Top edits to an page
All edits made to a page by one user, in chronological order.
| Page | Linux Mint (Log · Page History) |
| User | Aoidh (Edit Counter· Top Edits) |
| Total edits | 79 |
| Minor edits | 6 (7.6%) |
| (Semi-)automated edits | 36 (45.6%) |
| Reverted edits | 12 (15.2%) |
| atbe1 | 58.4 |
| Added (bytes)2 | 22,940 |
| Deleted (bytes) | -13,600 |
Minor edits
·
6 (7.6%)
Major edits
·
73 (92.4%)
(Semi-)automated edits
·
36 (45.6%)
Manual edits
·
43 (54.4%)
Reverted edits
·
12 (15.2%)
Unreverted edits
·
67 (84.8%)
1 Average time between edits (days)
2 Added text is any positive addition that wasn't reverted (approximate)
| Date | Links | Size | Edit summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-09-11 21:53 | Diff · History | -11 | FOSS as an acronym isn't used in the article, so there's no need to explain a first usage of it. Also FOSS as a link is a redirect to Free and open-source software and so is redundant here. |
| 2024-06-17 22:08 | Diff · History | -1,816 | →X-Apps: Listing each individual app appears WP:UNDUE and external links should not be in the body of the article per WP:ELNO. Adding {{unreliable source}} to LinkedIn posts and minor changes |
| 2024-05-27 08:59 | Diff · History | -1,055 | Undid revision 1225884173 by 49.206.43.202 (talk) The table in the release section provides the codebase |
| 2023-11-25 07:22 | Diff · History | -335 | Undid revision 1186746797 by Mr.BlogWriter (talk) Reverting; this blog is not a reliable source. |
| 2023-08-13 06:20 | Diff · History | -95 | Undid revision 1170097336 by EthicalTechie (talk) This is a mixed bag where some of the comma additions/removals make sense but the WP:ENGVAR changes and the external link are not improvements. |
| 2023-01-11 04:35 | Diff · History | 18,933 | Rescuing 119 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.3 |
| 2022-12-20 18:09 | Diff · History | -52 | →Features: MOS:LINKONCE |
| 2022-12-20 17:59 | Diff · History | -24 | Removing unnecessary boldface |
| 2022-12-20 17:49 | Diff · History | 4 | There is a space between these |
| 2022-12-08 13:13 | Diff · History | -18 | →Releases: MOS:LINKONCE |
| 2022-12-08 13:12 | Diff · History | -4 | →History: MOS:LINKONCE |
| 2022-12-08 13:09 | Diff · History | -3,163 | →Gallery: Removing gallery. Most of these images are just slightly different versions of the same exact thing, and the desktop is already demonstrated in other images in the article. |
| 2022-09-06 10:57 | Diff · History | 3 | Restored revision 1108629686 by 217.70.17.57 (talk): Rv back to version with an actual image |
| 2022-07-22 04:43 | Diff · History | -61 | Undid revision 1099698840 by 2804:431:C7D1:DDBA:E123:AEBC:B5C9:9FBF (talk) That broke the template |
| 2021-10-23 19:11 | Diff · History | -44 | Undid revision 1051456256 by TurquoiseWasTaken (talk) There is little chance of confusion there. |
| 2021-09-14 19:53 | Diff · History | -24 | (reverted) Undid revision 1044326069 by 2.52.78.207 (talk) |
| 2021-05-14 23:21 | Diff · History | -85 | Undid revision 1023192213 by Urban Versis 32 (talk) WP:CRYSTAL |
| 2021-02-24 22:01 | Diff · History | -2 | Undid revision 1008752012 by 2603:8080:8404:49B6:F47C:4F5A:4AE4:18A5 (talk) Rvv |
| 2019-10-22 19:41 | Diff · History | -22 | Reverted to revision 922228472 by Markbassett (talk): It based on Ubuntu specifically. (TW) |
| 2019-08-16 18:48 | Diff · History | -13 | Reverted edits by 37.0.122.228 (talk) to last version by Sannaj |
| 2017-04-26 02:40 | Diff · History | 380 | Reverted to revision 775488110 by BandonRandon (talk): Unexplaned, unsourced changes. (TW) |
| 2015-04-19 06:18 | Diff · History | -10 | Undid revision 657144728 by Lomkimarsh (talk) None of the sources spell his name that way. |
| 2014-11-28 10:12 | Diff · History | -137 | →See also: Removing per WP:SEEALSO, as both are already linked in the article proper |
| 2014-04-01 03:19 | Diff · History | -271 | (reverted) As per before, unsourced misleading edit with no consensus for inclusion; edit warring to include it is not a substitute for discussion. |
| 2014-03-31 23:07 | Diff · History | -271 | (reverted) Restoring consensus version per WP:STATUSQUO, WP:BURDEN, and WP:UNDUE. The comment is unsourced and misleading, as it suggests that if they were added together they'd surpass Mint; they wouldn't. |
| 2014-03-31 23:05 | Diff · History | 271 | (reverted) Reverted edits by Aoidh (talk) to last version by JohnGoodName |
