User contributions for CharlesShirley

29 May 2021

• 20:4220:42, 29 May 2021 diff hist +697 User talk:CharlesShirley ty Tag: Reverted

14 January 2021

• 20:4620:46, 14 January 2021 diff hist +4 Talk:Chris Jacobs (politician) →Removal of Capitol information: fix
• 20:4520:45, 14 January 2021 diff hist +475 Talk:Chris Jacobs (politician) →Removal of Capitol information: We need a reliable source, not a headline from a left-wing website--which contradicts itself.
• 20:3520:35, 14 January 2021 diff hist +4 Talk:Chris Jacobs (politician) →Removal of Capitol information: We need a reliable source, not a headline from a left-wing website--which contradicts itself.
• 20:3320:33, 14 January 2021 diff hist +567 Talk:Chris Jacobs (politician) →Removal of Capitol information: We need a reliable source, not a headline from a left-wing website--which contradicts itself.
• 20:2520:25, 14 January 2021 diff hist −376 Chris Jacobs (politician) →U.S. House of Representatives: removed a NY Times quote that did not mention Jacobs once. The quote was completely about Trump's speech and it had nothing to do with Jacobs. Off topic.
• 20:2220:22, 14 January 2021 diff hist +1 m Talk:Chris Jacobs (politician) →Removal of Capitol information: + '
• 20:1820:18, 14 January 2021 diff hist +3 Talk:Chris Jacobs (politician) →Removal of Capitol information: fix
• 20:1620:16, 14 January 2021 diff hist +953 Talk:Chris Jacobs (politician) →Removal of Capitol information: We need a reliable source, not a headline from a left-wing website.
• 20:0920:09, 14 January 2021 diff hist −108 Chris Jacobs (politician) →U.S. House of Representatives: Removed the Synthesis information again. You did comment on the talk page but you just made a claim again, without providing evidenc. You did not provide a reliable source to support your addition. The Verge's headline is only thing close that is just one source and it is not a reliable source. The NY Times articles does not say it and the WIVB article does not say it. You have not provided a reliable source to support your claim. See: Wikipedia:SYNTHESIS.
• 18:4118:41, 14 January 2021 diff hist −616 Chris Jacobs (politician) Undid revision 1000319376 by Praxidicae (talk) Jacobs vote did not happen until after the attack on the capitol. This is synthesis. The article you cite does not support the comment you are putting in the article. You need to go to talk page and discuss it. Your good faith edit has been reverted and now you need to get consensus to re-insert it. Tags: Undo Reverted
• 17:0117:01, 14 January 2021 diff hist +31 Aaron Coleman No edit summary
• 16:5816:58, 14 January 2021 diff hist −36 Aaron Coleman No edit summary
• 16:4316:43, 14 January 2021 diff hist +3,047 Aaron Coleman reverted good faith edits of redlink editor. many reliable sources were removed. Valid, important information was deleted from article. Editor needs to discuss these changes on article's talk page. Tag: Manual revert
• 00:0900:09, 14 January 2021 diff hist −376 Chris Jacobs (politician) →U.S. House of Representatives: removed a quote that did not mention Jacobs one time. It was not about him in any way whatsoever.
• 00:0800:08, 14 January 2021 diff hist −108 Chris Jacobs (politician) →U.S. House of Representatives: This article is about Jacobs, not about the Capitol Hill riots. This is a classic case of Wikipedia:SYNTHESIS There is no connection between Jacobs vote and the storming of the capitol and the Reliable Sources do not support that. Did Jacobs attack the capitol? No.

