User contributions for Vaalpak
A user with 51 edits. Account created on 22 May 2018.
7 August 2018
- 00:0900:09, 7 August 2018 diff hist −1 Peter Strzok the lies continue by snooganssnoogans and volunteer marek, just checked the RS noticeboard and the nypost is considered RS: here is what it says: "The NYPost is considered a RS by WP standards as its actual articles do conform to normal standards"
- 00:0600:06, 7 August 2018 diff hist +219 Peter Strzok here we go again with the deceitful edit summaries. can an admin please step in here and help? bad-faith users are continuing to remove RS info even when the text has 3 or 4 sources backing it up. here is the text directly from the WSJ source:"Strzok, who was considered a rising star at the FBI, was de facto demoted to a supervisory job in the bureau’s human resources division" also here is the text from the atlantic source:"Strzok's demotion didn’t attract much attention until December". Tag: Undo
6 August 2018
- 22:5322:53, 6 August 2018 diff hist +219 Peter Strzok okay, let's try this again. adding two more sources showing strzok has been DEMOTED. there a total of three RS now that explicitly state the guy has been demoted. let's see, will a liberal bad-faith user try to remove the text again by lying and claiming there needs to be even MORE reliable sources that prove he was demoted, or being sneaky and saying something vague like "that's not what it says" like the previous bad-faith user did when he removed the text
31 July 2018
- 23:1123:11, 31 July 2018 diff hist +490 Talk:Peter Strzok →Single-purpose account and 1RR violations
- 22:5622:56, 31 July 2018 diff hist +1 m User talk:Vaalpak →Challenged material
- 22:5622:56, 31 July 2018 diff hist +99 m User talk:Vaalpak →Challenged material
- 22:5522:55, 31 July 2018 diff hist −51 m User talk:Vaalpak →Edit-warring on Peter Strzok
- 22:4722:47, 31 July 2018 diff hist +341 User talk:Drmies →Snooganssnoogans: new section
- 22:3622:36, 31 July 2018 diff hist −1,674 Peter Strzok everything user said in previous edit summary in false - have not removed info on a "weekly basis" and nothing that I have contributed is fringe. this user seems to label RS and NPOV info they don't like "fringe" then try to smear the user by falsely claiming they edit warred or violated 1RR Tag: Undo
- 22:2622:26, 31 July 2018 diff hist +26 User talk:Vaalpak replying again
- 22:2522:25, 31 July 2018 diff hist −39 User talk:Vaalpak have never broken any 1RR rules, check my edit history
- 22:2022:20, 31 July 2018 diff hist +152 User talk:Vaalpak have not edit-warred or broken any 1RR rules, please stop making things up
- 21:3421:34, 31 July 2018 diff hist −2,449 Peter Strzok this is also undue for the lead. how some right-wing media and republicans pushed conspiracy theories is mentioned below in the reactions section and the fox news section
- 21:2921:29, 31 July 2018 diff hist −1,144 Peter Strzok removing this paragraph. the info is dated i.e. strzok has already testified before the house commitee. also the WSJ analysis is undue for the lead
- 21:2421:24, 31 July 2018 diff hist +344 Peter Strzok going from the number two position in counterintelligence to H.R. is clearly a demotion. this text probably doesn't even need one source, however it has two RS that suggest strzok was demoted and disciplined a third RS that explicitly states HE WAS DEMOTED, what more do you need?
