Diferencias · Historial | 2 | →Abd's Evidence for consensus: sp |
| 2009-08-05 01:51 | Diferencias · Historial | 3.658 | →Abd's Evidence for consensus: reply to Bilby with reasons why I bothered to comment here. |
| 2009-08-05 00:00 | Diferencias · Historial | 128 | →Abd's Evidence for consensus: collapse original response to Bilby |
| 2009-08-04 23:56 | Diferencias · Historial | 212 | →Abd's Evidence for consensus: ce |
| 2009-08-04 23:52 | Diferencias · Historial | 1 | →Abd's Evidence for consensus: now it's a missing close quote! |
| 2009-08-04 23:51 | Diferencias · Historial | 1 | →Abd's Evidence for consensus: missing close ital, fixed |
| 2009-08-04 23:49 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.913 | →Abd's Evidence for consensus: respond to wikilawyered argument, red herring. |
| 2009-08-04 23:35 | Diferencias · Historial | 107 | →Abd's Evidence for consensus: collapse first reply to Woonpton. |
| 2009-08-04 23:32 | Diferencias · Historial | 10.997 | →Abd's Evidence for consensus: respond to Bilby, detailed, will refactor other responses. |
| 2009-08-04 20:51 | Diferencias · Historial | 9 | →Abd's Evidence for consensus: fmt |
| 2009-08-04 20:49 | Diferencias · Historial | 1 | →Abd's Evidence for consensus: I do that all the time, put in a quote instead of two apostrophes for italics. |
| 2009-08-04 20:47 | Diferencias · Historial | 992 | →Bans should be clear: This should not be controversial. |
| 2009-08-04 20:38 | Diferencias · Historial | 214 | →Administrators blocks can be brought up for review by any editor: Agree with Mathsci. Perhaps. Or not. |
| 2009-08-04 20:33 | Diferencias · Historial | 1 | →Administrators blocks can be brought up for review by any editor: fmt |
| 2009-08-04 20:32 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.638 | →Administrators blocks can be brought up for review by any editor: The section title is fine, but the proposal isn't, especially within the context of this case. |
| 2009-08-04 20:16 | Diferencias · Historial | 55 | →The community found no problem with WMC's blocks when they were brought up for review: add smalltext note about response to FoF |
| 2009-08-04 20:13 | Diferencias · Historial | 551 | →The community found no problem with WMC's blocks when they were brought up for review: good example of cabal reflex responses here. |
| 2009-08-04 20:05 | Diferencias · Historial | -2 | →The community found no problem with WMC's blocks when they were brought up for review: flying brackets |
| 2009-08-04 20:04 | Diferencias · Historial | 195 | →The community found no problem with WMC's blocks when they were brought up for review: who pulled my chain? Collapse. |
| 2009-08-04 19:58 | Diferencias · Historial | 266 | →The community found no problem with WMC's blocks when they were brought up for review: r to Mathsci |
| 2009-08-04 19:55 | Diferencias · Historial | 895 | →The community found no problem with WMC's blocks when they were brought up for review: Oppose. |
| 2009-08-04 19:45 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.086 | →Reverting during protection: comment on the situation at Cold fusion when WMC rolled the article back to May 14. |
| 2009-08-04 19:36 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.042 | →Reverting during protection: support and explain |
| 2009-08-04 19:27 | Diferencias · Historial | 870 | →Page protection: comment on Bilby's proposal, I do support "administrative bans." But they really are warnings, not bans. |
| 2009-08-04 19:18 | Diferencias · Historial | 602 | →Page protection: support |
| 2009-08-02 04:14 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.077 | →Help the clueless: r |
| 2009-08-02 04:07 | Diferencias · Historial | 5.212 | →Don't debate proposals with no support: refactor proposal, respond to Beetstra |
| 2009-08-01 18:54 | Diferencias · Historial | 40 | →No personal attacks: the situation shifts. |
