A user with 160 edits. Account created on 3 October 2020.
Search for contributionsshowhide
⧼contribs-top⧽
⧼contribs-date⧽
(newest | oldest) View (newer 50 | ) ( 20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)

4 March 2021

3 March 2021

2 March 2021

1 March 2021

27 February 2021

  • 16:23 16:23, 27 February 2021 diff hist −18 m GimbapGot rid of "italics italics" in intro. Also referred to alternative spelling 'kimbap', the McCune-Reischauer spelling Tag: Visual edit
  • 16:21 16:21, 27 February 2021 diff hist +1,696 Talk:Gimbap →‎History (Language Used): new section
  • 16:12 16:12, 27 February 2021 diff hist +11 Gimbap →‎History: Not edit-warring as it's only 3 reverts. Anyways, added a discussion to the talk page and added a 'discuss' tag to the article Tag: Visual edit
  • 15:42 15:42, 27 February 2021 diff hist +418 GimbapUndid revision 1009248951 by Daiichi1 ( talk) If you look at the definition for 'minority view' on the WP page, it links to 'fringe theory'. But more to the point, there are ample sources here that lend support to both theories, as already discussed in the talk page, which suggests neither are 'fringe theories'; getting rid of any leading language is necessary to maintain WP:BALANCE and WP:IMPARTIAL. Tags: Undo Reverted
  • 14:54 14:54, 27 February 2021 diff hist +452 GimbapUndid revision 1009236721 by Daiichi1 ( talk) It's not WP:FALSEBALANCE, which only applies to fringe theories; a simple google alone shows that the origins are up to debate and some controversy. The talkpage for this site has already undergone ample discussion on which theory is 'better'. The revision doesn't endorse either theory, but just lists them in line with WP:NPOV (specifically WP:BALANCE and WP:IMPARTIAL). Tag: Undo
  • 10:33 10:33, 27 February 2021 diff hist +452 Gimbap →‎Etymology: Reworded to prevent mentions of 'the most accepted theory' as was previously applied to both the 'Japanese colonial' and 'bokssam' theory in this article. I think it would be better for WP:NPOV. Added sources, and deleted a source which didn't support the previous statement. Tags: Reverted Visual edit

24 February 2021

23 February 2021

19 February 2021

16 February 2021

10 February 2021

6 February 2021

(newest | oldest) View (newer 50 | ) ( 20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)
A user with 160 edits. Account created on 3 October 2020.
Search for contributionsshowhide
⧼contribs-top⧽
⧼contribs-date⧽
(newest | oldest) View (newer 50 | ) ( 20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)

4 March 2021

3 March 2021

2 March 2021

1 March 2021

27 February 2021

  • 16:23 16:23, 27 February 2021 diff hist −18 m GimbapGot rid of "italics italics" in intro. Also referred to alternative spelling 'kimbap', the McCune-Reischauer spelling Tag: Visual edit
  • 16:21 16:21, 27 February 2021 diff hist +1,696 Talk:Gimbap →‎History (Language Used): new section
  • 16:12 16:12, 27 February 2021 diff hist +11 Gimbap →‎History: Not edit-warring as it's only 3 reverts. Anyways, added a discussion to the talk page and added a 'discuss' tag to the article Tag: Visual edit
  • 15:42 15:42, 27 February 2021 diff hist +418 GimbapUndid revision 1009248951 by Daiichi1 ( talk) If you look at the definition for 'minority view' on the WP page, it links to 'fringe theory'. But more to the point, there are ample sources here that lend support to both theories, as already discussed in the talk page, which suggests neither are 'fringe theories'; getting rid of any leading language is necessary to maintain WP:BALANCE and WP:IMPARTIAL. Tags: Undo Reverted
  • 14:54 14:54, 27 February 2021 diff hist +452 GimbapUndid revision 1009236721 by Daiichi1 ( talk) It's not WP:FALSEBALANCE, which only applies to fringe theories; a simple google alone shows that the origins are up to debate and some controversy. The talkpage for this site has already undergone ample discussion on which theory is 'better'. The revision doesn't endorse either theory, but just lists them in line with WP:NPOV (specifically WP:BALANCE and WP:IMPARTIAL). Tag: Undo
  • 10:33 10:33, 27 February 2021 diff hist +452 Gimbap →‎Etymology: Reworded to prevent mentions of 'the most accepted theory' as was previously applied to both the 'Japanese colonial' and 'bokssam' theory in this article. I think it would be better for WP:NPOV. Added sources, and deleted a source which didn't support the previous statement. Tags: Reverted Visual edit

24 February 2021

23 February 2021

19 February 2021

16 February 2021

10 February 2021

6 February 2021

(newest | oldest) View (newer 50 | ) ( 20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook