Timeline for Editing content on 4 year-old questions isn't always necessary
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 17, 2017 at 10:13 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.serverfault.com/ with https://meta.serverfault.com/
|
|
| Mar 17, 2017 at 10:13 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://meta.serverfault.com/ with https://meta.serverfault.com/
|
|
| May 21, 2016 at 18:47 | history | edited | Andrew B | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
missed the wikipedia link
|
| May 21, 2016 at 18:38 | comment | added | Andrew B | @ewwhite That much I don't have visibility into, but if the answer is being dogpiled with downvotes on the basis of that one detail alone, that's pretty damn petty. | |
| May 21, 2016 at 18:37 | comment | added | ewwhite | The content was apt at the time. But the flurry of downvotes today is just stupid. | |
| May 21, 2016 at 18:10 | history | answered | Andrew B | CC BY-SA 3.0 |