| 2009-08-01 18:28 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.509 | →No personal attacks: Thanks, GoRight. And about the fox guarding the henhouse. Will we allow this even if the fox hasn't eaten any chickens yet? |
| 2009-08-01 18:07 | Diferencias · Historial | 12.174 | →Administrative recusal upon claim: respond to comments. |
| 2009-07-31 00:27 | Diferencias · Historial | 3.519 | →No personal attacks: Fox counts votes while Stalin guards the henhouse. Maybe they can make a deal. |
| 2009-07-30 23:06 | Diferencias · Historial | 6.577 | →Proposed findings of fact: GoRight has not expressed my position here. That's fine, of course, but not if editors assume that he has. |
| 2009-07-30 22:26 | Diferencias · Historial | 6.761 | →Abd's Evidence for consensus: r to Bilby. |
| 2009-07-30 18:05 | Diferencias · Historial | 811 | →Proposal by User:Objectivist: r to Objectivist. |
| 2009-07-30 17:13 | Diferencias · Historial | 2.946 | →Expert opinion is essential: on experts and Cold fusion; articles in fringe topics, should have the most expert "believers" available as advisors. |
| 2009-07-30 16:52 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.268 | →Expert opinion is essential: new version of reply to Spartaz, sign Raul reply |
| 2009-07-30 16:38 | Diferencias · Historial | 2.376 | →Expert opinion is essential: about experts and COI. Do we have a Wikipedia:WikiProject Experts? If not, we should. |
| 2009-07-30 16:20 | Diferencias · Historial | 497 | →Expert opinion is essential: wouldn't you want to know the opinion of the fox? |
| 2009-07-30 16:05 | Diferencias · Historial | 4.015 | →State of the Cold Fusion article: Oppose. "Peaceful" Talk page with controversial topic is not, actually, a good sign, unless high consensus has been reached. We aren't there. |
| 2009-07-30 15:33 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.421 | →Abd in violation of previous arbcomm remedies: Crohnie, if "all you did was vandal patrol," you'd not have been named as a member of the cabal. |
| 2009-07-30 15:19 | Diferencias · Historial | 2.372 | →Abd in violation of previous arbcomm remedies: Oppose, I did, in fact, follow that advice. Read it carefully, and read the rest of the decision. |
| 2009-07-30 15:00 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.055 | →Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: BTW, nice example of wikilawyering, citing text of policy to argue against substance. |
| 2009-07-30 14:47 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.845 | →Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: why it is very important that this principle be addressed by ArbComm. |
| 2009-07-30 14:32 | Diferencias · Historial | 4.778 | →Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: Wild Hair Ideas |
| 2009-07-30 09:51 | Diferencias · Historial | 2.441 | →Abd in violation of previous arbcomm remedies: r to MastCell. |
| 2009-07-30 09:26 | Diferencias · Historial | 2.170 | →WP:TINC: r to Mathsci |
| 2009-07-30 09:09 | Diferencias · Historial | 6.278 | →WP:TINC: r to MastCell. Thanks. |
| 2009-07-30 07:34 | Diferencias · Historial | -1 | →Abd has driven away subject matter experts: Durova's fault. Her apostrophe demon. |
| 2009-07-30 07:26 | Diferencias · Historial | 6.079 | →Abd has driven away subject matter experts: this is preposterous. Not one example, in fact. |
| 2009-07-30 06:33 | Diferencias · Historial | 3.359 | →Abd/GoRight disruption of dispute resolution proceedings: respond to this proposal. |
| 2009-07-30 05:50 | Diferencias · Historial | 2.296 | →Abd has engaged in meatpuppetry: some responses. |
| 2009-07-30 05:29 | Diferencias · Historial | 1 | →Wikilawyering: fmt |
| 2009-07-30 05:29 | Diferencias · Historial | 870 | →Wikilawyering: Oppose. Very bad definition of wikilawyering. |
| 2009-07-30 05:22 | Diferencias · Historial | 2.895 | →Meatpuppetry: respond |
| 2009-07-30 04:50 | Diferencias · Historial | 805 | →Don't debate proposals with no support: r to Boris. |
