User contributions for XJRfoBY

25 June 2010

• 03:4803:48, 25 June 2010 diff hist −411 Stanley A. McChrystal →Recommended troop increases: Someone's opinion does not conform to Wiki's neutrality

22 June 2010

• 18:0818:08, 22 June 2010 diff hist −2 m Mark Kirk →Military record controversy: Capitalization
• 18:0718:07, 22 June 2010 diff hist +79 Talk:Mark Kirk →how to deal with Kirk's erroneous statements?
• 18:0618:06, 22 June 2010 diff hist +17 Talk:Mark Kirk →how to deal with Kirk's erroneous statements?
• 18:0618:06, 22 June 2010 diff hist +21 Mark Kirk →Military record controversy: More accurate
• 18:0418:04, 22 June 2010 diff hist +449 Mark Kirk →Military record controversy: Added Kirk's response
• 06:0406:04, 22 June 2010 diff hist +219 Talk:Mark Kirk →Nature of Kirk's unit award
• 05:4205:42, 22 June 2010 diff hist +9 Mark Kirk No edit summary
• 05:4205:42, 22 June 2010 diff hist −19 Mark Kirk The source is ambiguous. Add source or leave out
• 05:4105:41, 22 June 2010 diff hist +535 Talk:Mark Kirk →Nature of Kirk's unit award
• 05:3305:33, 22 June 2010 diff hist +187 User talk:Jeff G. →User: XJRfoBY
• 05:3005:30, 22 June 2010 diff hist +1 Talk:Mark Kirk →Nature of Kirk's unit award: Sorry, weird formatting
• 05:2905:29, 22 June 2010 diff hist −1 Talk:Mark Kirk →Nature of Kirk's unit award
• 05:2805:28, 22 June 2010 diff hist −19 Mark Kirk →Military record controversy: Discussion page
• 05:2705:27, 22 June 2010 diff hist +83 Talk:Mark Kirk →Nature of Kirk's unit award: signing
• 05:2705:27, 22 June 2010 diff hist +618 Talk:Mark Kirk →Nature of Kirk's unit award
• 05:1905:19, 22 June 2010 diff hist −19 Mark Kirk →Military record controversy: Discussion page
• 05:1705:17, 22 June 2010 diff hist +540 Talk:Mark Kirk →Nature of Kirk's unit award: new section
• 05:0805:08, 22 June 2010 diff hist −274 Mark Kirk There is an intelligence analyst award not an intelligence officer award. The difference is "analyst" is for enlisted soldiers.
• 05:0405:04, 22 June 2010 diff hist +261 User talk:Jeff G. →User: XJRfoBY: new section
• 04:4804:48, 22 June 2010 diff hist +9 Mark Kirk Rrius, an experienced 'reviewer' and a liberal, wrote "powerful"
• 04:4504:45, 22 June 2010 diff hist −19 Mark Kirk Not true and not cited
• 04:1904:19, 22 June 2010 diff hist +49 User talk:XJRfoBY →June 2010
• 04:1604:16, 22 June 2010 diff hist 0 m Mark Kirk Punctuation
• 04:1504:15, 22 June 2010 diff hist −30 Mark Kirk Believe me, absolutely anything without a citation will be deleted. LastNavigator & Deveno are pretty much trying to blank the whole page
• 04:0704:07, 22 June 2010 diff hist −7,457 User talk:XJRfoBY ←Blanked the page
• 04:0504:05, 22 June 2010 diff hist +101 Mark Kirk No edit summary
• 03:5803:58, 22 June 2010 diff hist +460 Talk:Mark Kirk →Introduction
• 03:5403:54, 22 June 2010 diff hist +626 Mark Kirk Undid revision 369485093 by Rrius (talk) Please edit one thing at a time.
• 03:5203:52, 22 June 2010 diff hist +113 Mark Kirk Undid revision 369485764 by Rrius (talk)
• 02:2502:25, 22 June 2010 diff hist +2 m Mark Kirk →Teaching Record: Punctuation
• 02:2302:23, 22 June 2010 diff hist −5 Mark Kirk →Repute of Military Record
• 02:2202:22, 22 June 2010 diff hist +1,226 Mark Kirk I have not violated the three revert rule, you have. I have given my case on the discussion page and consensus has been reached.
• 01:1401:14, 22 June 2010 diff hist +432 Mark Kirk Undoing unexplained revision
• 01:1201:12, 22 June 2010 diff hist +130 Mark Kirk This website was written by civil servants (not Kirk), it is kept and operated by the US government. It is absolutely a reliable source.
• 01:0801:08, 22 June 2010 diff hist +432 Mark Kirk I have already stated the importance. The burden is on you to state why Kirk how meeting his wife is not relevant to his personal history. I don't understand why you're fighting this.
• 01:0401:04, 22 June 2010 diff hist +130 Mark Kirk This website is kept by the US Government and not by Kirk or Kirk's campaign. It is, therefore, reliable.
• 00:5700:57, 22 June 2010 diff hist −40 Mark Kirk Undid revision 369465979 by LastNavigator (talk) Blogs are not reliable sources according to wikipedia
• 00:5700:57, 22 June 2010 diff hist +1,226 Mark Kirk No edit summary
• 00:4800:48, 22 June 2010 diff hist +398 Talk:Mark Kirk →Text Proposed for Deletion
• 00:4600:46, 22 June 2010 diff hist +123 Talk:Mark Kirk →listing misinformation provided by Kirk about his military record
• 00:4100:41, 22 June 2010 diff hist −40 Mark Kirk →Military Service: Blogs are not reliable sources and editorials are not objective, do not conform to wiki's citation standards
• 00:2800:28, 22 June 2010 diff hist +261 Talk:Mark Kirk →Text Proposed for Deletion
• 00:2300:23, 22 June 2010 diff hist +5 Talk:Mark Kirk →Introduction
• 00:2200:22, 22 June 2010 diff hist +79 Talk:Mark Kirk →Introduction
• 00:2200:22, 22 June 2010 diff hist +129 Talk:Mark Kirk →Introduction
• 00:2000:20, 22 June 2010 diff hist +1,226 Mark Kirk →Repute of Military Record
• 00:0400:04, 22 June 2010 diff hist −4 Mark Kirk No edit summary
• 00:0400:04, 22 June 2010 diff hist −481 Mark Kirk →Career Prior to Congress: This information is listed below
• 00:0100:01, 22 June 2010 diff hist −1 m Mark Kirk →Teaching Record: Spacing