16 April 2015

• 15:50 15:50, 16 April 2015 diff hist 0‎ Post-glacial rebound ‎ →‎Overview: Corrected vague local-news-style "studies show" (unencyclopedic style), "studies" require citation (i.e. which ones?). State facts straightforwardly, then add inline citation. Citation still missing.
• 15:31 15:31, 16 April 2015 diff hist +28‎ Superficial deposits ‎ replaced jargon, retained link to "quaternary".
• 15:09 15:09, 16 April 2015 diff hist −4‎ Regolith ‎ Removed link for ordinary word. Ordinary words usually don't need linking. Linking this one doesn't extend understanding of the subject, but rather just understanding of the English language -- which isn't on-topic enough to justify the distraction.

15 April 2015

• 22:35 22:35, 15 April 2015 diff hist +26‎ Maria Rasputin ‎ It looked like you were saying the last one *wasn't* questionable ("they were questionable, certainly not the third one"). Refined for clarity and encyclopedic tone.
• 08:05 08:05, 15 April 2015 diff hist −54‎ Maria Rasputin ‎ Reworded unencyclopedic (a flippant style) commentary about reliability of sources. (I'm assuming the reliability of the memoirs is questioned by the ref(s) cited.)
• 07:52 07:52, 15 April 2015 diff hist +20‎ Maria Rasputin ‎ Without specifying who was murdered, it mis-assumes the reader already knows the backstory.
• 03:56 03:56, 15 April 2015 diff hist −72‎ Ushanka ‎ →‎References: removed promotional link to a page selling hats

14 April 2015

• 16:33 16:33, 14 April 2015 diff hist +5‎ Rogallo wing ‎ →‎History: fixed typo (a missing "they")
• 04:54 04:54, 14 April 2015 diff hist +1‎ Grid fin ‎ →‎Design characteristics: (Actually, smaller chord does have a direct effect on Reynolds Number which effects stall AOA, but it *decreases* it rather than increasing it as the text said.)
• 04:46 04:46, 14 April 2015 diff hist −180‎ Grid fin ‎ →‎Design characteristics: Extremely dubious and uncited. Chord in and of itself does not affect the stall angle of attack. If *other* factors of the grid type do affect the stall AOA, then *those* factors could be mentioned (w/ refs of course).

12 April 2015

• 17:32 17:32, 12 April 2015 diff hist +26‎ Pencil extender ‎ →‎History: Moved source to inline citation. The fact that a particular fact came from a particular source is almost always not germane -- off topic and not notable and therefore not includable.
• 07:02 07:02, 12 April 2015 diff hist −70‎ Ericsson DBH 1001 telephone ‎ →‎History: A 7-day production time is highly dubious (probably a mistake), justifying removal vs. just a tag. If actually true, it'd be notable for the astonishing long time -- and an explanation would be in order, also would need a good citation.

10 April 2015

• 16:25 16:25, 10 April 2015 diff hist −4‎ Juicy Fruit ‎ →‎Flavoring: translated the name of the unit to the one in most common usage
• 07:09 07:09, 10 April 2015 diff hist −217‎ L'eggs ‎ →‎The L'eggs egg: removed opinion, unsupported original research

9 April 2015

• 19:52 19:52, 9 April 2015 diff hist +498‎ Bonanza ‎ →‎Premise: Tagged section as OR which it appears to be in a major way. If this detailed analysis was from a reliable secondary source, it may be kept if that source is cited - but there's no evidence of that. See hidden note in the text after the tag.
• 19:14 19:14, 9 April 2015 diff hist −164‎ Dan Blocker ‎ →‎Early life: Removed off topic distraction. Implication that the education of an actor would be expected to correlate with the education of his characters is unsupported (and silly). Not notable.

5 April 2015

• 02:48 02:48, 5 April 2015 diff hist −2‎ Outer space ‎ →‎Earth orbit: probably meant to be 200 km (vs. 2000 km)

4 April 2015

• 03:22 03:22, 4 April 2015 diff hist 0‎ Talk:Reactive centrifugal force ‎ →‎Just what are you trying to say?
• 03:20 03:20, 4 April 2015 diff hist −5‎ Talk:Reactive centrifugal force ‎ →‎Just what are you trying to say?
• 03:19 03:19, 4 April 2015 diff hist +3‎ Talk:Reactive centrifugal force ‎ →‎Just what are you trying to say?
• 03:09 03:09, 4 April 2015 diff hist +1,333‎ Talk:Reactive centrifugal force ‎ →‎Just what are you trying to say?
• 02:44 02:44, 4 April 2015 diff hist +1,297‎ Talk:Reactive centrifugal force ‎ →‎Just what are you trying to say?

1 April 2015

• 18:18 18:18, 1 April 2015 diff hist −1‎ The Saint (TV series) ‎ "Is" is the standard tensed used in wikipedia for a tv series who's recordings are still existing, i.e. not lost. The series still "is", while it "was" originally broadcast from some date to some other date.
• 04:39 04:39, 1 April 2015 diff hist +116‎ Talk:Reactive centrifugal force ‎ →‎Just what are you trying to say?: acceleration of an object not of a reference frame
• 04:25 04:25, 1 April 2015 diff hist +1,015‎ Talk:Reactive centrifugal force ‎ →‎Just what are you trying to say?: new section
• 03:54 03:54, 1 April 2015 diff hist +21‎ Reactive centrifugal force ‎ →‎Difference from Centrifugal Pseudo Force: more linkage refinement
• 03:49 03:49, 1 April 2015 diff hist +19‎ Reactive centrifugal force ‎ Added more specificity in the link
• 03:38 03:38, 1 April 2015 diff hist −4‎ Reactive centrifugal force ‎ →‎Difference from Centrifugal Fictitious Force: I didn't want to say "pseudo" and "fictitious" in another. Went with "pseudo" for the time being. Other small refinements.
• 03:31 03:31, 1 April 2015 diff hist +955‎ Reactive centrifugal force ‎ Tried to clarify that RCF is not an alternative explanation of centrifugal force (in the usual meaning) using real forces instead of pseudoforce. Article does have that vibe (less-so now), which is why so many see it as quackery.
• 02:26 02:26, 1 April 2015 diff hist +2,109‎ Talk:Centrifugal force ‎ →‎So-called "reactive centrifugal force" is simply unnotable all around, barely worth mention.: new section