| 2009-07-30 04:40 | Diferencias · Historial | 0 | →Administrative recusal upon claim: number |
| 2009-07-30 04:40 | Diferencias · Historial | 0 | →Help the clueless: number |
| 2009-07-30 04:39 | Diferencias · Historial | 0 | →Don't debate proposals with no support: number it |
| 2009-07-30 04:38 | Diferencias · Historial | 5.062 | /*Administrative recusal upon claim */ propose |
| 2009-07-30 03:46 | Diferencias · Historial | -2.315 | →Help the clueless: This mouse is weird, I suspect it flash-copied the section.... |
| 2009-07-30 03:45 | Diferencias · Historial | 2.315 | /*Help the clueless */ a modest proposal |
| 2009-07-30 03:44 | Diferencias · Historial | 2.315 | /*Help the clueless */ a modest proposal |
| 2009-07-30 03:20 | Diferencias · Historial | 32 | /*Don't debate proposals with no support*/ Give it a title. |
| 2009-07-30 03:17 | Diferencias · Historial | 70 | →Template: sign it. |
| 2009-07-30 03:17 | Diferencias · Historial | 2.152 | →Template: don't debate proposals unless independent support is expressed. |
| 2009-07-30 03:01 | Diferencias · Historial | 925 | /*Broadening of consensus is always desirable */ |
| 2009-07-30 02:44 | Diferencias · Historial | 215 | →Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: redact proposal to strike second sentence about implementation. |
| 2009-07-29 16:59 | Diferencias · Historial | 8.248 | →Abd's Evidence for consensus: detailed examination of Woonpton's very defective analysis, which was founded on obvious error. |
| 2009-07-25 04:06 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.195 | →Proposal by User:Objectivist: another view. |
| 2009-07-25 03:57 | Diferencias · Historial | 57 | →Proposal by User:Objectivist: punct |
| 2009-07-25 03:54 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.230 | →Proposal by User:Objectivist: Oppose. WP:RS is crucial for science articles. |
| 2009-07-25 03:39 | Diferencias · Historial | 2.777 | →WP:BURO: Okay, here is the history, the diffs, and the reason why this is relevant. I should be back on Monday. Be nice. |
| 2009-07-23 21:31 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.151 | →Motion to freeze the Workshop page pending completion of evidence: long post on WR:short time. Short text here: long time. |
| 2009-07-23 18:16 | Diferencias · Historial | 2.204 | →Motion to freeze the Workshop page pending completion of evidence: respond to arbitrators. |
| 2009-07-22 15:31 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.106 | →Expand the scope of the case to cover Abd's behaviour over the last two years: I request, again, undeletion of that page. It could not possibly be harmful now. |
| 2009-07-22 15:18 | Diferencias · Historial | 922 | →Motion to freeze the Workshop page pending completion of evidence: respond to comments. |
| 2009-07-22 04:52 | Diferencias · Historial | 967 | →Template: Motion to freeze the Workshop page pending completion of evidence |
| 2009-07-21 17:39 | Diferencias · Historial | 436 | →Not enough experts: respond to R. Baley |
| 2009-07-21 17:35 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.109 | →Expert opinion is essential: experts are driven away, not by massive commentary, which they can ignore, but by our incredible inefficiency. |
| 2009-07-21 17:25 | Diferencias · Historial | 72 | →Not enough experts: sign it |
| 2009-07-21 17:24 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.514 | →Not enough experts: Raul is making serious charges with no evidence, only allegation. |
| 2009-07-21 17:09 | Diferencias · Historial | 3 | →Two more weeks to gather evidence: fmt |
| 2009-07-21 17:08 | Diferencias · Historial | 617 | →Two more weeks to gather evidence: r to the usual Raul654 self-contradictory claim. |
| 2009-07-21 17:02 | Diferencias · Historial | 410 | →Two more weeks to gather evidence: no, but a clerk could do it. Parties may respond in the "others" section. |
| 2009-07-21 15:03 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.143 | →Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: Ah, this explains it! |
