Misplaced Pages

18 March 2015

• curprev 15:1415:14, 18 March 2015 129.59.79.123 talk 48,139 bytes +348 Added link to opening paragraph showing the facts are in dispute. Removed claim that does not support SS hypothesis. undo
• curprev 14:4714:47, 18 March 2015 North Shoreman talk contribs 47,791 bytes +106 Undid revision 651931170 by 129.59.79.123 (talk) -- quit edit warring -- four editors have now reverted your edits undo
• curprev 14:3214:32, 18 March 2015 129.59.79.123 talk 47,685 bytes −106 Undid revision 651930929 by Gobonobo (talk) AGAIN MOVE TO TALK BEFORE UNDOING CHANGE AGAIN!!!! Why should we believe the original biased NYT article vs the later one? undo
• curprev 14:2914:29, 18 March 2015 Gobonobo talk contribs 47,791 bytes +106 Reverted to revision 651928795 by Gamaliel (talk): Just because two people say it didn't work doesn't mean it didn't happen. (TW) undo
• curprev 14:2114:21, 18 March 2015 129.59.79.123 talk 47,685 bytes +9 No edit summary undo
• curprev 14:1914:19, 18 March 2015 129.59.79.123 talk 47,676 bytes −115 Undid revision 651928795 by Gamaliel (talk)MOVE TO TALK BEFORE UNDOING AGAIN!!!!!! undo
• curprev 14:1114:11, 18 March 2015 Gamaliel talk contribs 47,791 bytes +115 Reverted to revision 651924713 by North Shoreman (talk): Article describes two people's belief, not a definitive conclusion. (TW) undo
• curprev 13:5613:56, 18 March 2015 129.59.79.123 talk 47,676 bytes −115 Undid revision 651924713 by North Shoreman (talk)The NY Times says this is a myth hence it is in dispute. Discuss in talk BEFORE undoing this change again! undo
• curprev 13:3013:30, 18 March 2015 North Shoreman talk contribs 47,791 bytes +115 Undid revision 651866930 by 108.205.228.188 (talk) -- unexplained deletion of apology as well as other issues undo
• curprev 01:5101:51, 18 March 2015 108.205.228.188 talk 47,676 bytes −115 Undid revision 651797941 by MastCell (talk) Alleged because NYTimes and other sources say it didn't happen. undo

17 March 2015

• curprev 16:2216:22, 17 March 2015 MastCell talk contribs 47,791 bytes +115 not really "alleged", since the RNC owned up to it and apologized in the 2000's (strangely, you removed that material along with its supporting sources) undo
• curprev 04:5304:53, 17 March 2015 108.205.228.188 talk 47,676 bytes −115 Removed text is to general to be taken as support for an alledged strategy. undo

14 February 2015

• curprev 11:0311:03, 14 February 2015 Niceguyedc talk contribs m 47,791 bytes +25 WPCleaner v1.34 - Repaired 1 link to disambiguation page - (You can help) - Poll taxes undo

30 January 2015

• curprev 08:2508:25, 30 January 2015 69.142.156.66 talk 47,766 bytes +5 Fixed grammar undo Tags: canned edit summary Mobile edit Mobile app edit

14 January 2015

• curprev 17:2517:25, 14 January 2015 107.5.3.97 talk 47,761 bytes +4 →Introduction undo

31 December 2014

• curprev 21:4121:41, 31 December 2014 CartoonDiablo talk contribs m 47,757 bytes −625 Undid revision 640340524 by 23.115.24.76 (talk) undo
• curprev 05:0105:01, 31 December 2014 23.115.24.76 talk 48,382 bytes +625 Added criticism of this one sided article. undo

12 December 2014

• curprev 19:5419:54, 12 December 2014 MastCell talk contribs m 47,757 bytes −362 Reverted edits by 209.179.46.111 (talk) to last version by Student7 undo
• curprev 18:3818:38, 12 December 2014 209.179.46.111 talk 48,119 bytes +362 No edit summary undo

19 November 2014

• curprev 21:3121:31, 19 November 2014 Student7 talk contribs 47,757 bytes +790 →19th century disfranchisement and rise of the Solid South: Copied from Solid South. The South has been the core of a Democratic Southern Strategy much longer than it has been in the Republican column. undo

14 November 2014

• curprev 00:1900:19, 14 November 2014 MastCell talk contribs 46,967 bytes +54 the sources clearly describe this as a republican party strategy pioneered by nixon; and in fact the republican party apologized formally for it in 2005; so we need to follow the sources per WP:V and WP:NPOV undo

13 November 2014

• curprev 08:3908:39, 13 November 2014 98.199.196.39 talk 46,913 bytes −54 This is not and never has been a Republican Party strategy. Progressives are writing this and the history is non-existent for these facts. We could have a Democratic Strategy of appealing to blacks by handing them welfare but that would be fake facts, too undo

4 November 2014

• curprev 16:5016:50, 4 November 2014 B talk contribs 46,967 bytes −257 The source for the claim that blacks supported welfare reform is an offhand comment in an interview with Toni Morrison - not actual data or even an interview with an historian - and even then she says nothing about people being shocked. undo