31 March 2015

• 08:47 08:47, 31 March 2015 diff hist +28‎ Walter Lewin ‎ Lede material was not a summary of material in main body -- solved by moving it to main body. To avoid undue weight on recency bias'd material and unduly overshadowing decades of service, I left it out of the lede.

30 March 2015

• 18:45 18:45, 30 March 2015 diff hist −11‎ Laugh track ‎ →‎Comeback of television programs recorded before an audience: "officially"? What office? (probably none, if there were it would need identification and citation) As there's likely no "office", "officially" is just unencyclopedic grandiosity.
• 18:31 18:31, 30 March 2015 diff hist +1‎ Laugh track ‎ →‎Cartoons, children's shows: inserted missing comma
• 17:58 17:58, 30 March 2015 diff hist −2‎ Laugh track ‎ →‎Radio: Removed reference from text and put it "inline". The fact that a fact came from a particular source is (usually) not notable, as it's not here. If the source itself *was* notable, the source's notability would itself need a ref.
• 02:49 02:49, 30 March 2015 diff hist −27‎ Max Planck ‎ →‎Early life and career: Removed "when?" tag. Statement doesn't beg this question. Also, it doesn't look like this usage was the intent of the tag.
• 02:46 02:46, 30 March 2015 diff hist −79‎ Max Planck ‎ Removed digression which appears to be OR. Characterization as "fundamental theories of 20th century physics" is not a summary of material in main body. Not cited, not asserted even in linked article.

29 March 2015

• 14:04 14:04, 29 March 2015 diff hist +344‎ Talk:Fictitious force ‎ →‎Name
• 01:26 01:26, 29 March 2015 diff hist −52‎ American cheese ‎ →‎Origins: Usually, sources aren't notable enough to include in text. Article wasn't a key in the history of American cheese, it's just where the two data points came from. (If it *was* key, it *could* be includable if that fact was itself referenced)

28 March 2015

• 19:22 19:22, 28 March 2015 diff hist +7‎ Lunar phase ‎ Moved libration gif back to conventional location on right side. Messy left-side location dominated the layout (unduly) and misled the eye which is accustomed to looking for lede text and TOC there.
• 18:58 18:58, 28 March 2015 diff hist +5‎ Lunar phase ‎ Article has only two refs and zero inline citations. Moved refimprove tag to top of article where it belongs (instead of hiding down by the reflist).

27 March 2015

• 02:59 02:59, 27 March 2015 diff hist −130‎ Carbon nanotube metal matrix composite ‎ →‎Advanced Modular Armor Protection: ... continued ... (removed orphaned space elevator mention)
• 02:57 02:57, 27 March 2015 diff hist −1,192‎ Carbon nanotube metal matrix composite ‎ →‎Space Elevator: OR. No reference provided asserting that such composites are being considered for a space elevator. Also, they aren't (i.e. it's dubious) so it would be hard to find such a ref.
• 02:29 02:29, 27 March 2015 diff hist −46‎ Sea Dragon (rocket) ‎ Ambiguous all around. "Today" is ambiguous. "Today's system" to compare "today's" costs is unstated (Shuttle?, SpaceX?, Soyuz?, etc.). Year for the dollar figures is ambiguous (then-year or "today" (whatever "today" is)). "Much" is subjective.
• 02:05 02:05, 27 March 2015 diff hist −25‎ Evel Knievel ‎ →‎Assault charges: Stick to the facts. Removed unsupported implication that the matter was some sort of ruse. It's unencyclopedic to imply things. If there really was an actual accusation of a ruse, say it straightforwardly and cite with reliable ref.
• 01:08 01:08, 27 March 2015 diff hist −327‎ Evel Knievel ‎ →‎Snake River Canyon: Rmvd slightly interesting, but not encyclopedically notable off topic mention. OR too: ref doesn't mention the jump, just the pardon. Inclusion needs *hefty* ref pointing out the coincidence (at minimum), even then it'd be flakey.
• 00:45 00:45, 27 March 2015 diff hist −91‎ Evel Knievel ‎ →‎Snake River Canyon: Removed off topic digression, uncited (negative) fact about a living person, but mostly off topic digression.
• 00:31 00:31, 27 March 2015 diff hist −239‎ Evel Knievel ‎ →‎Caesars Palace: Removed unencyclopedic editorial commentary. ("Ironic" is subjective, not from a secondary source.))
• 00:03 00:03, 27 March 2015 diff hist 0‎ Evel Knievel ‎ →‎Daredevil: toned down unencyclopedic exclamation mark

26 March 2015

• 19:23 19:23, 26 March 2015 diff hist −10‎ Skype ‎ →‎Security and privacy: The ref states straightforwardly that it *would* be. Ref looks reliable, ref didn't equivocate, so we don't need to. (Actually, IMHO, to add "apparently" here would be OR because it adds doubt the ref didn't have.)
• 19:16 19:16, 26 March 2015 diff hist +11‎ Skype ‎ →‎Security and privacy: An "allegation" is a *claim* that something occurred, not the thing that is claimed to have occurred.