explain xkcd - User contributions [en]

3052: Archive Request

2025-04-03T17:06:56Z

141.101.99.70: /* Explanation */

{{comic
| number = 3052
| date = February 17, 2025
| title = Archive Request
| image = archive_request_2x.png
| imagesize = 346x481px
| noexpand = true
| titletext = They just want researchers in the enclosure to feel enriched and stimulated. ('The Enclosure' is what archivists call the shadowy world outside their archives in which so many people are trapped.)
}}

==Explanation==
Research sometimes involves looking up old data in an archive, and old data is often not stored in a modern standard of file format. It may either be an older standard, largely forgotten and no longer catered for, or a choice of original archival format that made sense only within the organisation itself; either way, being a proprietary internal or licensed third-party format that lost (or never gained) wider support in the world at large. Unless the archive's contents are periodically re-examined, and up-converted into more contemporary standards in a timely manner, they might not be able to provide the data the researcher needs in a convenient way. The comic shows [[Cueball]] facing several issues that can happen with archived data:
* The data is stored as paper records, which will have to be scanned into a digital format.
* The data is being sent as a CD-ROM instead of being emailed or shared online, so it will take time to arrive. Also, most computers sold today do not come with a CD or DVD drive so the researcher might need to use another computer, or buy an external CD drive, to read it.
* It will take 10 business days (about 2 weeks) to process the request, plus shipping time.
* The data is not being sent in a common format for scanned documents, such as PDF, but a proprietary format that needs special software to decode.
* The decoder software only runs on {{w|Windows 98}} or {{w|Windows XP}}, versions of Windows which are no longer supported by [https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/lifecycle/products/windows-xp Microsoft], requiring a very old computer or the installation of a virtual machine. This often happens when old software is no longer supported by the manufacturer, so it cannot be updated to work on newer versions of Windows. This will add to the difficulty for the researcher to decode the data when they get it.
**Alternatively, it is a message originally written from when '98 was the earliest usable version in its particuar Windows family (there was Windows Millenium Edition, after that, which was all but the same for most purposes, and also still ran as "Windows upon DOS") and XP the required level in the NT-based line (i.e. no guarantees thst you could use Windows 2000 or earlier, but XP was significantly of the "DOS runs within Windows" design). This does not ''necessarily'' mean that Vista or later successors did not turn out to be able run the older software natively, although ''some'' key changes to the successor UIs or system back-ends (e.g. access to now-legacy .dlls, assumed system locations for user data or/or User Access Control limitations) might indeed need to be overriden by compatability modes or other special ways of running the software.

Normally, the reason for data coming in deprecated formats would be that it is held within a legacy system that was built around those formats. However, since these records are having to be scanned from paper in the first place, the rest seems to simply be inserting extra complication unnecessarily. The records could simply be scanned and shared using current systems and formats. This is borne out by the caption and the title text.

In zoos, captive animals need {{w|behavioral enrichment}} to promote physiological and psychological well-being - to keep them active and reduce stress and harmful behaviors. One common method is to provide food or treats encased in such a way that the animal has to exert effort to open/destroy the enclosure. The intention is to mimic the natural pattern of having to work to get to food, with the challenge and effort providing fulfillment and distraction, in addition to receiving food. The comic humorously suggests that archivists are doing the same thing as zookeepers - providing intellectual stimulation for the researcher by forcing them to jump through hoops in order to get their data. The title text suggests that archivists live in their world of archives and see the rest of the universe outside it as a cage that's trapping the rest of us. This is perhaps a reference to {{w|Allegory of the cave|Plato's Cave}}, a philosophical question about what it means to perceive reality for which Randall [[876: Trapped|has enjoyed]] poking fun at the idea before, or any number of examples of 'inside-out' thinking, such as {{w|List of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy characters#Wonko the Sane|Wonko the Sane}} (from ''The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy'') or Jevil (of ''{{w|Deltarune}}''), where someone insists that they live 'outside' a conceptually inverted structure which contains the whole rest of existence beyond ('within') its walls.

In libraries and archives, catalog enrichment means adding useful data to the catalog, including scans of the table of contents or the whole book. Many institutions have already digitized large parts of their collection. Researchers can then download a scan directly from the online catalog, just by clicking on a link.

