User talk:Mr rnddude/Archive 5

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Archive 10

Add to EEng

Since you closed the debate and I don't want to restart it I just thought I'd clarify one thing which may be construed as implicating you specifically. you'll only ever see a voter as "informed" if they think like you do. I didn't mean you specifically, I meant the many (even majority) of voters who do. Certainly they are the most visible if not most prevalent - as the coverage of both Brexit and now the U.S elections has shown. Other than that, carry on. 19:21, 8 November 2016 (UTC)Mr rnddude (talk)

It would have been OK for you to say that back on my talk page. I'm not a debate-closed absolutist. Anyway, thanks for the clarification. EEng 19:22, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Gaius Antonius Hybrida

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Gaius Antonius Hybrida you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Krishna Chaitanya Velaga -- Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk) 03:20, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

Cheers for the notification. Ill try to respond in a timely manner as much as possible. Im undergoing a current GA review as well as a GAR. Mr rnddude (talk) 03:23, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

New deal for page patrollers

Hi Mr rnddude,

In order to better control the quality of new pages, keep out the spam, and welcome the genuine newbies, the current system we introduced in 2011 is being updated and improved. The documentation and tutorials have also been revised and given a facelift. Most importantly a new user group New Page Reviewer has been created.

Under the new rule, you may find that you are temporarily unable to mark new pages as reviewed. However, this is nothing to worry about - most current experienced patrollers are being accorded the the new right without the need to apply, and if you have significant previous experience of patrolling new pages, we strongly encourage you to apply for the new right as soon as possible - we need all the help we can get, and we are now providing a dynamic, supportive environment for your work.

Find out more about this exiting new user right now at New Page Reviewers and be sure to read the new tutorial before applying. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:29, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Gaius Antonius Hybrida

The article Gaius Antonius Hybrida you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Gaius Antonius Hybrida for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Krishna Chaitanya Velaga -- Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk) 02:21, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Minos

The Minos article is poorly informed. Every ruler of Crete was called Minos. That's why they call it the Minoan civilization. The original Minos was a lawgiver from whom Lycurgus of Sparta took many ideas and adopted them to Sparta's terrain as Crete was a maritime empire (long before the hellenization of Greece). The mythological Minos lived at a time when the Minoan civilization was in decline. I believe the longest continously inhabited city in Europe (or the world?) Argos is located on Crete. Would you look into this? Thanks.2607:FB90:1E07:82D1:0:E:1943:9201 (talk) 23:37, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

I don't know why I associated Argos with Crete. (Perhaps because Argos is the oldest continously inhabited city in Europe and the Minoan civilization is the oldest civilization in Europe.) What I am sure of, is that the Philistines were of Minoan origin. However the treatment of Philistines (who have no relation to Palestenians, the same way Turkic peoples have no relation to the Osmans) in The Torah is biased. I am an ethnic Hebrew -- not a relegious Jew. I am myself a lawgiver and an inventor of a religion. I have no vested interest in glorifying the Philistines, because I am a political Zionist. However, I hate pseudoscience, and I stand for truth: by strengthening the Minos article, we could supply more accuracy both to Lycurgus of Sparta and to Philistines articles, which are gothic now. 2607:FB90:1E07:82D1:0:E:1943:9201 (talk) 23:45, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

I have several on-wiki projects that I am currently working on. Lycurgus is currently on the back-burner for me and will be for some time. I'll at most be able to play an advisory role for the Minos article, if you intend to work on it, but, I'd have to decline a full collaboration on it. Lycurgus is an article that receives at most a couple of edits a month and so hasn't become anything particularly noteworthy in terms of quality. It's a victim of drive-by editing. Mr rnddude (talk) 06:17, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Doc Love

