Benutzerbeiträge von „Peregrine981“

27. Januar 2016

• 16:4516:45, 27. Jan. 2016 Unterschied Versionen −475‎ Regressive left ‎ Undid revision 701937089 by Fredperry2016 (talk) - sorry, but these are unsourced and blatant NPOV violations. Please discuss on talk

7. Januar 2016

• 11:5311:53, 7. Jan. 2016 Unterschied Versionen +33‎ Regressive left ‎ Islamo-Leftism
• 11:4711:47, 7. Jan. 2016 Unterschied Versionen −220‎ Regressive left ‎ not really necessary to mention everyone who has ever discussed the term in the lead
• 11:4511:45, 7. Jan. 2016 Unterschied Versionen −483‎ Regressive left ‎ →‎Analysis: - remove extraneous info about editorial content of Rubin Report

6. Januar 2016

• 23:5823:58, 6. Jan. 2016 Unterschied Versionen −439‎ Regressive left ‎ →‎External links: - not relevant as "extra" links. should be cited in text or not at all

4. Januar 2016

• 12:4412:44, 4. Jan. 2016 Unterschied Versionen −1.188‎ Regressive left ‎ this material is not really germane to the topic of "regressive left", just background on Nawaz; merge "controversy" section into "analysis" - not clear what the difference is, and "controversy" is not good NPOV title

23. Oktober 2013

• 11:2811:28, 23. Okt. 2013 Unterschied Versionen +465‎ Ana Kasparian ‎ We had a big discussion on this subject a few months ago - Kapsarian just BARELY meets the notability criteria - so there just isn't that much information available. We simply cannot have an article that is almost entirely sourced from the source itself.

21. Oktober 2013

• 11:0611:06, 21. Okt. 2013 Unterschied Versionen +446‎ Ana Kasparian ‎ archive url
• 10:5610:56, 21. Okt. 2013 Unterschied Versionen +259‎ Ana Kasparian ‎ This article is WAY too reliant on primary original research. As consensus was to keep this article as a stand alone, it needs to be significantly improved, meaning removing most of the self reporting. Ideally we should be using mostly secondary sources

30. Juli 2013

• 23:2923:29, 30. Jul. 2013 Unterschied Versionen +1.043‎ Ana Kasparian ‎ suggest merger
• 12:0912:09, 30. Jul. 2013 Unterschied Versionen −4.410‎ Ana Kasparian ‎ I see that opponents of merge are determined to avoid discussing this topic. I remind you that consensus does not exist on this topic, and ignoring the discussion does not mean that everything is settled. happy to debate, not to be ignored.

29. Juli 2013

• 14:4814:48, 29. Jul. 2013 Unterschied Versionen −4.410‎ Ana Kasparian ‎ Undid revision 566267393 by Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) - pls at least have the courtesy to discuss the change on talk as requested numerous times.
• 12:1612:16, 29. Jul. 2013 Unterschied Versionen −4.410‎ Ana Kasparian ‎ I tried to discuss on talk, but no one seems to be interested in discussion. Please see talk page, and refer to WP:GNG and WP:BASIC; this page clearly fails notability criteria, and most recent AfD was ambiguous at best about keeping as is

26. Juli 2013

• 12:0812:08, 26. Jul. 2013 Unterschied Versionen −4.410‎ Ana Kasparian ‎ I'm sorry if this ruffles some feathers, but the advocates of non-merge haven't cited a clear policy reason to keep the page other than that she hosts a popular show, which is not sufficient grounds, please read WP:BASIC before complaining

18. Juli 2013

• 00:3600:36, 18. Jul. 2013 Unterschied Versionen +5.436‎ Generation Z ‎ →‎Traits and Trends

16. Juli 2013

• 21:4921:49, 16. Jul. 2013 Unterschied Versionen −34‎ Widerstand von Sason 1904 ‎Keine Bearbeitungszusammenfassung

