Related changes
Appearance
Enter a page name to see changes on pages linked to or from that page. (To see members of a category, enter Category:Name of category). Changes to pages on your Watchlist are shown in bold with a green bullet. See more at Help:Related changes.
List of abbreviations (help):
- D
- Edit made at Wikidata
- r
- Edit flagged by ORES
- N
- New page
- m
- Minor edit
- b
- Bot edit
- (±123)
- Page byte size change
- Temporarily watched page
5 June 2025
- diffhist m Japan 04:59 −4 ICE77 talk contribs (removed and redundancy)
- diffhist m Japan 04:58 −35 ICE77 talk contribs (introduced 5 instances of % for consistency with previous % instances at the top of "Economy" section)
- diffhist m Japan 04:54 +9 ICE77 talk contribs (added JSDF acronym for clarity since it's used later at the end of the "Military" section)
- diffhist m Japan 03:29 +8 ICE77 talk contribs (added era's start date)
- diffhist Japan 01:48 −199 Nikkimaria talk contribs (per previous discussion) Tag: Manual revert
- diffhist m Japan 01:37 +199 カトーポッポー talk contribs Tags: Reverted Visual edit
4 June 2025
- diffhist Wikipedia:Reliable sources 20:11 −2 Butwhatdoiknow talk contribs (→Scholarship: copy edit)
- diffhist Wikipedia:Merging 14:20 −3 Klbrain talk contribs (→Proposing a merge: 'Should'' to 'can'; there does doesn't seem to be a need for compulsion - controversial topics are well-watched, so template are more likely to be noticed.)
- diffhist Wikipedia:Reliable sources 13:34 −4 Gog the Mild talk contribs (Copy edit)
3 June 2025
2 June 2025
1 June 2025
- diffhist Wikipedia:Merging 18:14 +15 Mathglot talk contribs (→Proposing a merge: Let's try flipping it around, so the lead sentence of the section is about initiating a proposing a merge via discussion, which is after all, the section's main purpose. The part about a bold merge now appears just after that intro, and I think makes more sense this way.)
- diffhist Wikipedia:Merging 18:03 −9 Mathglot talk contribs (→Proposing a merge: Tweaking shortcut placement, but there are pros and cons: pro: this seems clearer and places each one next to the content it applies to; con: it places INIT and PROP below BOLD, although the latter refers only to a sentence. Might be better to rearrange the text, so that the section is described first, and bold only in a latter sentence, as it is a minor part of this section, and place BOLD below the others.)
- diffhist Mitsubishi Corporation 11:42 +25 VersedVoyager67 talk contribs Tag: Visual edit