User contributions for Wikieditor1377
A user with 64 edits. Account created on 20 September 2020.
1 November 2020
- 16:3716:37, 1 November 2020 diff hist +26 Wikipedia talk:Dispute resolution noticeboard →Multiple reverts and unecessary threats
- 16:2416:24, 1 November 2020 diff hist +1,482 Wikipedia talk:Dispute resolution noticeboard →Multiple reverts and unecessary threats: new section
- 15:5115:51, 1 November 2020 diff hist −155 Raw foodism Not supported by current references and scientific data. Tag: Visual edit
- 15:5015:50, 1 November 2020 diff hist +21 Raw foodism Altered Dietitian to British Dietician Association according to the reference listed. Tag: Visual edit
- 15:4015:40, 1 November 2020 diff hist +8 Raw foodism →Claims: Added year of the publication of the research on Acrylamide Tag: Visual edit
- 15:3815:38, 1 November 2020 diff hist +1,383 Raw foodism Added more updated information on acrylamide to the claim section, a substance found in starch after exposing it to high temperatures, and its link to cancer in humans. Tag: Visual edit
- 14:1014:10, 1 November 2020 diff hist +79 User talk:Wikieditor1377 →October 2020
- 14:0314:03, 1 November 2020 diff hist +441 User talk:Wikieditor1377 →October 2020
- 01:5201:52, 1 November 2020 diff hist +1,040 User talk:Evad37 →Multiple reverts and unecessary threats: new section
- 00:2600:26, 1 November 2020 diff hist +75 User talk:Wikieditor1377 →October 2020
- 00:2400:24, 1 November 2020 diff hist +1 User talk:Wikieditor1377 →October 2020
- 00:1300:13, 1 November 2020 diff hist +833 User talk:Wikieditor1377 →October 2020
31 October 2020
- 23:5623:56, 31 October 2020 diff hist +382 Talk:Raw foodism →Acrylamide information insufficient on claim section. It is currently described as carcinogenic or likely carcinogenic by a number of organizations such as the World Health Organization or the Environmental Protection Agency
- 23:4823:48, 31 October 2020 diff hist +81 Talk:Raw foodism →Acrylamide information insufficient on claim section. It is currently described as carcinogenic or likely carcinogenic by a number of organizations such as the World Health Organization or the Environmental Protection Agency
- 23:4323:43, 31 October 2020 diff hist +108 User talk:Wikieditor1377 →October 2020
- 23:4223:42, 31 October 2020 diff hist +1,461 User talk:Wikieditor1377 →October 2020
- 23:0823:08, 31 October 2020 diff hist 0 m User talk:Wikieditor1377 →October 2020
- 23:0723:07, 31 October 2020 diff hist +409 User talk:Wikieditor1377 →October 2020
- 22:5722:57, 31 October 2020 diff hist +393 User talk:Wikieditor1377 →October 2020
- 22:2022:20, 31 October 2020 diff hist +2,630 Talk:Raw foodism →Acrylamide information insufficient on claim section. It is currently described as carcinogenic or likely carcinogenic by a number of organizations such as the World Health Organization or the Environmental Protection Agency: new section
- 18:4718:47, 31 October 2020 diff hist +248 User talk:Wikieditor1377 →September 2020
- 18:3518:35, 31 October 2020 diff hist +104 m User talk:Zefr No edit summary Tag: Reverted
- 18:3418:34, 31 October 2020 diff hist +960 User talk:Zefr →Missing information: Destruction or loss of vitamins and other nutrients by cooking. Toxins created by cooking.: new section Tag: Reverted
- 17:5917:59, 31 October 2020 diff hist +843 Talk:Raw foodism →Missing information: Destruction or loss of vitamins and other nutrients by cooking. Toxins created by cooking.