5. Juli 2013

• 09:2909:29, 5. Jul. 2013 Unterschied Versionen +3.940‎ Generation Z ‎ reverted unexplained removals

26. Mai 2013

• 23:3923:39, 26. Mai 2013 Unterschied Versionen +3.888‎ Generation Z ‎ "born after the preceding" is redundant and possibly confusing. better to just say "after"

25. April 2013

• 14:5514:55, 25. Apr. 2013 Unterschied Versionen +4.010‎ Generation Z ‎ if you were to take the 2005 start date, then they would not even be close to adult, so this sentence doesn't fit with our sources. Also, a somewhat cumbersome and redundant phrase.

22. April 2013

• 22:5122:51, 22. Apr. 2013 Unterschied Versionen +4.468‎ Generation Z ‎ ad age article was not removed. if you look a little bit, you'll see that it is the first source under "dates". Also, 1995 hardly qualifies as "latter" 1990s....
• 09:1109:11, 22. Apr. 2013 Unterschied Versionen +4.434‎ Generation Z ‎ media.... please take this up on talk. If you revert again I'm going to take it to an administrator. constant reversions are not helpful to building a consensus. Conversation is.
• 00:2000:20, 22. Apr. 2013 Unterschied Versionen +3.834‎ Generation Z ‎ 1990s seems to be a more common date, Magid & Associates, and Horovitz, both main sources of this article cite 1995 & 1997

20. März 2013

• 10:4110:41, 20. Mär. 2013 Unterschied Versionen +3.942‎ Generation Z ‎ →‎Traits and Trends: - the oldest gen z are still only about 10 years old... the dot com bubble has hardly had a huge impact on them. nor 9/11

17. März 2013

• 01:0601:06, 17. Mär. 2013 Unterschied Versionen +4.519‎ Generation Z ‎Keine Bearbeitungszusammenfassung
• 01:0001:00, 17. Mär. 2013 Unterschied Versionen +4.505‎ Generation Z ‎ these changes have been extensively discussed. please discuss on talk page if you are so attached to the older wording

7. Februar 2013

• 10:5910:59, 7. Feb. 2013 Unterschied Versionen +4.370‎ Generation Z ‎ re-organize a bit.
• 10:5510:55, 7. Feb. 2013 Unterschied Versionen +4.353‎ Generation Z ‎ this seems like a massive over-generalization.... some "Z" children will also be children of Y or even possibly young boomers. Also, boomers are often criticized for "over-parenting" so this seems off.

31. Januar 2013

• 01:0201:02, 31. Jan. 2013 Unterschied Versionen +1.932‎ Generation Z ‎ sorry but it is banal to say they "are more inclined towards technology" without more detail and a proper source. Swearing thing needs source, and sounds unencyclopedic

28. Januar 2013

• 11:3911:39, 28. Jan. 2013 Unterschied Versionen +1.932‎ Generation Z ‎ "in the media" is redundant, unless other names are used in other fora?

15. Januar 2013

• 16:3716:37, 15. Jan. 2013 Unterschied Versionen +1.953‎ Generation Z ‎ 9/11 stuff applies to previous generation (at least according to the newsweek article cited); moving digital natives stuff into Terminology section
• 16:3016:30, 15. Jan. 2013 Unterschied Versionen +2.389‎ Generation Z ‎ If you look at the article it clearly says that "Generation 9/11" is first of all only a subset of another generation, and that generation is the Millennials, not Gen Z (as is also clear here from birth dates 1980-1991)

11. Januar 2013

• 13:4113:41, 11. Jan. 2013 Unterschied Versionen +3.162‎ Generation Z ‎ Merged content from Pluralist Generation to here. See Talk:Generation Z#Merger proposal.

