Jump to content

Miscegenation: 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 (newer 50 | ) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)

28 October 2025

2 October 2025

29 September 2025

25 September 2025

7 September 2025

4 September 2025

11 August 2025

6 August 2025

18 July 2025

6 June 2025

3 June 2025

2 June 2025

1 June 2025

26 May 2025

18 May 2025

6 May 2025

5 May 2025

4 May 2025

29 April 2025

27 April 2025

26 April 2025

  • curprev 19:0219:02, 26 April 2025 Kanchan M Mahon talk contribs 74,881 bytes +2,881 I added clarification that the term “miscegenation” is derogatory. Also I added a section from the Wikipedia article on “Race” that states that it is a a social construct which does not have an scientific validity or definition. I pulled this addition from the existing article on “Race” and it seems to have copied correctly along with the citations associated with it. I originally posted my proposal in Talk, but it’s been deleted. So I will stand behind this edit until someone gives me correct undo Tag: Visual edit

25 April 2025

22 April 2025

3 April 2025

8 March 2025

24 February 2025

16 February 2025

  • curprev 07:4507:45, 16 February 2025 Dingolover6969 talk contribs 71,177 bytes +141 Improve lede: change short desc because WP:NOTDICT; summarize some info from the article into the lede very blandly and simply; fix the end of the lede, the part with synonyms, which was ungrammatical (but still useful). undo

10 February 2025

30 January 2025

19 January 2025

18 January 2025

  • curprev 10:1810:18, 18 January 2025 2600:100f:b19a:ea7f:d8a0:548a:40ed:8e22 talk 70,568 bytes +203 Etymological history: Didn't fix it, but asked for review as political parties are specifically identified and the pamphlet in question wasn't a party document, it was a hoax specifically design to discredit abolitionist, not Democrats. The pieces as written is inaccurate and is designed to impune contemporary parties with actions from the past, that infact were not actions specifically by the party even at the time. undo Tags: Reverted Mobile edit Mobile web edit

11 January 2025

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