Jump to content

J. K. Rowling: Revision history


For any version listed below, click on its date to view it. For more help, see Help:Page history and Help:Edit summary. (cur) = difference from current version, (prev) = difference from preceding version, m = minor edit, → = section edit, ← = automatic edit summary

(newest | oldest) View ( | ) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)

29 December 2021

27 December 2021

24 December 2021

20 December 2021

19 December 2021

18 December 2021

17 December 2021

16 December 2021

15 December 2021

14 December 2021

12 December 2021

11 December 2021

9 December 2021

  • curprev 11:0511:05, 9 December 2021Licks-rocks talk contribs 200,213 bytes −62 Undid revision 1059424764 by Zedembee (talk) Please check the talk page. The sentence you tried to change is subject to a very lenghty RFC at the moment. Tag: Undo
  • curprev 10:4110:41, 9 December 2021Zedembee talk contribs 200,275 bytes +62 Added language "and the potential conflict between these and sex-based rights" for balance. The position that JKR was speaking AGAINST trans rights and not FOR natal women's rights is an opinion. For accuracy and fairness, both interpretations of her comments should be acknowledged at once and with equal weight. Tag: Reverted
  • curprev 10:0010:00, 9 December 2021Pyxis Solitary talk contribs 200,213 bytes +1 [dummy edit for comment] "Unbelievable that anyone would think this is acceptable." I don't. And I won't lose the bet that there are many others on the outside looking in that think the same. As with all pendulums, the burn-JKR pitchforks & torches era will wane and be replaced with another P&T.
  • curprev 09:5109:51, 9 December 2021Pyxis Solitary talk contribs 200,212 bytes +97 Citation edits.
  • curprev 06:1206:12, 9 December 2021Crossroads talk contribs 200,115 bytes −1,427 No, if you actually read WP:LABEL you'll see that the problem is using a vague and value-laden term without in-text attribution. Judging by how the RfC on the next sentence is going, there is no way there is consensus to add this, and doing so could be viewed as an attempt to spoil the RfC. Unbelievable that anyone would think this is acceptable. Tag: Manual revert

8 December 2021

7 December 2021

4 December 2021

2 December 2021

30 November 2021

29 November 2021

(newest | oldest) View ( | ) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)