User talk:2601:153:881:3D60:9091:73B9:E4D6:FD2D
Re GM platform[edit]
Don't worry, that wasn't vandalism. Some editors just have inherently ess respect for IPs. Thanks, Thanoscar21talk, contribs 22:33, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
- Looking at the edit history, it wasn't a lack of respect for IPs. The registered user reverted a bunch of vandalism, from multiple IPs, and this unegistered user's constructive edit was mixed in with it all. So it was probably an oversight. At worst, it was case of collateral damage, or a small sacrifice to quickly solve a bigger problem. Had the same thing happened if 2601:153:881:3D60:9091:73B9:E4D6:FD2D were logged in to an account? Probably not. But another question that comes to mind: The IP's original edit was over two months ago and the revert happened today 26 minutes before the IPs latest edit. How did the IP manage to catch that revert, reinstate the change, and write that extented edit summary 26 minutes later? --DB1729 (talk) 22:54, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
- Sorry, not important nor desperate need of a reply, but should've pinged @Thanoscar21: since that is who I was more or less talking to. --DB1729 (talk) 23:07, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
- Thanoscar21 and DB1729 (and IP) - As the editor who made that revert, it was clear that the vast majority of the intervening edits were vandalism, so I felt it best to restore the article to the last good revision and sort it out from there. The "multiple issues" tag was the only constructive edit in that period that wasn't a partial fix of the vandalism, and since I question the validity of the "not formatted correctly" tag anyway, I decided it wasn't necessary to restore "multiple issues" just to remove it again shortly thereafter. (And I too find it interesting that an anonymous editor on a dynamic IP caught that in such a short amount of time.) --Sable232 (talk) 00:24, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for the explanation. And it sounds like you may have justifiably done the same thing if it had been a registered account.
- The two edits we are assuming are both from the same IP, [1] and [2], are the only two IPs geo-locating to Maryland in the time frame, so there is no evidence of anything sinister going on (WP:AGF). But that does not explain the quick catch. Just a flukey/lucky thing? --DB1729 (talk) 00:52, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
- Thanoscar21 and DB1729 (and IP) - As the editor who made that revert, it was clear that the vast majority of the intervening edits were vandalism, so I felt it best to restore the article to the last good revision and sort it out from there. The "multiple issues" tag was the only constructive edit in that period that wasn't a partial fix of the vandalism, and since I question the validity of the "not formatted correctly" tag anyway, I decided it wasn't necessary to restore "multiple issues" just to remove it again shortly thereafter. (And I too find it interesting that an anonymous editor on a dynamic IP caught that in such a short amount of time.) --Sable232 (talk) 00:24, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 | This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address. |