19:1319:13, 31 January 2015diffhist−6
Island of stability
→Concept criticism: Removed quotes. It was unclear whether the emphasis was added and whether the "[mainstream]" clarification was added. If they were added by an editor, it's not a quote. If not added, that should be made clear.
19:3319:33, 24 January 2015diffhist−5
Paths of Glory
→Background: Source doesn't say "anti". "Anti-war" implies a larger more general message about all war, a more inclusive thing than just the gruesomeness of the particular situation depicted. It's inapplicable unless that larger message is unambiguous.
19:0719:07, 24 January 2015diffhist−231
Paths of Glory
WP does not state opinion as fact. Those refs give opinions without support. The characterization is subjective and POV and therefore unencyclopedic and not includeable, regardless of the appearance of satisfying the ref requirement.
04:2004:20, 23 January 2015diffhist−57
Paths of Glory
Nice ref (really). "Anti-war" still is a charged term with POV implications. It's also quite debatable & subjective -- it could also be "war film" and easily ref'd for that, eh? :-) More straightforward & more encyclopedic to leave it out.
19:0719:07, 18 January 2015diffhist0
Heat pipe
It's a common mistake to misapply "efficient" for "effective". If "efficiency" was really meant, use in this context would be ambiguous. Context suggests the meaning of "effective" is the intent.
05:2205:22, 18 January 2015diffhist−32
Patty Hearst
→Early life: The rest of the sentence seems to imply that "illustrious" is better expressed as "wealthy". Thinned out for tighter flow. Removed unnecessary (and somewhat ambiguous) "business footing".
03:0003:00, 18 January 2015diffhist−1,001
Patty Hearst
→Family: Removed (much) off-topic digressive material. Subject is not PH's family, but rather it's a POV selection-bias (rant) about perceived malfeasance of Hearst *organization*. If de-POV'd, it would be suited for article on WRH, but not here.
15:1115:11, 12 January 2015diffhist−68
Uma Thurman
→Early life: Source in text (as well as in the inline) implies notability of source itself. The fact that it was in a that source is likely off topic and unnotable here. (If source IS notable, how-so would need discussion as well as a citation.)
20:1720:17, 20 December 2014diffhist−13
Dihedral (aeronautics)
Intent was "materiel". Please look up "materiel" before changing it to "material" next time. It's a common mistake. IMO, it's actually better to avoid "materiel" altogether. Any ideas?
18 December 2014
19:1919:19, 18 December 2014diffhist−53
Don Quixote
→The Pastoral Wanderings: Rmvd dubious uncited "rem. of Ovid". WP:burden requires citation before reinstate. Need secondary source saying they're similar and that similarity is notable. Otherwise, it's OR. Removed vague & unencyclopedic "reminiscent".
03:4503:45, 11 December 2014diffhist+1
Xmas
Smoother, less awkward. No need for "but" which asserts "the following is counter to the previous" which is not the case here. Split up long sentence.