14:4014:40, 8 July 2023diffhist−554
Disruptive innovation
Removed work by Lingfei Wu, Dashun Wang, and James A. Evans from the opening paragraph - there was more about them than there was about Christensen. Their article isn't even about disruptive innovation, it's about science policy and has nothing to do with business models, all they do is use the term 'disrupt' in a similiar manner. Suspect some ambitious researcher trying to raise their profile. Didn't fit in anywhere else so deleted.Tag: Visual edit
12:3712:37, 28 May 2023diffhist−293
Augmented reality
Apparent promotional content. Improbable on face of it that a Pepsi bus is the best example of AR, citation is for a private YouTube video so effectively unsourcedTags: Visual editMobile editMobile web editAdvanced mobile edit
15:1315:13, 7 March 2023diffhist−973
Convention on Cluster Munitions
Removed definition section: very poorly written; relies on a single source that failed verification; contains no unique content, everything it said is also covered in the history section in more depth (and much better written)Tags: Mobile editMobile web editAdvanced mobile edit
19:1119:11, 20 February 2023diffhist−604
Offensive weapon
Original research - directly quotes the statute but the specific interpretation is not backed up by any other sources, just a link to a related product for sale. Also last I checked this argument has never been tested in a court of law: although it is logically sound it is pure speculation is until there has been a legal ruling or it is clarified in subsequent legislation or prosecuting guidelines.Tags: Visual editMobile editMobile web editAdvanced mobile edit
09:0209:02, 17 February 2023diffhist+311
Grammatical modifier
Added a brief explanation and source on expletive infixation - although “in-fucking-credible” is an appropriate example I think it’s best practice to make it clear why we went with that over something less offensive.Tags: Visual editMobile editMobile web editAdvanced mobile edit
09:2009:20, 12 January 2023diffhist+2
Quran desecration
Punctuation: a misplaced comma changed the meaning of the sentence. Previous wording technically stated that the government of Cuba incited the riots, where instead the events which incited the riots occurred in CubaTags: Visual editMobile editMobile web editAdvanced mobile edit
14:4014:40, 8 July 2023diffhist−554
Disruptive innovation
Removed work by Lingfei Wu, Dashun Wang, and James A. Evans from the opening paragraph - there was more about them than there was about Christensen. Their article isn't even about disruptive innovation, it's about science policy and has nothing to do with business models, all they do is use the term 'disrupt' in a similiar manner. Suspect some ambitious researcher trying to raise their profile. Didn't fit in anywhere else so deleted.Tag: Visual edit
12:3712:37, 28 May 2023diffhist−293
Augmented reality
Apparent promotional content. Improbable on face of it that a Pepsi bus is the best example of AR, citation is for a private YouTube video so effectively unsourcedTags: Visual editMobile editMobile web editAdvanced mobile edit
15:1315:13, 7 March 2023diffhist−973
Convention on Cluster Munitions
Removed definition section: very poorly written; relies on a single source that failed verification; contains no unique content, everything it said is also covered in the history section in more depth (and much better written)Tags: Mobile editMobile web editAdvanced mobile edit
19:1119:11, 20 February 2023diffhist−604
Offensive weapon
Original research - directly quotes the statute but the specific interpretation is not backed up by any other sources, just a link to a related product for sale. Also last I checked this argument has never been tested in a court of law: although it is logically sound it is pure speculation is until there has been a legal ruling or it is clarified in subsequent legislation or prosecuting guidelines.Tags: Visual editMobile editMobile web editAdvanced mobile edit
09:0209:02, 17 February 2023diffhist+311
Grammatical modifier
Added a brief explanation and source on expletive infixation - although “in-fucking-credible” is an appropriate example I think it’s best practice to make it clear why we went with that over something less offensive.Tags: Visual editMobile editMobile web editAdvanced mobile edit
09:2009:20, 12 January 2023diffhist+2
Quran desecration
Punctuation: a misplaced comma changed the meaning of the sentence. Previous wording technically stated that the government of Cuba incited the riots, where instead the events which incited the riots occurred in CubaTags: Visual editMobile editMobile web editAdvanced mobile edit