I gathered a dozen references for Doc Love. I did not save them, because I do not need references for personal use. However, every statement in the deleted article was sourced. Because the other editors are so god damn lazy, I had to find the sources in the unlikeliest of places. I am not going to grind for the same shine a second time, you dig? Okay, let me put it this way -- instead of deleting sections you can't find references for, keep trying until you find references. Learn through involvement. ... First, would you check if you can see Doc signing my petinion to President Obama and the President-elect Donald J. Trump to pardon Pimp Snooky? The link is in the edit summary. I am not sure if the link works, because I posted it to thousands of places but only got five people to sign. I suspect I am either doing something wrong, or Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, T-Mobile, and Google are hiding it from view. Please list the names of the three remaining people who left comments on the petition to prove to me that the link indeed works. I already told you that Doc Love was one of them. That leaves three more. ... Sorry but I have to be cautious with folks I just met. ... Then we can further discuss the matter of recreating the article with my help.2607:FB90:1E07:82D1:0:E:1943:9201 (talk) 01:18, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Aside from Doc Love - Tom Hodges Hodges - there's a Victor Martinez and Lew Jurjewicz. I can only see the top three names but note there's five supporters. Now, for your article on Doc Love, you can request undeletion from an admin and have it placed into your personal userspace. I know registered editors can request "userfy/draftify", I don't know how it works for unregistered (IP) editors - probably either the sandbox or your userpage. So, if you can get it undeleted you won't be starting from scratch and you'll have your references returned to you. Also, I've moved this discussion to the bottom of my userpage as that's where every checks for new messages. Mr rnddude (talk) 04:23, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

If you could help by adding your name I'd appreciate it. ¶ The media is spreading lies about Pimp Snooky to destroy his character. So here are some preemptive answers. ¶ Lawyers are people of the lie who edit out the truth. Their weakness is that they buy their own bullshit. Even Ned Stark pleaded guilty to totally bogus charges because he was promised to be sent to the wall, but they chopped off his head. My lawyers tried to do that to me too, but i outfinessed them. ¶ Pimp Snooky is not pimping the game unlike the Ex-Pimps -- he is pimping prostitutes, and he is not a chronic abuser -- that prostitute who didn't follow him to Las Vegas was a sex spy. ¶ If a girl chooses you, but doesn't follow you, what the hell she chose you for? ¶ When one of my hoes overstayed her visa in hong kong, i took her back to her home country -- she faced 40 days in prison. Pimp Snooky got 20 years. ¶ There are charismatic vampires. There are friendly ghosts. Therre are sympathetic gold diggers. There are noble Mafia bosses. There are good witches. There are cops and politicians who are not crooked. Islam is a relegion of peace. They even say Hitler was wronged by historians, especially the RSS in India. Pimps are pure evil. Could it be because they are the most envied?! ¶ The rook is like your pinp-buddy -- it gets taken off the board before the checkmate. that's because the rook tells you the truth, and when you fail to listen -- you are done. The Ego is your worst enemy. Ex-Pimp's Pimpin' Ken's own wife cut him with a god damn knife. And he wrote The Art of Human Chess -- an open book with all the pages blank. Wow! Women are guilty of domestic abuse as much as men are or more these days. There was one stripper who beat her boyfriend into pulp like a god damn blender in my apartment building. She got two months and was released early! Pimp Snooky got twenty god damn years in the prime of his LIFE! Females get away with murder both figuratively and literally. The man is always the scapegoat. The black man is always the scapegoat. The Mack Pimp is always the scapegoat. The individualist is always the scapegoat. These are the real minorities. Others are getting all the priveleges, while still playing the victim card. ¶ Ex-Pimps don't need a bodyguard to walk around cities like Milwaukee because Players only kill eachother. Being Ex-pimps -- they are now squares -- members of mainstream society. Almost no gangsters kill squares. ¶ Not all Pimps are Players. Some are Macks. Meaning, their focus is seduction -- they don't encourage their hoes to steal from tricks or con Jhons, and even a burgler has more guts than a common squealing citizen. Pimp Snooky is a Mack Pimp -- not a Player Pimp. ¶ Ex-Pimps sell Pimpin' -- real Pimps sell prostitutes. At least Johns get something for their money. ¶ Gorgeous dre was selling an audio book for $300 called nothing but pimping. It's a scam. I can buy 9 programs from 9 Ex-Pimps for $300 ÷ 9. Approximately $33 per program. All of these Ex-Pimps and relationship coaches are like 11% right. Doc Love's program costs $500 if we include Mastery Series I, II, III, and IV. Add to that Doc Love Club membership and that's $600. But since he knows twice as much as Gorgeous Dre, I would say he knows 22%. By claiming that he has a monopoly on truth, Doc Love is ignoring the reality that when it comes to social intelligence, fuzzy logic is closer to the way we arrive at truth. ¶ A Pimp, especially if he is a Mack, involves you as an apprentice -- an Ex-Pimp, especially if he is a Player cons you. ¶ Ex-Pimps ratted Pimp Snooky out; so FBI and IRS would leave them alone they threw Pimp Snooky under the bus by setting him up with a sex spy. One of these sex spies is in the video. ¶ https : // www . change . org / p / president - barack - obama - and - to - the - us - president - elect - donald - trump - free - brother - snooky ? recruiter = 6329979472607:FB90:1E07:82D1:0:E:1943:9201 (talk) 13:28, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Mr rnddude. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Apologies