| 2009-07-21 14:29 | Diferencias · Historial | 921 | →Two more weeks to gather evidence: Stephan Schulz is opposed to a consensus of the parties? Why? |
| 2009-07-21 14:18 | Diferencias · Historial | 3 | →Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: fmt |
| 2009-07-21 14:18 | Diferencias · Historial | 517 | →Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: comment on collapse. |
| 2009-07-21 14:12 | Diferencias · Historial | 149 | →Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: collapse extended response. |
| 2009-07-21 14:10 | Diferencias · Historial | 5.429 | revert simply to prepare for refactoring. |
| 2009-07-21 13:54 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.156 | →Expert opinion is essential: support. I could quibble about essential, but, in fact, in the long run, it *is* essential. |
| 2009-07-21 02:22 | Diferencias · Historial | 4.524 | →Abd has engaged in meatpuppetry: Since they won't provide evidence for the charges, I do link to the actual diffs for the Scibaby incident. |
| 2009-07-21 01:32 | Diferencias · Historial | 831 | →Two more weeks to gather evidence: Two weeks okay by me. |
| 2009-07-21 01:06 | Diferencias · Historial | 332 | →Expand the scope of the case to cover Abd's behaviour over the last two years: May I please have a copy of that deleted page? |
| 2009-07-20 19:17 | Diferencias · Historial | 1 | →Not enough experts: format |
| 2009-07-20 19:17 | Diferencias · Historial | 6.278 | →Not enough experts: Support, discuss expertise. |
| 2009-07-20 18:18 | Diferencias · Historial | 2.416 | →WP:BURO: Support, with a caveat. |
| 2009-07-20 17:56 | Diferencias · Historial | 2.728 | →Abd's wikilawyering: oppose: internally contradictory. |
| 2009-07-20 17:26 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.591 | →Abd has engaged in meatpuppetry: oppose, obviously. |
| 2009-07-20 17:12 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.713 | →Meatpuppetry: r. to Enric Naval's assertion of policy violation. |
| 2009-07-20 15:54 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.381 | →One more week to gather evidence: Support. |
| 2009-07-20 05:17 | Diferencias · Historial | 5.422 | →Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: it's fundamental because we have no other objective measure of NPOV than degree of consensus. |
| 2009-07-20 04:46 | Diferencias · Historial | 2.727 | →Expand the scope of the case to cover Abd's behaviour over the last two years: oppose, of course. |
| 2009-07-18 06:39 | Diferencias · Historial | 2.823 | →Meatpuppetry: oppose. |
| 2009-07-16 18:14 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.140 | →Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: This discussion could be very important. |
| 2009-07-16 17:53 | Diferencias · Historial | 610 | →Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: proposal is an explanation of the five pillars, not a substitute for them. |
| 2009-07-16 17:43 | Diferencias · Historial | 383 | →Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: respond to raw ABF, personalizing a seriously proposed principle. |
| 2009-07-16 16:11 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.365 | →Consensus is fundamental to NPOV: r to Newyorkbrad. |
| 2009-07-16 15:36 | Diferencias · Historial | 951 | →Hipocrite and Mathsci are added as parties: respond to Newyorkbrad. |
| 2009-07-16 14:50 | Diferencias · Historial | 817 | /*Consensus is fundamental to NPOV*/ |
| 2009-07-16 13:24 | Diferencias · Historial | 465 | →Hipocrite and Mathsci are added as parties: respond to Mathsci. |
| 2009-07-15 19:16 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.061 | →Hipocrite and Mathsci are added as parties: withdraw part of motion. |
| 2009-07-15 13:20 | Diferencias · Historial | 1.816 | /*Hipocrite and Mathsci are added as parties*/ Motion to add. |
Todas las horas están en UTC.