==Transcript==

:[A side view of Cueball, sitting on a wheeled office chair, at a desk with a laptop on it and his hands on the laptop. A jagged line comes from the laptop screen presumably representing text on the computer screen from an online page, with the underlined text representing a hyperlink to another online page.]
:Computer: To request data from the archives, fill out this form. The pages will be scanned, encoded to CD-ROM, and mailed to you within 10 business days.
:Computer: Download the decoder for our proprietary format here (Requires Windows 98® or XP®)
:Cueball: ''Ugh, fine...''

:[Caption below the panel:]
:Archivists actually have everything in digital repos now, but they still do this to provide enrichment for researchers, the way zoos hide food for animals in hard-to-open boxes.

{{comic discussion}}

[[Category:Comics featuring Cueball]]
[[Category:Computers]]
[[Category:Animals]]

Talk:583: CNR

2025-04-02T23:20:42Z

141.101.99.70: Undo revision 371123 by Bb777 (talk) Contextless. Unsigned.

It's kind of silly that they'd need to make a new kid. There are plenty of them for free in any given shopping mall on any day!

(No, I do not condone abducting children, even for science.)[[User:Pennpenn|Pennpenn]] ([[User talk:Pennpenn|talk]]) 03:57, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

@Pennpenn: For $847.63 you can buy a child in the supermarket. Or could, in 1989. The Simpsons already did it! {{unsigned ip|173.245.53.147}}

The title text may also be a reference to the Ig Nobel Prize, which is awarded to research that "cannot or should not be reproduced." [[User:Enter your username|Enter your username]] ([[User talk:Enter your username|talk]]) 13:19, 6 November 2020 (UTC)

Talk:3015: D&D Combinatorics

2025-03-20T22:31:11Z

141.101.99.70: /* Am i the only one being extremely confused by the trivia section? */ Hmmm... Is this more or *less* confusing? Anyway, does the job better.

The bot originally created this page as “D Combinatorics”. I renamed it to the correct title and tried to get as many of the references as possible (including a few redirects). [[User:JBYoshi|JBYoshi]] ([[User talk:JBYoshi|talk]]) 00:54, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

:The title in the Atom feed (which I'm assuming the bot consumes) is "D Combinatorics". I'm guessing something in Randall's pipeline didn't like the ampersand. --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.154.160|162.158.154.160]] 01:41, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

::Yup, if you look at [https://xkcd.com/3015/info.0.json 3015's JSON] you see that <code>title</code> and <code>safe_title</code> differ, and if you look at the HTML page source you'll see '''3''' different things: <code><title>xkcd: D Combinatorics</title></code>, <code><meta property="og:title" content="D&amp;D Combinatorics"></code>, and <code><div id="ctitle">D&D Combinatorics</div></code>! So probably what happened is Randall entered D&D but was supposed to enter D&amp;D, and the openGraph tags adder code, having to be HTML-aware, decoded & normalized D&D as HTML would, but the other parts of the pipeline just ate it for some reason. {{unsigned ip|172.69.65.224|06:09, 23 November 2024}}

::: The problem now is that the feed doesn't validate (because it contains a bare &) and it's also not updating (maybe because of the previous problem). --[[Special:Contributions/172.71.119.13|172.71.119.13]] 11:10, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

::: Well, it's updating now, but it still doesn't validate. Sigh... --[[Special:Contributions/172.70.160.195|172.70.160.195]] 11:33, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

What are the odds of rolling 16 or higher on 3D6+D4? 3D6 average 10.5, D4 average is 2.5, total average should be 13. I do not know how to proceed from here. {{unsigned ip|172.71.147.206|01:14, 23 November 2024}}
:By raw combinatorics: 71 + 52 + 34 + 20 + 10 + 4 + 1 ways to get each of 16 - 22 respectively, for a total of 192, out of 4(6^3) = 864 total. 192/864 simplifies to exactly 2/9. I have no idea how Randall found this; if anyone has an idea, please let me know. [[User:Kaisheng21|Kaisheng21]] ([[User talk:Kaisheng21|talk]]) 01:33, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
::I used some simple python code to loop over every dice and confirm and it's 2/9 [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.111|162.158.158.111]] 12:11, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
::I suspect there is no better way of doing it than looping over the dice. As to how Randall discovered it, it was obvious that at least 2d6 would be needed (since d6 is the only D&D dice that has a multiple of 3 sides), and after that my guess is Randall used a combination of a python script and some experimentation to land on the correct choice of dice. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.56|172.70.162.56]] 14:15, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