Obviously I was wrong about my post, and I apologize - and you were actually defending me too, which is an even greater irony. Initially I incorrectly assumed you were another one of many people who've had bad interactions with KIENGIR. Anyway, thanks for your note, and sorry for my misunderstanding. Darouet (talk) 16:19, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Darouet, it's ok. Sorry for my more outburst-y response. I've had interactions with KIENGIR before but not sour or negative ones that would leave me begrudged. My note could have been worded better anyway - as I said, I was a little miffed. Although I should have also sympathized with you there a little as well, your OP was derailed by the discussion over KIENGIR after all. Thanks for understanding. Happy editing, Mr rnddude (talk) 16:25, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Exactly, and thanks for understanding. I only mentioned him tangentially initially - but it'd be easier to dam Niagra Falls than get a pithy response from him, let alone a diff. I did look into the "closed case" issue, and all I could find was this: one user asked an admin, informally, if K's post to a Hungarian talk forum was canvassing. There was never any systematic examination, or discussion of it, I could find. Anyway it's all ancient history now. -Darouet (talk) 17:25, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Unintentional irony

I think the proposal makes a lot of sense, but beware the unintentional irony in edit summaries like this one! :) MPS1992 (talk) 08:16, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

MPS1992 - I was on mobile so short and sweet was the goal. I would have gone with "violently massacre" or "utterly obliterate" if I'd had more time. I kid of course. Irony noted, and valid too. :) Mr rnddude (talk) 09:30, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer - RfC

Hi Mr rnddude. You are invited to comment at a further discussion on the implementation of this user right to patrol and review new pages that is taking place at Wikipedia:New pages patrol/RfC on patrolling without user right. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 00:23, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

The example where The Discoverer is removing the properly sourced material from the article

Dear Mr rnddude, Please consider this. Here is another example of how The Discoverer removes properly sourced material without discussing it. I have no issues if this kind of editing style is fine with administrators. -- Abhijeet Safai (talk) 12:39, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Abhijeet Safai, it's not an issue of having put in a citation, it's the fact that the citation does not conform to the established practice. Here if you want to conform to article standards try adding this and see if it gets reverted;<ref>{{cite web|title=‘Panic following withdrawal of notes has largely faded’|url=http://www.thehindu.com/business/Economy/%E2%80%98Panic-following-withdrawal-of-notes-has-largely-faded%E2%80%99/article16668379.ece|publisher=The Hindu|date=19 November 2016}}</ref>. That should come out to look like this; There are 172 citations within the article and they all follow that specific format. So, if it's about CITEVAR, as I suspect it is, putting in the citation with the correct format should let it go unnoticed. Mr rnddude (talk) 13:06, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Dear Mr rnddude, I totally agree with you and will comply to what you have said henceforth. I do not think it is about citation. I think it is about proving a particular point and pushing the point of view. I am feeling bad that the contents and references are removed! And no action happens even after bringing it to the notice! I can understand that my citation style maybe wrong. But then it needs to be improved and notified to me on my talk page or anywhere else. Removing the references entirely should be taken very seriously as I might not have seen this and nobody would have noted it if they don't get time to come back. You can see that I was not much active in last some months. It feels very bad when your work is removed without even discussing it. It is surely discouraging if people edit in this style and they can get away with that. Thanks a lot for your time and explaining things to me. Thanks once again. -- Abhijeet Safai (talk) 13:12, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Abhijeet Safai, I'll add, that the content portion of this should be discussed on the article talk page. I refer to this; However, some believe that these deaths cannot be linked to demonetization. You should seriously consider putting a note on the talk page and pinging the editor who has removed the content. Editors are well within their rights to revert material that they do not think is necessary or accurate - this is common on all manner of articles. Where this becomes a problem is if it becomes subject to an edit war. WP:BRD explains this process. Bold; be bold and make an edit. Revert; if an edit does not improve the article, and cannot be easily rectified, revert the edit. Discuss; if your edit has been reverted, take it to the talk page and discuss it with either the person who reverted it or anybody else who may be interested as well. If problems arise, and you have exhausted your ability to work with the other editor, take it to WP:DRN - but not AN/I. The administrator's noticeboard for incidents is solely for the purposes of administrator intervention for behavioural issues. Content problems do not belong on AN/I. Sorry, I didn't notice that content was changed as well. I only noted the inclusion of a reference. Mr rnddude (talk) 13:29, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks a lot Mr rnddude for your detailed reply. I will surely raise the issue at WP:DRN. Thanks once again. -- Abhijeet Safai (talk) 13:34, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Invitation to the Roman and Byzantine task force

Hey I've noticed you've made a lot of edits regarding Roman military history, and was wondering if you'd like to join. We are a little small, we only have 10 members, but we are making steady progress. Love to see you join. Thanks! Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 16:40, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Iazyges, hey, yeh sure happy to join. I tend to edit Roman Empire era articles (Macrinus, Caracalla, Battle of Antioch (218)) with some dabbling in the Republican era (Gaius Antonius Hybrida, Battle of Chaeronea (86 BC) and Burebista - Dacia, but, connected to Roman Republic history). I imagine that your interest in the Iazyges would have led you to cross the path of Dacian history a few times - especially after Trajan's Dacian Wars ended and the Iazyges moved into the area. Thanks for the offer, I will join. Mr rnddude (talk) 16:51, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Blocking of User:God's Godzilla

Hi. I saw your "oppose" comment in the AN/I discussion only after the blocking process was complete. This is, of course, an example of a race condition that basically can't be avoided without some sort of multi-phase commit protocol, so I don't think this was avoidable. I'd be perfectly happy for you to revert the block if you wish. -- The Anome (talk) 08:13, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

The Anome I was going to formulate a last ditch proposal to see if there was any intention from GG to reform and if the CIR issues were salvageable, ah well. As I am not an admin, I cannot unblock the editor. Its fine though, I won't challenge the block as the reasoning behind it has significant support - even if it was gathered almost on the spot. Mr rnddude (talk) 08:34, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. -- The Anome (talk) 08:45, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

If I may

Hi Mr rnddude, if I may be so bold - I believe that certain ANI thread may be getting a little (more) out of hand and it might be best to cut your losses and step away lest it get to you a little too much. Again, just some uninvited advice! Have a great day -- samtar ^{talk or stalk} 11:01, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Samtar - thanks, but, Uther has been pathetically aggressive towards me this entire time. I'm about two seconds from agreeing with Hijiri and seconding his request for a WP:NOTHERE block. There is no reason to be so aggressive even when I'm being generally civil. Advice is always wanted, but, sorry, I'm going to ignore it this time. I;m not going to jump in there for nothing any further, but, if my buttons keep getting pushed, I will support a WP:NOTHERE block. Mr rnddude (talk) 11:05, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Add; by ignore I mean that I won't absolutely recuse myself and not that I will continue to argue over there. I was hoping to avoid commenting any further after my post to Drmies. The only reason I did is because he removed a spam post - after reverting me for removing it - and I thanked him for that. Mr rnddude (talk) 11:08, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Samtar - add... again; My blood boils and settles fairly quickly. I appreciate your comment. Thanks. If anything heats up even a little over there, then I'll leave without comment. Otherwise, I'll only comment where I think it's necessary (i.e. when I'm being responded to). Mr rnddude (talk) 11:17, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the replies (and the kitten!) - totally understand where you're coming from with the above, just wanted to be that slight nudge in case you needed it. AN/I has the awful habit of getting the blood boiling for even the most sensible, civil editors like yourself. Wouldn't want to see that happen :-) -- samtar ^{talk or stalk} 11:34, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. It's rare that I get peeved at AN/I but it does happen. Mr rnddude (talk) 11:42, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Battle

The Battle section is a little confusing. Is Dio the one who puts its at Immae? And does that account reflect scholarly consensus, or is it one of equally supportable views?  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 23:43, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

The two main supported views are; a) Dio is correct and b) No opinion. Only Glanville (and I think one other source) mention Herodian's battle at all. I would say that Dio has the greater support. Am working to find sources that demonstrate this. I've added two (Dunstan who has no opinion, and Goldsworthy who agrees on not far from Antioch possibly near the village at Immae), and removed one (Glanville) because I'd placed it in the wrong section. Mr rnddude (talk) 04:24, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Gaius Antonius Hybrida

On 11 December 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Gaius Antonius Hybrida, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that expulsion from the Senate did not prevent Gaius Antonius Hybrida from attaining the highest elected office in the Roman Republic? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Gaius Antonius Hybrida. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Gaius Antonius Hybrida), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Iazyges A-class

Hey, I was wondering if you were willing to help reviewing on my A class review for the Iazyges article, which I recently got to GA class. Thanks, Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 06:26, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Iazyges - yeah sure, I'll take a look at it soon as I get a chance. Possibly today if I can separate enough time for it. If not today, then Tuesday as I am very busy tomorrow. Mr rnddude (talk) 06:28, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Alright sounds good, thanks again! Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 06:29, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Rollback granted

Hi Mr rnddude. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! -- samtar ^{talk or stalk} 19:35, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Samtar - thanks for the grant. You'll probably notice my edit count has super-inflated over the past few hours... Huggle is extremely potent and effective. I was taking it slow until the most random vandal - all they do is insert "derp" on random articles came along. Then things went from 0 to 100 and I ended up with well over 100 rollbacks against just them in the space of an hour or two. Mr rnddude (talk) 17:34, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For dealing with "derpy" for two hours straight. You deserve that break (and this barnstar), mate. (Now let's hope someone can get out or adapt an edit filter soonish...) AddWittyNameHere (talk) 18:53, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

December 2016

Hello. I would just like to remind you that when reverting vandalism to make sure you revert all of the vandalism added, as not to leave any on the page. As well, remember to warn users using the templates provided to do so. Thank you. – 🐈? (talk) ^{(ping me!)} 22:15, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

