User talk:Mo ainm/Archives/2016/June

Quick correction
Actually I was saying even if Rms had been reverting *in their opinion* vandalism. By the definition of WP:Vandalism it isnt vandalism and so not justified in breaking 1rr - I will edit my comment to be more explicit. Only in death does duty end (talk) 12:24, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * But you still want closure and warning on vandalism when vandalism is not the issue. And an editor who is here since 2005 really should know what vandalism is. Mo ainm  ~Talk  12:43, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * In the last few days I have seen an editor here ten years who genuinely has no idea what qualifies as a reliable secondary source and one who thinks BLP's can be entirely primary-sourced... I'm willing to extend good faith in that they have an incomplete understanding of policy. Otherwise its mountain-molehill time. Only in death does duty end (talk) 12:57, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately competency is not a requirement to edit here, but an editor who was previously on a 0RR on an article involved in the Troubles arb case then goes on to breach the very strict 1RR with no explanation why they are doing it. Mo ainm  ~Talk  13:02, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah I didnt spot they previously had a 0rr. Only in death does duty end (talk) 13:09, 17 June 2016 (UTC)