It seems like we edited the transcript at the same time. The odds of rolling 16 or higher in this situation seem to be 2/9? [[User:Darkmatterisntsquirrels|Darkmatterisntsquirrels]] ([[User talk:Darkmatterisntsquirrels|talk]]) 01:29, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

: There are 864 possible rolls (6 * 6 * 6 * 4). If you enumerate all of the rolls you will find that 192 are 16 or higher. 192/864 = 2/9, the value from the explanation. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.54.139|172.68.54.139]] 01:41, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

I added a table of outcomes to clarify how it works out to 2/9, anyone know how to make it pretty? -- Laurence Cheers {{unsigned ip|172.71.150.247|02:03, 24 November 2024}}

A much simpler approach: Roll two six sided dice and sum the result. You are successful if the result is 5 or 9. That happens 8 times out of 36. 8/36 = 2/9. (Or successful if the sum is 4 or 6, or 2 or 7, or 2,3,4 or 11, or several other combinations.) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.54.139|172.68.54.139]] 01:41, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
:Clever, but dice rolls in D&D involving summing all the dice, applying modifiers, if any, and then comparing to one or more threshold values. Your method makes it very difficult to apply modifiers. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.41.8|162.158.41.8]] 02:49, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
::I think you misunderstand the problem here. This is not skill, no modifiers apply, it's purely probability [[Special:Contributions/162.158.158.111|162.158.158.111]] 12:11, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Minor quibble, arrows aren't fired (unless they're flaming or self-propelled, perhaps), they are shot. (Shotguns are fired of course.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.41.73|162.158.41.73]] 02:52, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
:Arrows are "loosed", even more accurately. At least to avoid the confusion from how so many things may be shot, or ''a'' shot. (Many different nouns, from a physical measure of liquer/coffee/vaccine to a projectile, or an even abstract fundemental of chance; and, as verb, projectiles perhps may be shot, then so may their targets.) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.205.178|172.68.205.178]] 14:32, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
:Well, lets not quarrel over it.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.103.67|172.71.103.67]] 14:37, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
:Too many barbed comments, and I'd be all of a quiver... [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.153|141.101.99.153]] 14:51, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Rolling 22 or lower on percentile dice (or, equivalently, 79 or higher) is close enough, and easier to come up with. (Give or take whether 00 is treated as 100 or zero.) Or directly represent the action: roll a d10. If it's 1-5, you lose. If it's 6-10, roll again; if it's 1-5 you lose, 6-9 you win, 10 roll again. (Modify slightly if you want to distinguish the case of grabbing *two* cursed arrows.) [[User:Jordan Brown|Jordan Brown]] ([[User talk:Jordan Brown|talk]]) 03:26, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Alternative exact solution for getting this probability using dice: Roll: 1d8, 2d6, 1d4 succeed on 19 or higher.{{unsigned ip|172.68.55.11|03:54, 23 November 2024}}

I couldn’t remember the formula for binomial coefficients (“n choose k”), but there’s an easy way to calculate that the probability of drawing no cursed arrows is 2/9 without that formula. You just need to multiply the probabilities that each of the arrows drawn is not cursed. Since only two arrows are drawn, you only have to multiply two numbers.

The probability that the first arrow is not cursed is 5/10 – there are 5 non-cursed arrows and 5 cursed arrows out of 10 total. After taking out one non-cursed arrow, there are 4 non-cursed arrows and 5 cursed arrows out of 9 total, so the probability that the second arrow is not cursed is 4/9. Multiplying the two probabilities, the probability of drawing two non-cursed arrows is (4*5)/(10*9) = 20/90 = 2/9.

