24 February 2019

• 09:2309:23, 24 February 2019 diff hist +191 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard →Is the SPLC reliable? It is reliable
• 09:2109:21, 24 February 2019 diff hist +1,514 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources cite your sources. there is no consensus. Tag: Undo
• 09:2009:20, 24 February 2019 diff hist +237 Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources →SPLC
• 09:1709:17, 24 February 2019 diff hist +1,514 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources the talk page and sources clearly show there is NOT consensus, stop vandalizing. Tag: Undo
• 09:1309:13, 24 February 2019 diff hist +1,606 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources ridiculous... US courts are among the most authoritative and reliable sources; furthermore, i listed newsweek as a source on it which is listed here in this very page as a reliable source. you can't have newsweek be reliable and SPLC be reliable when newsweek is saying SPLC is not reliable. Tag: Undo
• 08:5908:59, 24 February 2019 diff hist +1,606 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources I literally labeled this no-consensus. You cannot say there is consensus when a US court has rejected your assertion. Tag: Undo
• 08:5808:58, 24 February 2019 diff hist +189 Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources →SPLC
• 08:5608:56, 24 February 2019 diff hist +111 Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources →SPLC
• 08:5508:55, 24 February 2019 diff hist +23 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard SPLC is has been ruled in court to be unreliable
• 08:5408:54, 24 February 2019 diff hist +1,802 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard SPLC is has been ruled in court to be unreliable
• 08:2608:26, 24 February 2019 diff hist +1,606 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources SPLC defamation lawsuit updates with sources like newsweek and law.com regarded as "reliable" on this very list, and even SPLC themselves
• 08:1608:16, 24 February 2019 diff hist +459 Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources →SPLC

22 February 2019

• 13:3413:34, 22 February 2019 diff hist +660 User talk:4.34.50.170 →February 2019
• 03:4403:44, 22 February 2019 diff hist −231 User talk:4.34.50.170 →Rebuttal
• 03:4403:44, 22 February 2019 diff hist +242 User talk:4.34.50.170 →February 2019
• 03:4303:43, 22 February 2019 diff hist +231 User talk:4.34.50.170 →February 2019
• 03:3503:35, 22 February 2019 diff hist +901 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources Undid revision 884512818 by NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) vandalism Tag: Undo
• 03:3403:34, 22 February 2019 diff hist +140 Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring →User:4.34.50.170 reported by User:NorthBySouthBaranof (Result: )
• 03:3103:31, 22 February 2019 diff hist +306 Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring →User:4.34.50.170 reported by User:NorthBySouthBaranof (Result: )
• 03:2803:28, 22 February 2019 diff hist +901 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources Undid revision 884512490 by NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) vandalism Tag: Undo
• 03:2503:25, 22 February 2019 diff hist +901 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources Undid revision 884512103 by NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) vandalism. There's literally a US court case showing the position that SPLC is reliable is false. This MUST be at least NC. Tag: Undo
• 03:2203:22, 22 February 2019 diff hist +901 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources Undid revision 884510470 by NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) vandalism Tag: Undo
• 03:2103:21, 22 February 2019 diff hist +431 Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources →SPLC
• 03:0603:06, 22 February 2019 diff hist +901 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources Undid revision 884509995 by NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) vandalism Tag: Undo
• 03:0503:05, 22 February 2019 diff hist +527 Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources →SPLC
• 03:0203:02, 22 February 2019 diff hist +2 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources fixed language re SPLC
• 03:0103:01, 22 February 2019 diff hist +344 Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources →SPLC
• 02:5902:59, 22 February 2019 diff hist +899 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources Undid revision 884509472 by DemocraticLuntz (talk) stop vandalising a united states court ruling Tag: Undo
• 02:5802:58, 22 February 2019 diff hist +9 Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring →User:4.34.50.170 reported by User:MrX (Result: )
• 02:5702:57, 22 February 2019 diff hist +303 Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring →User:4.34.50.170 reported by User:NorthBySouthBaranof (Result: )
• 02:5202:52, 22 February 2019 diff hist +899 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources Undid revision 884508772 by DemocraticLuntz (talk) vandalism, see talk page Tag: Undo
• 02:5002:50, 22 February 2019 diff hist +899 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources Undid revision 884508304 by NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) vandalism, see talk page. I labeled this NC, you are saying there is consensus when a US court has objectively rejected your position. Tag: Undo
• 02:4802:48, 22 February 2019 diff hist +169 Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources →SPLC
• 02:4602:46, 22 February 2019 diff hist +220 Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring →User:4.34.50.170 reported by User:NorthBySouthBaranof (Result: )
• 02:4102:41, 22 February 2019 diff hist +899 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources Undid revision 884507754 by NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) see talk page. NONE of you have countered the UNITED STATES COURT CASE REJECTING SPLC's reliability. Tag: Undo
• 02:4002:40, 22 February 2019 diff hist 0 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources fixed NC tag
• 02:3902:39, 22 February 2019 diff hist +899 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources Undid revision 884506881 by Grayfell (talk) YOU ARE JUST VANDALIZING AT THIS POINT. THERE'S LITERALLY A UNITED STATES COURT WHICH HAS HEARD THE EVIDENCE ON YOUR POSITION AND REJECTED IT WHOLESALE. STOP VANDALIZING. Tag: Undo
• 02:3302:33, 22 February 2019 diff hist +745 User talk:Grayfell SPLC (southern poverty law center)
• 02:3002:30, 22 February 2019 diff hist +899 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources Undid revision 884502537 by Grayfell (talk) STOP VANDALISING. THERE'S LITERALLY A COURT OPINION REJECTING YOUR POSITION. SEE TALK PAGE OR YOU WILL BE REFERRED TO WP ADMINS FOR A BAN Tag: Undo
• 02:2902:29, 22 February 2019 diff hist 0 Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources →SPLC
• 02:2802:28, 22 February 2019 diff hist −1 Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources →SPLC
• 02:2802:28, 22 February 2019 diff hist +926 Wikipedia talk:Reliable sources/Perennial sources SPLC (southern poverty law center)
• 01:5301:53, 22 February 2019 diff hist +899 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources Undid revision 884450424 by MrX (talk) the fact that we're discussing this seriously is proof there is NOT consensus. there is no reason to not label it NC. Tag: Undo

21 February 2019

• 18:1418:14, 21 February 2019 diff hist +821 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources SPLC vandalism, stop removing the court case showing they're not reliable
• 18:0918:09, 21 February 2019 diff hist +637 User talk:Grayfell SPLC on perennial sources list

20 February 2019

• 23:5823:58, 20 February 2019 diff hist +828 Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources SPLC is has been ruled in court to be unreliable
• 23:5023:50, 20 February 2019 diff hist +525 Talk:Center for Immigration Studies SPLC is objectively not reliable