What cat? thanks for the message - as I'm new to Huggle I am currently not using the revert and warn option that I have but I have administered a couple of warnings via twinkle. With regards to vandalism, I'm using Rollback on Huggle so it should automatically do this for me. Could you point me to a page I can go to where I deleted some but not all vandalism, I'm curious as to why I would have missed some. Unless it wasn't through my recent Huggle usage in which case, that's probably just human error on my part. Cheers for the message, Mr rnddude (talk) 22:20, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Here, but upon closer inspection this wouldn't be attributable to you: ClueBot failed to revert all vandalism, and then the vandal readded what got removed by ClueBot, which you reverted. I didn't notice the ClueBot edit not reverting everything and the IP change. From what I know of Huggle, you likely couldn't do much about that. Sorry! – 🐈? (talk) ^{(ping me!)} 22:25, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Ah, yes. Thanks for the message anyway What cat?. Yes, Huggle is a very quick instant no fuss system. Basically what happens is that is I open up a diff on Huggle, click R (or Q to add a warning), and the edit is automatically reverted without any input from me. Since I have rollback, it automatically rollbacks as far as necessary after prompting me to allow it. All good, I'd rather be prompted unnecessarily to take a closer inspection of my edits, than for a problem edit to go unnoticed. Looking at the diffs, I was rather confused as to why "a potato" wasn't highlighted for reversion in Huggle but figured it was somebody else's previous edit and didn't think to take a closer look at it. So some culpability does lie with me here. Thanks, Mr rnddude (talk) 22:31, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Huggle only recognizes-and-reverts-all when all problematic edits are by one and the same editor without interruptions. Pages being targeted by multiple vandals simultaneously, by a rapid-hopping IP and cases where another editor or bot made an edit somewhere in the vandalism-string of edits can cause some havoc. (After a while, you learn to recognize when to open the page in-browser and check through the history, though--a long string of edits by IPs and newusers usually is fairly recognizable in the editbar. It rarely hurts to double-check those through Huggle and if many of them are recent, open a tab just to double-check what the page looked like a day or two ago) AddWittyNameHere (talk) 22:39, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

With regards to Rollback, I am aware that it will only target the stream of edits from a single editor. Hence why Cluebot's interruption allowed part of the vandalism to remain. I should have noticed the interim between the edits. Will input greater vigilance for those things as I can imagine things can get pretty complicated where multiple editors are vandalizing a single page. Mr rnddude (talk) 22:44, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Yeah, though it gets even easier to overlook when it's a single IP-hopper who's staying in the same range. Sometimes the IPs differ only by a number or two, and that's really, really easy to miss. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 22:51, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

I do hate the 2607: range of IPs (which is huge) I'm not going to lie, I have trouble distinguishing between them. I look for contribution patterns rather than IP patterns in this regard because I'd definitely start mixing them. For the most part I've kept my contributions tab open so that I check my edits and use the little panel labelled "History of your changes" to make sure my edits are going to the article I had intended it to go to. Mr rnddude (talk) 23:01, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

IPv6-addresses are hell in that regard, yes. Huge, unwieldy ranges consisting of long, garbled strings of letters and numbers. Impossible to memorize or even just recognize on sight, especially when dealing with a frequent hopper or trying to keep track of multiple IPv6-vandals. When I vandal-fight, I often tend to end up with ridiculously many open tabs in browser (as in, I close most and ten minutes later I have 40+ again) even when using Huggle, especially when some of the more persistent LTAers and trolls are around. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 23:14, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Here I was thinking Derpy was bad, "40+ tabs" good grief. Mr rnddude (talk) 23:18, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Derpy is annoying as hell, sure, but mostly because he's fast and his edits don't belong on our articles. (And probably (using) a bot, if you ask me) He's not actually being abusive to people, though, and that still makes him a good deal better than some. (That is, compared to the types who e-mail me death threats, replace my userpage with a painting of a man fucking a goat, edit slurs into my userpage, dump dick pics everywhere, insert the text 'I molest children, by the way' into my talkpage comments, tell me to take a step in front of a speeding bus, dump 'KILL YOURSELF' repeated 247 times on my talkpage, and so on. Sadly, none of those are hypothetical.) AddWittyNameHere (talk) 23:43, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Rest easy, its just some random person who's pinning their problems on others. Cliched as that is. You do good work for the encyclopaedia. I haven't received any particular abuse beyond being told that I'm dyslexic because one editor couldn't write a grammatically correct sentence. Ah well I don't have much advice beyond; revert, report, and ignore (RBI - except RRI cause you know, normal editors can't block). Mr rnddude (talk) 00:03, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Don't worry, I don't personally care. I know I've got thick skin and can handle it. Besides, when the vandals start thrashing your user/usertalk pages, you know you're doing something right.

Problem is more, if I receive that kind of abuse, I'm hardly the only one—and while I know most fellow vandal fighters can deal with it, I also know most does not equal all. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 00:24, 13 December 2016 (UTC)