| 2014-03-31 22:55 | Diff · History | -271 | (reverted) WP:STATSQUO, plus this is factually inaccurate; rv per WP:BURDEN and WP:DE. |
| 2014-03-29 22:25 | Diff · History | -271 | Undid revision 601858237 by JohnGoodName (talk) Get a consensus, rv per WP:STATUSQUO. Your edit-warring is disruptive, and you will be blocked if you continue. |
| 2014-03-29 06:04 | Diff · History | -271 | (reverted) Saying "please discuss on talk page" is not an excuse to push this edit; get a consensus for the edit, nothing short of that will keep this edit on the talk page, given that the previous consensus was against this. |
| 2014-03-27 03:29 | Diff · History | -271 | Undid revision 601393175 by JohnGoodName (talk) That's not how this works. Get a consensus, edit-warring to include this edit will only get you blocked. Rv per WP:STATUSQUO. |
| 2014-03-26 14:43 | Diff · History | -271 | (reverted) Undid revision 601145924 by JohnGoodName (talk) Please don't just wait a few days and hit "Undo" with no explanation; get a consensus for the edit *before* reinserting it. |
| 2014-03-24 05:00 | Diff · History | -271 | (reverted) Undid revision 600947084 by JohnGoodName (talk) There's no consensus at all, and neither is WP:STATUSQUO what you're suggesting; consensus was against you in that previous discussion. |
| 2014-03-22 02:19 | Diff · History | -83 | →Reception: Rm external link of an image from the body of the article per WP:EL, replace external link of Linux Format with wikilink |
| 2014-03-22 02:18 | Diff · History | -271 | →Reception: Rm per WP:STATUSQUO. Having an unsourced "disclaimer" longer than the actual statement is the very definition of WP:UNDUE. |
| 2014-03-20 02:59 | Diff · History | -13 | Rm tag I included with my last edit, turns out <note> doesn't do that as I thought it did. |
| 2014-03-20 02:44 | Diff · History | 270 | Undid revision 600397054 by Aoidh (talk) Adding note |
| 2014-03-20 02:24 | Diff · History | -257 | Reverted to revision 600360066 by Aoidh (talk): Per talk page; "Ubuntu versions" shows a serious misunderstanding of what a distro is. Get a consensus; rv per WP:STATUSQUO. (TW) |
| 2014-03-19 20:57 | Diff · History | -50 | Undid revision 600358939 by CodeCat (talk) Please do not mark non-minor edits as minor, they will be reverted. Also, see talk. There's no confusion on "which", it's quite clear. |
| 2014-03-19 20:23 | Diff · History | -50 | (reverted) →Reception: That information is found in the sources. See talk page. |
| 2014-03-18 19:46 | Diff · History | -28 | Undid revision 600108485 by CodeCat (talk) Then discuss it on the talk page, because if you think PCWorld and others are not reliable take that to WP:RSN, because that's quite a claim. |
| 2014-03-18 01:57 | Diff · History | -28 | (reverted) →Reception: That's not a distinction the reliable sources make, since Linux Mint is also an "Ubuntu variant" the same way others are. |
| 2014-03-18 00:30 | Diff · History | 1,164 | Undid revision 600055702 by CodeCat (talk) It is reliably sourced, and the discussion on the talk page doesn't support removing the information by a long shot |
| 2014-01-08 14:20 | Diff · History | 77 | →Reception: Adding what the sources actually say, since it's relevant. |
| 2013-07-08 19:35 | Diff · History | 44 | Undid revision 563389964 by 86.29.103.199 (talk) In no way is that inappropriate. |
| 2013-06-19 11:02 | Diff · History | 0 | Reverted to revision 560485503 by Elteto: Rm test edit. (TW) |
| 2013-06-10 14:51 | Diff · History | -1,036 | Rv; "operating system" is not concise for the lede sentence. DistroWatch rankings are not the definition of "popularity" which is vague anyways, and is already mentioned. |
| 2013-06-10 05:54 | Diff · History | -20 | Partial revert; the lede needs to be precise; it is a Linux distro. |
| 2013-01-12 23:55 | Diff · History | -1,698 | (reverted) Undid revision 532777559 by 198.91.172.4 (talk) You've been reverted by several people several times now; hitting "undo" won't suddenly change that. Get a consensus first. |
| 2013-01-10 09:37 | Diff · History | -1,698 | Undid revision 532325305 by 198.91.172.4 (talk) Doesn't belong here. See talk page and discuss instead of just hitting "undo". |
| 2013-01-09 05:22 | Diff · History | -4 | Undid revision 532120940 by 68.98.5.94 (talk) No, that is most certainly MATE. |