27 July 2018
- 21:1021:10, 27 July 2018 diff hist +348 Peter Strzok added two more sources that say strzok was demoted. that's three RS that state he has been disciplined and demoted
- 21:0521:05, 27 July 2018 diff hist +16 m Peter Strzok added more neutral wording, rm words that make it seem like there is a consensus
- 20:5920:59, 27 July 2018 diff hist +189 Peter Strzok texts
- 20:5720:57, 27 July 2018 diff hist −10 m Joseph diGenova added wikilinks to lead
- 20:5620:56, 27 July 2018 diff hist +39 Joseph diGenova known for numerous things besides what some RS have described as conspiracy theories, better wording is "has been accused" especially since this text is in the lead
19 July 2018
- 22:3222:32, 19 July 2018 diff hist −10 m Joseph diGenova tweaked biased wording in lead. known for many other things besides just this
- 22:2922:29, 19 July 2018 diff hist −3,240 Peter Strzok numerous people have removed this controversial section. it is unneeded and undue, also shouldn't be in a BLP article Tag: Undo
- 22:2722:27, 19 July 2018 diff hist +104 Peter Strzok demotion
- 22:2322:23, 19 July 2018 diff hist −3,240 Peter Strzok removed unneeded and undue section. shouldn't be in BLP article. especially current events and controversial figure
25 June 2018
- 23:5223:52, 25 June 2018 diff hist +16 Peter Strzok oig report also revealed pro-clinton texts were exchanged
- 23:4823:48, 25 June 2018 diff hist +208 Peter Strzok loss of security clearance
- 23:4023:40, 25 June 2018 diff hist +4 m Peter Strzok minor tweak to lede
7 June 2018
- 23:5223:52, 7 June 2018 diff hist +2 m Evan McMullin copyedit
- 23:4823:48, 7 June 2018 diff hist +10 m Evan McMullin copyedit
- 23:4523:45, 7 June 2018 diff hist +48 Kate Bolduan added category
- 23:3723:37, 7 June 2018 diff hist +5 m John Solomon (political commentator) copyedit
- 23:3523:35, 7 June 2018 diff hist +1 John Solomon (political commentator) sources do not identify this as something solomon is prominent for. this doesn't belong in the lead
- 23:3323:33, 7 June 2018 diff hist 0 Joseph diGenova sources do not identify this as something digenova is prominent for. this doesn't belong in the lead, please stop Tag: Undo
- 23:3023:30, 7 June 2018 diff hist −6 Dan Bongino have the claims been proven false yet?
- 23:2923:29, 7 June 2018 diff hist −9 m Dan Bongino copyedit
- 23:2723:27, 7 June 2018 diff hist −4 m Dan Bongino not really
- 23:2323:23, 7 June 2018 diff hist +320 Talk:Jerry Maren 99 not 98
5 June 2018
- 22:3822:38, 5 June 2018 diff hist +1 Joseph diGenova moved biased wording from lead to section below - very controversial sentence like this should not be in the lead
- 22:3422:34, 5 June 2018 diff hist −10 Dan Bongino removed biased wording - numerous legal experts, scholars and attorneys do not think the claims are false Tag: Undo
- 22:3322:33, 5 June 2018 diff hist +96 John Solomon (political commentator) clarified wording in lead for accuracy
- 22:2222:22, 5 June 2018 diff hist +36 John Solomon (political commentator) moved controversial text from lead, only 1 source (CJR) labels solomon this way
- 22:1722:17, 5 June 2018 diff hist +43 Laurence Tribe added category based on numerous reliable sources
- 22:1522:15, 5 June 2018 diff hist −10 Dan Bongino fixed biased wording - many legal experts, scholars and attorneys do not think the claims are false
- 22:1122:11, 5 June 2018 diff hist −1 m Jon Roberts served 14 years
- 22:0922:09, 5 June 2018 diff hist 0 m Aidy Bryant corrected name
- 22:0422:04, 5 June 2018 diff hist −6,901 m User talk:Vaalpak ←Replaced content with '== May 2018 == 25px|alt=Information icon Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to :...' Tag: Replaced
22 May 2018
- 20:2520:25, 22 May 2018 diff hist +33 Joseph diGenova the sources do not identify this as something he is prominent for Tag: Undo
- 20:2320:23, 22 May 2018 diff hist +55 Peter Strzok Not a "sockpuppet", this is my first time editing on wikipedia. I changed the text to accurately reflect what the source says, why was my edit reverted? Tag: Undo
- 20:1920:19, 22 May 2018 diff hist +33 Joseph diGenova did not remove any content from article Tag: Undo
- 20:1720:17, 22 May 2018 diff hist +33 Joseph diGenova moved text from lead - controversial sentence like this should not be the second sentence in the article. also only 2 or 3 news outlets label digenova this way