4. Januar 2013

• 13:3713:37, 4. Jan. 2013 Unterschied Versionen +2.700‎ Generation Z ‎ formal merger proposal of Pluralist Generation to here

2. Januar 2013

• 13:4513:45, 2. Jan. 2013 Unterschied Versionen +2.613‎ Generation Z ‎ Undid revision 530702188 by 108.23.42.250 (talk) - please discuss these changes on talk page

26. Dezember 2012

• 05:1405:14, 26. Dez. 2012 Unterschied Versionen +2.664‎ Generation Z ‎ Undid revision 529719410 by 98.119.189.21 (talk) - rv at least the 4th instance of vandalism.

17. Dezember 2012

• 06:5006:50, 17. Dez. 2012 Unterschied Versionen +2.646‎ Generation Z ‎ TIME article is not really about the generation. It is talking about "overparenting", but does not clearly say this applies to Gen Z only. It mentions that since the 1980s the trend has been increasing. cd be both Y +Z

16. Dezember 2012

• 13:0913:09, 16. Dez. 2012 Unterschied Versionen +2.639‎ Generation Z ‎ Undid revision 528214514 by 98.119.189.21 (talk) - those sources have been discussed. removing unsubstantiated content

12. Dezember 2012

• 02:1802:18, 12. Dez. 2012 Unterschied Versionen +1.257‎ Generation Z ‎ thanks for your contribution but this is not a "how to" guide for teachers. Practical tips like this belong in a blog or a teachers' forum
• 00:2700:27, 12. Dez. 2012 Unterschied Versionen +1.257‎ Generation Z ‎ I'm removing the stuff added by anon IP. It seems like a possible copyright violation, or lifted from some other work. It has in-line citations that are not explained and do not meet wikipedia standards. In addition most seems like pop-psychology.

3. Dezember 2012

• 16:5616:56, 3. Dez. 2012 Unterschied Versionen +2.079‎ Generation Z ‎ removing content that is largely meaningless claptrap. Sources are note verifiable, or do not discuss Generation Z. Please stop adding it in without discussion.

30. November 2012

• 10:1210:12, 30. Nov. 2012 Unterschied Versionen +2.123‎ Generation Z ‎ Undid revision 525657406 by 98.119.189.21 (talk) - please discuss changes on talk

28. November 2012

• 01:1001:10, 28. Nov. 2012 Unterschied Versionen +2.099‎ K Generation Z ‎Keine Bearbeitungszusammenfassung

27. November 2012

• 16:1916:19, 27. Nov. 2012 Unterschied Versionen +2.032‎ Generation Z ‎ →‎Other terms: Adding/removing wikilink(s)
• 16:1216:12, 27. Nov. 2012 Unterschied Versionen +1.987‎ Generation Z ‎ better intro sentence. I don't think we should include every rinky dink name that has been suggested in the intro. better to list them in "other terms" section.
• 16:0516:05, 27. Nov. 2012 Unterschied Versionen +2.005‎ Generation Z ‎ remove some of the forest of refs in the first paragraph. not necessary to include every article ever to discuss the subject, especially as this is not particularly controversial, and is the intro paragraph. other copyedit. remove dead link
• 12:5612:56, 27. Nov. 2012 Unterschied Versionen +3.484‎ Generation Z ‎ minor fixes; more formal terminology
• 09:4209:42, 27. Nov. 2012 Unterschied Versionen +3.461‎ Generation Z ‎ Time article does not support assertion. also is rather verging into OR. consolidate ref
• 09:2709:27, 27. Nov. 2012 Unterschied Versionen +4.804‎ Generation Z ‎ removing some unreliable sources.

15. November 2012

• 13:2413:24, 15. Nov. 2012 Unterschied Versionen +2.382‎ Generation Z ‎ revised intro
• 13:1413:14, 15. Nov. 2012 Unterschied Versionen +2.411‎ Generation Z ‎ omigoddess.com is not a reliable source. Time article doesn't discuss Generation Z as a concept, rather parenting in the 21st century. As such it constitutes original research/synthesis. mashable article is advertising for a marketing company. other probs