- 15:5715:57, 31 October 2020 diff hist −8 m User talk:Wikieditor1377 No edit summary
- 15:4115:41, 31 October 2020 diff hist +389 User talk:Wikieditor1377 No edit summary
- 15:3515:35, 31 October 2020 diff hist +57 Talk:Raw foodism No edit summary
- 15:3415:34, 31 October 2020 diff hist +323 Talk:Raw foodism No edit summary
- 15:1015:10, 31 October 2020 diff hist −205 Raw foodism Nonsense. A diet followed by near 100% of all living creatures on the planet is not a fad diet. Near 100% of other species live on a 100% raw food diet and the human race lived on a 100% raw food diet for millions of years as well. Tag: Reverted
- 14:4214:42, 31 October 2020 diff hist +545 Talk:Raw foodism →Missing information: Destruction or loss of vitamins and other nutrients by cooking. Toxins created by cooking.
- 02:1202:12, 31 October 2020 diff hist +26 m Talk:Raw foodism No edit summary
- 01:3601:36, 31 October 2020 diff hist +1,052 Talk:Raw foodism →Missing information: Destruction or loss of vitamins and other nutrients by cooking. Toxins created by cooking.: new section
- 01:1601:16, 31 October 2020 diff hist +801 User talk:Psychologist Guy →Edit on page: Raw foodism Tag: Reverted
30 October 2020
- 14:4314:43, 30 October 2020 diff hist +6 Raw foodism Although the word food is implied when we say raw vegan diet I've left the word food there so that you and possibly others don't get confused. Tag: Reverted
- 14:3814:38, 30 October 2020 diff hist +1 Raw foodism They forgot the word vegan there since vitamin B12 deficiency is often linked with veganism, and not with people who consume a raw meat dish such as carpaccio or steak tartare. Tag: Reverted
- 14:3114:31, 30 October 2020 diff hist +476 Raw foodism This time I've used only the reference that included all those vitamins and minerals, since some of the others that were used before dealt specifically with one or two of those components, which could cause confusion to readers.. Tag: Reverted
- 13:5413:54, 30 October 2020 diff hist −12 m Raw foodism No edit summary Tag: Reverted
- 13:4813:48, 30 October 2020 diff hist +1,533 Raw foodism Added content to the claims section Tags: Reverted Visual edit
- 13:2413:24, 30 October 2020 diff hist +368 User talk:Psychologist Guy →Edit on page: Raw foodism: new section Tag: Reverted
- 00:3700:37, 30 October 2020 diff hist −4,308 Raw foodism Edited claims section. After the sentence "claims from raw food proponents:", most of the content was actually criticism rather than claims by their proponents. Tags: Reverted nowiki added Visual edit Mobile edit Mobile web edit
22 September 2020
- 01:4001:40, 22 September 2020 diff hist +1 m User talk:GreenC/2020 No edit summary
- 01:3801:38, 22 September 2020 diff hist 0 m User talk:GreenC/2020 No edit summary
- 01:3601:36, 22 September 2020 diff hist +354 User talk:GreenC/2020 Added reply
- 01:1701:17, 22 September 2020 diff hist +36 m Talk:The Martian (film) No edit summary
- 01:1201:12, 22 September 2020 diff hist +533 Talk:The Martian (film) →Adding individual opinions to the accolade section isn't appropriate.: new section
21 September 2020
- 23:5723:57, 21 September 2020 diff hist +455 User talk:GreenC/2020 →Edit: the martian (film): new section
- 22:1722:17, 21 September 2020 diff hist +315 User talk:SummerPhDv2.0 →Edit: The Martian (film): new section
- 20:3120:31, 21 September 2020 diff hist −396 The Martian (film) An individual's opinion shouldn't be in the accolade section of a movie. That section is reserved for organizations such as the academy awards or the golden globes. In critical reception is where you can sometimes find professional film critic's opinions from different organizations such as the chicaco sun-times. Tags: Manual revert Reverted
20 September 2020
- 19:4319:43, 20 September 2020 diff hist −100 Affirmative action No edit summary
- 18:4218:42, 20 September 2020 diff hist −396 The Martian (film) Fixed accolade section. Tag: Reverted