22 October 2014

• curprev 16:2416:24, 22 October 2014 Albany NY talk contribs m 47,224 bytes +16 section heading capitalization per WP:HEAD, wikilinks undo

12 October 2014

• curprev 19:5319:53, 12 October 2014 Blondeguynative talk contribs 47,208 bytes +11 No edit summary undo

25 September 2014

• curprev 20:4020:40, 25 September 2014 Jerimee talk contribs 47,197 bytes +13 No edit summary undo
• curprev 20:3320:33, 25 September 2014 Jerimee talk contribs 47,184 bytes +518 No edit summary undo

17 September 2014

• curprev 17:3117:31, 17 September 2014 Ralph Byrns talk contribs 46,666 bytes +209 corrected the number of formerly Confederate states won by Barry Goldwater in the 1964 campaign. undo Tag: gettingstarted edit

1 September 2014

• curprev 03:3103:31, 1 September 2014 Scott Illini talk contribs 46,457 bytes −270 →Roots of the Southern strategy: cleanup and slight balancing undo

24 July 2014

• curprev 18:3318:33, 24 July 2014 Darknipples talk contribs 46,727 bytes −156 →Shift in Strategy: removed WP:SYNTH (first line) undo

21 July 2014

• curprev 21:0721:07, 21 July 2014 96.227.222.184 talk 46,883 bytes +3 →Evolution undo

9 July 2014

• curprev 22:5122:51, 9 July 2014 Gobonobo talk contribs 46,880 bytes +272 Reverted to revision 616222161 by Gobonobo (talk): Entire edit was problematic, reverting all the way. (TW) undo
• curprev 18:1818:18, 9 July 2014 Blondeguynative talk contribs 46,608 bytes −34 Vandalism? undo
• curprev 13:3813:38, 9 July 2014 194.168.147.250 talk 46,642 bytes −238 No edit summary undo
• curprev 13:3613:36, 9 July 2014 Gobonobo talk contribs 46,880 bytes −510 Reverted to revision 615822590 by Student7 (talk): Removing weasel words, pov phrasing, and misrepresentation of sources. (TW) undo
• curprev 13:3113:31, 9 July 2014 Danhenryidaho talk contribs m 47,390 bytes +295 information, citations added. undo
• curprev 13:0313:03, 9 July 2014 184.7.145.226 talk 47,095 bytes +215 Added the words "Alleged" and "opine" do to the fact that the article is so biased. Also a citation was added. undo

6 July 2014

• curprev 14:1714:17, 6 July 2014 Student7 talk contribs 46,880 bytes −171 →Roots of the Southern strategy: agree. tried to reword undo

30 June 2014

• curprev 09:2809:28, 30 June 2014 AnomieBOT talk contribs m 47,051 bytes +15 Dating maintenance tags: {{Clarify}} undo
• curprev 07:2807:28, 30 June 2014 SolomonFreer talk contribs m 47,036 bytes +11 →Roots of the Southern strategy undo
• curprev 07:2507:25, 30 June 2014 SolomonFreer talk contribs m 47,025 bytes −19 →Roots of the Southern strategy undo
• curprev 07:2507:25, 30 June 2014 SolomonFreer talk contribs m 47,044 bytes +1 →Roots of the Southern strategy undo
• curprev 07:2407:24, 30 June 2014 SolomonFreer talk contribs m 47,043 bytes +18 →Roots of the Southern strategy: Tagged a very poor sentence that I can't understand at all for editing. undo

22 June 2014

• curprev 04:0904:09, 22 June 2014 Drmies talk contribs 47,025 bytes −54 Reverted 1 edit by Dpperry (talk): Rv. clearly not neutral. (TW) undo
• curprev 04:0704:07, 22 June 2014 Dpperry talk contribs 47,079 bytes +54 No edit summary undo

13 May 2014

• curprev 21:5521:55, 13 May 2014 72.128.7.5 talk 47,025 bytes −43 →Recent comments on Southernization and Southern strategy: Reworked to remove confusing mix of quote from ref and quotes of person quoted in ref. undo

2 April 2014

• curprev 17:2717:27, 2 April 2014 Gamaliel talk contribs 47,068 bytes +165 →Evolution: I couldn't find it in Branch so I added a citation to Lamis and removed sentence added by Jonnydbs that does not appear in Lamis undo

1 April 2014

• curprev 22:4922:49, 1 April 2014 Jonnydbs talk contribs m 46,903 bytes +60 →Evolution undo

31 March 2014

• curprev 13:5313:53, 31 March 2014 Alf.laylah.wa.laylah talk contribs 46,843 bytes +913 Reverted to revision 594282500 by Student7 (talk): Rv revisionism; take to talk page. Try to defend your edit summary position that Taylor Branch's book is an "opinion piece.". (TW) undo
• curprev 07:1407:14, 31 March 2014 AnomieBOT talk contribs 45,930 bytes +1,399 Rescuing orphaned refs ("Herbert" from rev 594282500; "HerbertReagan" from rev 594282500; "NY Times 1996" from rev 594282500; "Branch" from rev 594282500; "Boyd" from rev 594282500) undo