I was considering writing this observation in the Explanation section of the page, but I’m not if it belongs there. This solution avoids using formulas from combinatorics, so it might not be connected enough to the comic.—[[User:Roryokane|Roryokane]] ([[User talk:Roryokane|talk]]) 06:02, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

My simple-minded approach:
* Roll d10 once for your first arrow: if 1 to 5, the arrow is cursed, otherwise not;
* Roll d10 again for your second arrow: same rules, but repeat until you have a different number from the first one (so d10 is in fact only a d9 this time)
* I won't calculate probabilities – these are your arrows, live with it ;-) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.109.51|172.69.109.51]] 07:33, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
:That has the benefit (over 3d6+1d4) of telling you which arrow(s) (if either) was cursed. [[User:RegularSizedGuy|RegularSizedGuy]] ([[User talk:RegularSizedGuy|talk]]) 07:52, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
::Also tells you how many cursed arrows are left, which is useful if the next player wants to take their chances with them too.[[Special:Contributions/172.71.103.68|172.71.103.68]] 14:40, 25 November 2024 (UTC)
:If you don't like re-rolls, you can make d9 out of 2d3. Nine possibilities, so just assign one of them (perhaps by rolling them one at a time) to be the more significant digit. Don't have a d3 handy? Use d6 and modulo off the extra! (1=1, 2=2, 3=3, 4=1, 5=2, 6=3) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.150.91|172.68.150.91]] 05:59, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

