Top edits to an article
All edits made to a page by one user, in chronological order.
Article | The Kashmir Files (Log · Page History) |
User | Hemantha (Edit Counter· Top Edits) |
Total edits | 37 |
Minor edits | 11 (29.7%) |
(Semi-)automated edits | 8 (21.6%) |
Reverted edits | 6 (16.2%) |
atbe1 | 2.9 |
Added (bytes)2 | 12957 |
Deleted (bytes) | -8102 |
Minor edits
·
11 (29.7%)
Major edits
·
26 (70.3%)
(Semi-)automated edits
·
8 (21.6%)
Manual edits
·
29 (78.4%)
Reverted edits
·
6 (16.2%)
Unreverted edits
·
31 (83.8%)
1 Average time between edits (days)
2 Added text is any positive addition that wasn't reverted (approximate)
Date | Links | Size | Edit summary |
---|---|---|---|
2022-06-29 06:16 | Diff · History | -696 | Undid revision 1095582181 by X-Editor (talk) what did you not understand when I reverted you last time? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=history&title=The_Kashmir_Files&offset=20220323031321&limit=5 |
2022-05-31 12:06 | Diff · History | 146 | change budget to range in lede and body |
2022-05-31 11:42 | Diff · History | 319 | add budget range, see talk |
2022-05-07 07:09 | Diff · History | -1493 | rm section on director's tweets as WP:NOTNEWS. at the moment, it's enough to have this in talk page 'in the media' |
2022-05-03 05:42 | Diff · History | 10578 | rvv |
2022-03-31 09:59 | Diff · History | -666 | rv; news of release in some country is just that, WP:NOTNEWS; other edit breaks urls |
2022-03-30 08:10 | Diff · History | -1210 | Undid revision 1080094368 by PQR01 (talk) Consult talk where Rawal's review has been discussed more than once. Koimoi is unreliable per WP:ICTFSOURCES |
2022-03-23 03:13 | Diff · History | -580 | →Critical reception: Enough reasons were given for Rawal's HT review removal - promotion, questions of independence; none of which were actually addressed at all. Get consensus on talk before adding. |
2022-03-20 07:19 | Diff · History | -639 | →Release: rm claim sourced to a youtube video as WP:UNDUE, not everything he's said needs to be carried. rm NZ rating review as WP:NOTNEWS. simplify wording for 4000 screens, removing heavily promotional claims and tag for better source. |
2022-03-20 04:39 | Diff · History | 12 | →Critical reception: ce per my explanation before |
2022-03-20 04:37 | Diff · History | -9 | →Critical reception: ce (revert part of Special:Diff/1078095969 which broke grammar) |
2022-03-20 04:24 | Diff · History | -777 | Undid revision 1078098697 by M4DU7 (talk) An uncredited "Entertainment Desk" article doesn't count as well-sourced. India Today (an op-ed by all appearances) specifically says "The BJP, in particular, is putting its weight behind the film" - how is that word-of-mouth if the largest org in the world is marketing it? |
2022-03-20 03:04 | Diff · History | 39 | →Critical reception: change "of publication" to "reviewing for publication" for some reviews where the reviewers have other affliliations as well |
2022-03-17 17:08 | Diff · History | -14 | revert User:Dev0745's unconstructive edits, with incomprehensible edit summaries, to lead. User:Dev0745, please respond in the talk">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:The_Kashmir_Files#Line_in_lead where you were specifically questioned about these additions, instead of stealth edit warring. |
2022-03-17 13:12 | Diff · History | 483 | (reverted) Add exploitative as noted by BBC and multiple reviews from all sides - Hindu, TNIE, First Post. |
2022-03-17 12:50 | Diff · History | -420 | (reverted) deduplicate refs to BBC article |
2022-03-17 12:32 | Diff · History | 155 | (reverted) →Political messaging and historical accuracy: slightly reword as instead of absolving VP Singh's BJP supported govt, it simply fails to mention it. Use Asim Ali's article to share some of the sourcing load carried by Rohmetra's. |
