User contributions for Fangz

Search for contributionsshowhide

⧼contribs-top⧽

Username, IP address or CIDR range:

Namespace:

Invert selection

Associated namespace

Tag filter:

Invert selection

Only show edits that are latest revisions

Only show edits that are page creations

Hide minor edits

⧼contribs-date⧽

From date:

To date:

Show only edits pending review

Hide probably good edits

16:0416:04, 14 October 2025 diff hist +517 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of yuri works →List of yuri works: Reply Tag: Reply
15:5915:59, 14 October 2025 diff hist +24 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of yuri works No edit summary
15:5815:58, 14 October 2025 diff hist +1,147 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of yuri works →List of yuri works: Reply Tag: Reply
15:0215:02, 14 October 2025 diff hist 0 m Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of yuri works No edit summary
15:0115:01, 14 October 2025 diff hist +701 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of yuri works →List of yuri works: Reply Tag: Reply
14:5214:52, 14 October 2025 diff hist +668 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of yuri works →List of yuri works: Reply Tag: Reply
14:3814:38, 14 October 2025 diff hist +197 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of yuri works →List of yuri works: Reply Tag: Reply
14:3414:34, 14 October 2025 diff hist +191 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of yuri works No edit summary
14:3214:32, 14 October 2025 diff hist +879 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of yuri works →List of yuri works: Reply Tag: Reply
12:5612:56, 14 October 2025 diff hist +181 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of yuri works No edit summary
12:5012:50, 14 October 2025 diff hist +720 Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of yuri works →List of yuri works: Reply Tag: Reply

07:1207:12, 22 August 2025 diff hist +22 Last battle of Bismarck Undid revision 1306579969 by Wdford (talk) - Cameron and all experts agreed that Bismarck would inevitably have sunk without the scuttling. That's what the sources say. Stop trying to cover up this fact Tag: Reverted

13:5213:52, 16 August 2025 diff hist +68 Last battle of Bismarck Fine, if you really want to be accurate
13:4813:48, 16 August 2025 diff hist 0 RMS Lusitania You know, I'd rather not call it machine gun ammo because American made ammunition was actually never approved for use in machine guns at this time
13:3813:38, 16 August 2025 diff hist +12 Battle of Leyte Better wikilink

11:5711:57, 10 August 2025 diff hist +73 Last battle of Bismarck actually maybe just rewrite this sentence
11:4211:42, 10 August 2025 diff hist +2 Last battle of Bismarck while the use of scuttle instead of sunk in the infobox is fine, in the context of this sentence about the failure of the operation a different wording is more accurate and neutral in line with the "both" answer from Cameron.
11:3311:33, 10 August 2025 diff hist +281 Sinking of the RMS Lusitania →British Government deliberately putting Lusitania at risk: add bailey and ryan discussion on Runciman
11:1411:14, 10 August 2025 diff hist +1 m Sinking of the RMS Lusitania No edit summary
11:1411:14, 10 August 2025 diff hist −924 Sinking of the RMS Lusitania remove note, does not belong in lede. This is already discussed later and is generally not considered a credible argument according. Including it in lede without secondary source based discussion is inappropriate
11:0411:04, 10 August 2025 diff hist +528 Sinking of the RMS Lusitania →American: add ref and additional info from Malone's testimony
10:4210:42, 10 August 2025 diff hist +280 Sinking of the RMS Lusitania remove AMC listing claim, only really comes from watson, can be directly rebutted from primary documents. The "reserve" listing from Bailey, Preston etc is verified. Watson only mentions Lusi in one paragraph in a book about a WW2 AMC, so not reliable for this article. See talkpage on Lusitania article
10:3210:32, 10 August 2025 diff hist +30 RMS Lusitania →Outbreak of the First World War: preston also discusses this
10:2110:21, 10 August 2025 diff hist +128 RMS Lusitania →Aftermath: change to bailey and ryan version
10:1210:12, 10 August 2025 diff hist −168 RMS Lusitania remove watson 2006 "Atlantic Convoys and Nazi Raiders: The Deadly Voyage of HMS Jervis" from reference. This is a book about a WWII AMC that only mentions Lusitania in one paragraph in the introduction.
10:0710:07, 10 August 2025 diff hist +642 RMS Lusitania being bold and removing claim about listed as a AMC. Refs are low quality - Davidson only says (fringe source) Simpson says so, and has been "sharply controverted", Denson also references Simpson. Craughwell and Watson are random asides in works about other topics. The 1915 newspaper article is quoting German propaganda. Checks of Navy List and and Janes' backs Bailey & Ryan's conclusion, so use this instead. See talkpage
09:0709:07, 10 August 2025 diff hist −35 RMS Lusitania Begin removing questionable claim about being listed as a AMC, as opposed to being reserved Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit

13:1313:13, 7 August 2025 diff hist −506 War crimes in World War I →Blockade of Germany: Trim the old newspaper stuff, I don't think we need that many references, doesn't add anything Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit

15:5915:59, 5 August 2025 diff hist +347 Talk:RMS Lusitania →Listed as a AMC?: Reply Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit Reply
14:3914:39, 5 August 2025 diff hist +17 RMS Lusitania add link
14:3914:39, 5 August 2025 diff hist +34 Talk:RMS Lusitania →Listed as a AMC?
14:3514:35, 5 August 2025 diff hist +11 RMS Lusitania add dubious tag, fix ref
14:3114:31, 5 August 2025 diff hist +896 Talk:RMS Lusitania →Listed as a AMC?: new section Tag: New topic

09:5609:56, 27 June 2025 diff hist −109 Tsuchizaki Minato, Akita Remove useless map frame current Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit

00:0000:00, 11 June 2025 diff hist −796 McNamara fallacy rm McNamara's folly section: youtube not reliable source, also linked video does not refer to the fallacy. In the video the primary fault of McNamara is a naive belief in how effective videotape based teaching courses could be in improving the mental aptitude of the 100,000. This is unrelated to the topic of the article

14:3614:36, 27 March 2025 diff hist −9 Ralph Underwager →Interview controversy: change around order in time
14:2914:29, 27 March 2025 diff hist +672 Dissociative identity disorder edit to address complaints???? I don't know, no one else suggests anything. I hope this is better? Please be constructive
14:1314:13, 27 March 2025 diff hist +400 Talk:Dissociative identity disorder →Lead: Reply Tag: Reply
14:0914:09, 27 March 2025 diff hist +206 Talk:Dissociative identity disorder →Lead: Reply Tag: Reply
14:0114:01, 27 March 2025 diff hist +872 Talk:Dissociative identity disorder →Lead: Reply Tag: Reply
13:5013:50, 27 March 2025 diff hist +672 Talk:Dissociative identity disorder →Lead: Reply Tag: Reply
13:4013:40, 27 March 2025 diff hist +168 Talk:Dissociative identity disorder →Lead
13:3813:38, 27 March 2025 diff hist +575 Talk:Dissociative identity disorder →Lead: Reply Tag: Reply
13:2713:27, 27 March 2025 diff hist +609 Talk:Dissociative identity disorder →Page should be deleted: Reply Tag: Reply
13:1913:19, 27 March 2025 diff hist +200 Talk:Dissociative identity disorder →Lead
13:1513:15, 27 March 2025 diff hist +867 Talk:Dissociative identity disorder →Lead: Reply Tag: Reply
13:0313:03, 27 March 2025 diff hist +697 Talk:Dissociative identity disorder →Lead: Reply Tag: Reply
12:5212:52, 27 March 2025 diff hist +593 Talk:Dissociative identity disorder →Lead: Reply Tag: Reply
12:4312:43, 27 March 2025 diff hist +86 Talk:Dissociative identity disorder →Lead
12:4112:41, 27 March 2025 diff hist +323 Talk:Dissociative identity disorder →Lead: Reply Tag: Reply

14 October 2025

22 August 2025

16 August 2025

10 August 2025

7 August 2025

5 August 2025

27 June 2025

11 June 2025

27 March 2025