13 January 2021

• 23:2223:22, 13 January 2021 diff hist +99 Talk:Lauren Boebert →Mention of support for storming of the capitol: No reliable source supports PBP89's suggestion.
• 23:0423:04, 13 January 2021 diff hist +1,546 Talk:Lauren Boebert →Mention of support for storming of the capitol: No reliable source says Boebert supported the storming of the capitol.
• 22:4522:45, 13 January 2021 diff hist −449 Lauren Boebert →Tenure: Unbelievable. Are we going to post every single, little thing that happens to this woman? Her Twitter account status, her bag check, Democrats wanting her to resign. What in that list is really encyclopedic. It is just normal every day things that do not get posted to other people's accounts. Wikipedia is not a newspaper. See: Wikipedia:NOTNEWS. Tags: Manual revert Reverted
• 22:3922:39, 13 January 2021 diff hist −4 David Valadao past tense.
• 22:3822:38, 13 January 2021 diff hist −33 David Valadao He took his seat on Jan 12, 2021. He voted to impeach Trump on Jan 13, 2021.
• 22:3322:33, 13 January 2021 diff hist −642 Jody Hice Undid revision 1000165425 by Paintspot (talk) both of the those facts belong in the body of the article, but not in the lead.removed sentence from the lead. The sentence is a classic example of Wikipedia:SYNTHESIS. There is no connection between Stefanik's vote and the storming of the capitol and the Reliable Sources do not support that POV edit Tag: Undo
• 17:4717:47, 13 January 2021 diff hist −88 Lauren Boebert →Tenure: We don't know how the metal detectors situation was resolved. Is this situation really important enough to meet inclusion? Not really.
• 16:5416:54, 13 January 2021 diff hist +158 User talk:Drmies →User:CharlesShirley: I am an editor.
• 16:3916:39, 13 January 2021 diff hist −15 Lauren Boebert →Tenure: removed "one week later. Not needed. Readers can count the days.
• 16:3816:38, 13 January 2021 diff hist −45 Lauren Boebert →Tenure: removed the second reference to the metal detectors being new. We get it, they were new. It already said that. removed redundancy. The article is about metal detectors or those particular metal detectors.
• 16:3616:36, 13 January 2021 diff hist −43 Lauren Boebert →Tenure: removed unnecessary reference to "storming the capitol again" This article is not about metal detectors or storming of the capitol.
• 16:2416:24, 13 January 2021 diff hist −1,284 Elise Stefanik removed sentence from the lead. The sentence is a classic example of Wikipedia:SYNTHESIS. There is no connection between Stefanik's vote and the storming of the capitol and the Reliable Sources do not support that POV edit.
• 16:1816:18, 13 January 2021 diff hist +363 Talk:Lauren Boebert →Mention of support for storming of the capitol: No reliable source supports PBP89's suggestion.
• 15:4015:40, 13 January 2021 diff hist −108 Chris Jacobs (politician) Undid revision 1000097426 by Rider1819 (talk) The discussion on the Ted Cruz talk page does not lend support to this edit here. They have nothing to do with each other. There is no connection between Jacobs vote and the storming of the capitol and the Reliable Sources do not support that. Wikipedia:SYNTHESIS Tag: Undo
• 15:3415:34, 13 January 2021 diff hist +540 User talk:107.13.227.173 First writing warning.
• 15:2715:27, 13 January 2021 diff hist +1 m Chris Jacobs (politician) →U.S. House of Representatives: removed space
• 15:2015:20, 13 January 2021 diff hist +133 User talk:CharlesShirley →January 2021: fixes. Tag: Reverted
• 15:1515:15, 13 January 2021 diff hist +659 User talk:CharlesShirley →January 2021: funny comments, but not in an intentional way. Tag: Reverted
• 15:1015:10, 13 January 2021 diff hist −12 Colorado's 3rd congressional district Undid revision 1000090658 by 2601:281:C200:ACF0:3836:A401:B98F:D379 (talk) removed vandalism. Tag: Undo

12 January 2021

• 22:1822:18, 12 January 2021 diff hist −236 Elise Stefanik moved info into the body of the article. does not belong in the opening section.
• 22:1422:14, 12 January 2021 diff hist −20 Lauren Boebert →Tenure: the article supporting this info does not say she was tweeting to QAnon supporters. That is false info. removed.
• 22:1222:12, 12 January 2021 diff hist +257 Lauren Boebert →Tenure: corrected information. The politicians were Democrats. And the articles called the protestors "Pueblo residents" not Colorado citizens.
• 22:0122:01, 12 January 2021 diff hist 0 Lauren Boebert moved info into tenure section. Tag: Manual revert
• 21:5921:59, 12 January 2021 diff hist −18 Lauren Boebert removed weasel word. also, separate section was unnecessary. Tag: Reverted
• 14:2114:21, 12 January 2021 diff hist −37 Lauren Boebert →Tenure: removed unnecessary section

11 January 2021

• 23:5123:51, 11 January 2021 diff hist +277 User talk:73.53.31.249 spam editing is inappropriate. current
• 23:4823:48, 11 January 2021 diff hist +183 Talk:Elise Stefanik →How to present Stefanik's vote to challenge Pennsylvania electors: her one vote should not be in the opening section
• 23:4623:46, 11 January 2021 diff hist −191 Elise Stefanik That information does not belong in the opening section. Tag: Reverted
• 20:5420:54, 11 January 2021 diff hist −156 Lauren Boebert Should not be in the opening section.
• 13:5813:58, 11 January 2021 diff hist +766 Lauren Boebert Undid revision 999633317 by Drmies (talk) Reverted removal of opposition to socialism. It has been in article for a long time and there has not been a convincing argument to remove it and the one given here isn't either. Tags: Undo Reverted
• 13:5113:51, 11 January 2021 diff hist −795 Lee Zeldin →Trump administration: removed a comment that was not supported by a reliable source. The Hill article did not mention Zeldin one time. This article is about Zeldin.
• 12:5812:58, 11 January 2021 diff hist +293 Talk:Andrew C. McCarthy →McCarthy's change of opinion about Trump: "reversal" wording.
• 03:5903:59, 11 January 2021 diff hist −55 Lauren Boebert Undid revision 999616433 by Tataral (talk) No. Information is not correct and does not belong in opening section. Tag: Undo
• 03:5803:58, 11 January 2021 diff hist −1,508 Lee Zeldin The election objection info doesn't belong in the opening section and I removed info that is not about Zeldin. The article is about Zeldin.