2022-03-17 08:05 | Diff · History | 0 | Undid revision 1077604301 by Pravega (talk) Nobody is implying anything; it is a simple, well referenced statement with multiple backing sources. Use talk page if you have issues instead of removing in minor edits. |
2022-03-17 04:41 | Diff · History | -1005 | (reverted) rm section on Rhode Island added by User:Jhy.rjwk. The source, WPRI, literally starts off with "House Speaker Joe Shekarchi is distancing lawmakers from a citation that" with further quotes from him saying how routine this is. Makes this WP:UNDUE as it is one person's opinion. |
2022-03-17 03:12 | Diff · History | 663 | restore Rahul Desai review, removed on a flimsy technicality. His review's reliability has never been questioned, as specifically noted in spam list entry. URL hasn't been added, so the question of evading spam list doesn't arise. Under these circumstances, this review is exactly similar to an WP:OFFLINE source and the citation is formatted as such. |
2022-03-17 02:59 | Diff · History | -432 | →Non-BJP support: rm section based on misreading of the source which makes it clear that the CM's statement is a diplomatic response to the "make it tax free in state" demands by BJP MLAs |
2022-03-16 19:03 | Diff · History | -1029 | (reverted) Undid revision 1077507832 by Bhaskarbhagawati (talk) Koimoi isn't any better, see WP:ICTFSOURCES. ToI article makes it clear at every sentence that it's all director's claims and without reliable verification, the whole thing is unnecessary. |
2022-03-16 14:10 | Diff · History | -29 | →Plot: rm editorial words User:Vizziee has silently restored. something removed with explanation. What's authentic and inauthentic isn't decided in a film plot. Vicious implies immorality, a judgement that viewers can't make. |
2022-03-16 14:04 | Diff · History | -2 | (reverted) Reorder text to adhere to the timeline of events in lead. The film promotion and tax breaks had already started by Friday, even before box office data had come in. |
2022-03-16 13:47 | Diff · History | -26 | →Plot: ce to remove some blatant editorialising |
2022-03-16 08:17 | Diff · History | -359 | revert these edits as unconstructive. No need for IMDb non-controversy in lead as it was removed from body. Scroll ref is remnant from removed edits, so remove that as well. |
2022-03-15 18:58 | Diff · History | -184 | Undid revision 1077321825 by Akshaypatill (talk) unnecessary repetition of an existing citation |
2022-03-15 18:39 | Diff · History | 12 | Undid revision 1077290996 by Akshaypatill (talk) remove at param breaks quote display. |
2022-03-15 14:07 | Diff · History | 3 | →Release and box office: simplify first weekend box office collections to a single sentence instead of three |
2022-03-15 14:02 | Diff · History | 7 | →Production: ce |
2022-03-15 14:01 | Diff · History | -204 | →Production: rm undue quote and unsupported claim |
2022-03-15 13:58 | Diff · History | -167 | →Plot: more ce |
2022-03-15 13:36 | Diff · History | -494 | →Plot: some ce, rm editorial sentences, simplify language at odds with history per MOS:PLOT |
2022-03-15 07:10 | Diff · History | 1108 | Undid revision 1077227165 by Akshaypatill (talk) Not synth as siasat specifically notes this aspect. I've added it as a ref with the relevant quote |
2022-03-15 06:33 | Diff · History | 70 | restore text on ruling party, removed by User:Chess. I count at least three review/articles specifically mentioning it - "cementing the current dispensation’s favoured discourse", "party, whose agenda he is consciously or inadvertently perpetuating". I've added a couple to the ugly refn block as well. |
2022-03-15 03:08 | Diff · History | -34 | →Cast: correct Mandlekar's character name per {{u|Dsnb07}}'s post on talk and The Hindu review |
2022-03-14 19:37 | Diff · History | -89 | →Release and box office: Neither does the source support the claim of records nor do anything else available elsewhere. |
All times are in UTC.