Top edits to an page
All edits made to a page by one user, in chronological order.
| Page | Talk:Nexus One (Log · Page History) |
| User | Daniel.Cardenas (Edit Counter· Top Edits) |
| Total edits | 30 |
| Minor edits | 1 (3.3%) |
| (Semi-)automated edits | 0 (0%) |
| Reverted edits | 0 (0%) |
| atbe1 | 2.4 |
| Added (bytes)2 | 9,550 |
| Deleted (bytes) | 0 |
Minor edits
·
1 (3.3%)
Major edits
·
29 (96.7%)
(Semi-)automated edits
·
0 (0%)
Manual edits
·
30 (100%)
Reverted edits
·
0 (0%)
Unreverted edits
·
30 (100%)
1 Average time between edits (days)
2 Added text is any positive addition that wasn't reverted (approximate)
| Date | Links | Size | Edit summary |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2010-03-19 14:53 | Diff · History | 1,469 | →Apple vs. Nexus One: |
| 2010-03-03 20:54 | Diff · History | 327 | →Apple vs. HTC: |
| 2010-03-03 19:54 | Diff · History | 182 | →Apple vs. HTC: Are you saying the references don't say the Nexus one is a target? |
| 2010-03-03 19:45 | Diff · History | 33 | →Apple vs. HTC: Depends what you mean by target. The target is also the nexus one as shown by numerous references. |
| 2010-03-03 19:44 | Diff · History | 181 | →Apple vs. HTC: Depends what you mean by target. The target is also the nexus one as shown by numerous references. |
| 2010-03-03 19:40 | Diff · History | 1 | →Apple vs. HTC: A patent lawsuit is about specific devices, with the nexus one being the one most called out |
| 2010-03-03 19:39 | Diff · History | 204 | →Apple vs. HTC: A patent lawsuit is about specific devices, with the nexus one being the one most called out |
| 2010-03-03 18:41 | Diff · History | 166 | →Apple vs. HTC: |
| 2010-03-03 17:59 | Diff · History | 263 | →Apple vs. HTC: There are many references that state otherwise |
| 2010-03-03 16:42 | Diff · History | 226 | →Apple vs. HTC: Its notable that apple is suing because of patent issues related to the nexus one. There is no speculation about that. |
| 2010-01-31 20:43 | Diff · History | 253 | →Visibility under Sunlight: |
| 2010-01-22 21:12 | Diff · History | 625 | →References: |
| 2010-01-16 18:30 | Diff · History | 165 | →Automate archiving?: :What do people think about keeping the last 15 threads? ~~~~ |
| 2010-01-11 21:16 | Diff · History | 162 | →Apple patent text: I'm saying what VentureBeat said is verifiable. |
| 2010-01-11 20:46 | Diff · History | 13 | →Apple patent text: |
| 2010-01-11 20:42 | Diff · History | 412 | →Apple patent text: |
| 2010-01-11 19:18 | Diff · History | 259 | →Apple patent text: The line above does not summarize anything about google agreeing not to incorporate multitouch. Are you saying venture beat is not a reliable source? |
| 2010-01-11 18:59 | Diff · History | 791 | →Apple patent text: new section |
| 2010-01-11 06:04 | Diff · History | 195 | →No Blade Runner reference?: |
| 2010-01-09 13:13 | Diff · History | 275 | →Comparisons?: |
| 2010-01-09 04:35 | Diff · History | 231 | →HTC Dragon: |
| 2010-01-08 18:12 | Diff · History | 305 | →No Blade Runner reference?: |
| 2010-01-08 13:44 | Diff · History | 50 | →Multitouch Patent: added ref |
| 2010-01-08 13:37 | Diff · History | 525 | →Multitouch Patent: |
| 2010-01-08 13:21 | Diff · History | 489 | →Multitouch Patent: |
| 2010-01-08 13:12 | Diff · History | 454 | →No Blade Runner reference?: absurd |
| 2010-01-07 00:45 | Diff · History | 217 | →wp:lead: The person who removed the open source from the first sentence probably didn't know there was a discussion. ~~~~ |
| 2010-01-06 00:03 | Diff · History | 437 | →wp:lead: new section |
| 2010-01-05 21:49 | Diff · History | 168 | →No Blade Runner reference?: |
| 2010-01-05 21:49 | Diff · History | 472 | →Reference style. Reference after period: new section |
All times are in UTC.