User talk:79.66.10.120

Hi 79.66.10.120! Trying to get your point across by calling people "cunts" will not help you gain acceptance for your edits. Don't really know why I'm taking my time to write to you, but hey, maybe I like talking to brick walls.

In reference to your changes: I'm well aware that the original etymology didn't have extensive sourcing. However, it is your job to provide sources supporting your claim if you want to change a generally accepted etymology. Am I making any sense here?

Mind you, I'm not actually contesting your changes per se, only the way in which they were made. Instead of providing sources, possibly taking the time to start a discussion in the Etymology scriptorium for a community discussion, since your claims affect terms in several languages such as olasz, valah, Vlah etc., you reverted my changes, and let's not forget, called me a "cunt" and referred to my actions as "cuntery" (FYI, a made up word – props for creativity though). Sorry to say that you managed to eradicate any patience and benevolence I might have had for you and your ambitions to contribute to Witkionary. --Robbie SWE (talk) 16:44, 11 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Funnily enough the correct etymology is actually already present in lots of other English Wiktionary articles.
 * In summary, What you basically said is 'Ideally we'd like an accurate entry, but we're prepared to have a mad one instead if there's a chance it could force conscientious contributors to do more work than is absolutely necessary'. Now you got the time and reference you extorted, it's suddenly no longer enough and you demand even more. Sounds to me like you are well on the way to mastering the fine art of cuntery.


 * It is obviously pointless for me to try and reason or have a conversation with you. Live well! --Robbie SWE (talk) 18:44, 11 July 2016 (UTC)