| 2012-10-29 07:09 | Diff · History | 60 | →System requirements: Added sentence clarifying what requirements these are |
| 2012-10-29 07:06 | Diff · History | -2 | →OEM: removing unnecessary quotation marks |
| 2012-10-29 07:05 | Diff · History | -465 | →Reception: Removing unnecessary disclaimer per the talk page discussion about this |
| 2012-08-09 18:36 | Diff · History | -80 | Reverted to revision 505297593 by 94.139.26.139: If it's installed separately, it's not representitive of a typical Mint installation. (TW) |
| 2012-07-18 01:08 | Diff · History | -109 | Undid revision 502884230 by JorgePeixoto (talk) |
| 2012-07-16 06:36 | Diff · History | -13 | →Reception and adoption: Removing "and adoption". Where is the adoption in this? Considering the initial concern was about the section showing "popularity contest", this added source seems odd to add here. |
| 2012-07-16 06:34 | Diff · History | -18 | →Reception and adoption: Change the wording, since this article is about Linux Mint, not Ubuntu. |
| 2012-07-16 06:32 | Diff · History | 0 | →Reception and Adoption: Changing case per WP:MOS |
| 2012-07-16 06:31 | Diff · History | 8 | →Reception and Adoption: clarify where the poll was, and less than implies something that isn't said by the subsequent source. |
| 2012-07-08 02:24 | Diff · History | 104 | Because DistroWatch is a primary source here, replacing DistroWatch with third-party reference, and restoring it as an external link. |
| 2012-06-29 16:49 | Diff · History | 895 | Undid revision 499919585 by Wei2912 (talk) You don't remove sourced content because you feel what the sources are discussing is unreliable. That's not for you to decide. |
| 2012-06-26 13:39 | Diff · History | -65 | Undid revision 499428732 by Palosirkka (talk) See previous edit. I know exactly what I removed, and removed it for the reasons given. This isn't notable, and is worded in a non-NPOV way. |
| 2012-06-26 10:26 | Diff · History | -108 | →History and development process: Rm weasel wording. "Most" distros do use or allow use of some type of proprietary software in one form or another. |
| 2012-06-17 04:45 | Diff · History | 0 | →Reception: Moving refs to proper place |
| 2012-06-17 04:44 | Diff · History | 105 | Adding yet another secondary source. |
| 2012-06-17 04:41 | Diff · History | 204 | →Reception: Adding secondary sourced. |
| 2012-06-17 04:35 | Diff · History | 55 | Reverted to revision 497959067 by AnomieBOT: You need consensus for these edits.. (TW) |
| 2012-06-17 01:53 | Diff · History | 4 | (reverted) Undid revision 497955151 by JorgePeixoto (talk) Absolutely not. |
| 2012-06-16 03:24 | Diff · History | -235 | Undid revision 497812863 by JorgePeixoto (talk) That last sentence is unnecessary, WP:UNDUE, and suggests a POV that isn't implied by anything. Discuss, don't reinsert. |
| 2012-06-16 02:25 | Diff · History | 574 | Undid revision 497807170 by JorgePeixoto (talk) It's sourced, accurate, and very clear on what it represents, I don't see how it can be misleading. Please discuss on talk. |
| 2012-02-27 12:30 | Diff · History | 60 | Reverted to revision 479087381 by 67.250.30.84: A blog is not a WP:RS. (TW) |
| 2012-02-16 09:56 | Diff · History | -84 | Reverted edits by 112.205.21.243 (talk) to last version by Rchandra |
| 2012-02-11 10:21 | Diff · History | -22 | →Editions: Reworded Debian edition, none of the references said anything about the GNOME version being the "main" version. |
| 2012-02-11 10:17 | Diff · History | -9 | →Editions: Removed unnecessary "straight" |
| 2012-02-11 10:16 | Diff · History | -820 | →Development team: Removed external links, removed undue list of devs per WP:NOTEVERYTHING. A brief mention of a couple might be warranted, but not an entire section of names for each thing. |
| 2012-01-26 06:16 | Diff · History | -356 | Removed information that was repeated in the next paragraph, and moved donor/sponsor information to the development section. |
| 2012-01-26 06:12 | Diff · History | -257 | Removed sentence about GPL, the GPL part can be found in the infobox, and the definition of the GPL seems unnecessary, that's what the wikilink to GPL is for |
| 2012-01-26 05:39 | Diff · History | 0 | Moved paragraph to development section, as it is way to technical for the lede, and doesn't summarize the article. |
| 2012-01-26 05:37 | Diff · History | -8 | "GNU/Linux" to "Linux" per WP:COMMONNAME and the supporting refs. |
All times are in UTC.