There seems to be doubt that a "N locks and M keys to unlock them" system could be easily accomplished. I think it could be trivial, with strategically interlocking locked-restraints. A chain formed of bike-locks can give a larger locked loop that can be unlocked by just unlocking any ''single'' one of the constituent locks, leaving the other locked loops to not matter (or you could also try the {{w|Borromean rings}} system, whereby it is again secure against itself, until just one ring is opened up to reveal that the rest now ''aren't even locked at all''...). With almost arbitrary ability to cross-link (or, if you will, repeated/alternating-reflected Borromean triplet connections), you can extend the requirements to more than one unlocking being required (by looping chain elements to mre than just the 'adjacent' loops, sideways onto a parallel meta-loop or up/down the chain, all you might do is allow some slack (could be sufficient to get a thing held directly closed by the taut loop-of-loops, but not enough if the passage of the loop through a hasp/sneck actually prevents the otherwise free movement of the final slide-to-unlock action to occur), but a second (or third, or fourth) unlocking can be required to open-end the whole metaloop of locks. At the top end, M=N solutions are also trivial (e.g. two keys, two locks popularly of safety deposit boxes or [[2677: Two Key System|other things]]). Which is not to say that a specific M-of-N puzzle (where 1<M<N) might not need a ''little'' bit of thought to actually design and implement, but there's no obvious reason why all such combinations shouldn't be nicely doable. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.165|172.69.79.165]] 14:56, 23 November 2024 (UTC)
:Can we first confirm that the M-of-N Encryption was what Randall was referencing in the first place? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.140|172.71.154.140]] 03:17, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
::No, first confirm that this is what the explanation treats as what Randall was referencing. As it was, "complicated lock mechanics" and/or "magic" were suggested as the only ways of doing this, when this (or what we thought this was) just needs a little thought and N bike-locks suitably entangled. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.58.45|172.70.58.45]] 13:17, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
:I'm glad someone else chimed in on this, because it is definitely ''not'' difficult to require unlocking of multiple discrete locks! I can't even figure out why one might think it would be? [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 15:55, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
::I had assumed that the locks were built into the chests (as they sometimes are), and that the chests were physically separated. Using m of n keys on a single chest would merely be complicated, but wouldn't really fulfill the description. Leaving the chests unlocked, but tightly wrapped in a locked chain would be more like drawers of a single "chest". I instead assumed that each of m chests had to be individually opened with its own proper key, but you had n chests to choose from. It was unspecified what would happen if you tried pairing a chest to the wrong key; perhaps both the key and the chest would be disabled (melted/stuck/burned/teleported). (And yes, needing only a subset of the chests, but any sufficiently large subset will do, is a semi-standard class of problem; a search for Byzantine Generals or PAXOS algorithm will get you started.) [[User:JimJJewett|JimJJewett]] ([[User talk:JimJJewett|talk]]) 07:45, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
:::For certain combinations of Ms and Ns, one solution is to have each chest have M locks (that must all be unlocked), such that each possible combination of M keys fully opens (at least) one chest, within which are the necessary complimentary keys to now fully unlock every other chest. A looser version is to have possibly only M/2 (or M/3, etc) locks in a configuration whereby you get to open any given two (or 3+) chests that only produce the full set of keys (and probably spares), but does leave it open to being exploited as "we could only open the one chest, and maybe one or two others with (M/2)<(owned keys)<(M) partial key overlap but at least it had ''some'' of the available treasure", unless designed to not work like that.
:::The limited subset of workable {M,N} values makes it impractical as "I have N chests and M chests, how do I...?" puzzle-setting, but still leaves it possible to force a puzzle from scratch that works this way (e.g. "you must have visited at least M antechambers and deceated the Key Guardians within, before you can open the chests within which are all the components necessary to create the potion that makes you ElementalLevelBoss-Proof"), for which you can determine a convenient set of requirements.
:::One (simple) combination would be two of three distinct keys (#1, #2 and #3) and three chests ("A", needs #1+2, contains #3; "B" needs 1+3, contains 2; "C" need 2+3, contains 1).
:::Add in the feature of duplicate keys but also a mechanism (or magic, or valid physical reason) which causes keys to be stuck in the locks (or vanish/melt/shatter/etc) upon being used, and you can create an even more complex puzzle, whereby having keys enough to (theoretically) open two chests is actually only enough to open one of them initially as you then lose the ability to attempt to open the other... at least until the opened chest provides new keys enough to open (perhaps by opening a different interim chest, with its own new keys, etc) the one that you did not initially choose. This would greatly expand the number of higher-order "M-of-N" combinations that you could facilitate. And could even created "M>N" requirements (three keys, two (combo-)locks: chest A needs 1+2, chest B needs 1+3; both render any keys inserted beyond further use but also contain a 'spare' 1; you need to externally gain 1+2+3 to eventually open A+B).
:::Exactly how (and why) you do it is open to your own needs.
:::And, if you're open to add an intermediate "locked box", you can exploit the trivial many:one ''and'' one:many relationships by just compounding them together, and maybe even adding more steps; e.g. with the last example of keys 1+2+3 opening A+B, you can offer up (from A, 4)+(from B, 5). To unlock C needs both 4+5 (thus 1+2+3, once removed), which itself handily contains ''all'' the further individual keys (or copies of the one key) required to open D, E, F, ... Z, so grants the stipulation of "3 needed to open 23". Or the earlier 2 keys (non-sticking, or regained by copies) for 3 chests grants the full co-keys needed to open that same key-store (see also {{w|Annett's key}}). Arbitrarily higher permutations of pretty much any initial number of (original) keys and however many intermediate openings (to match the singular key-safe's relatively simple multi-key requirements) steps you through the means to then open an arbitrary number of (final) locks, but you won't get ''any'' of the last locks unlocked if you have not fully satisfied the very first requirement.
:::...although it'd be neater if it was an M-and-N that was more direct, I still think. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.85|141.101.99.85]] 18:13, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

"other polyhedral dice, with the number of faces denoted by dX (e.g., d10 is a 10-sided die, with numbers from 1 to 10 on it)." - the d10 may be a poor choice as exemplar here; Back in the last century, when I was playing D&D, d10 were typically (and uniquely) numbered 0-9, not 1-10. This may no longer be the case, and I may be showing my age, but if it is still the norm, the d8 or d20 might be a better choice of example. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.210.6|172.68.210.6]] 02:40, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
:Typically, I've only seen 0-9 d10s, as part of a "d100" dice pair, with one reading 0-9 & the other reading 0⁰-9⁰... Single d10, mostly seem to come in 1-10? Maybe it depends which reseller one shops at... [[User:ProphetZarquon|ProphetZarquon]] ([[User talk:ProphetZarquon|talk]]) 15:49, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
::They are usually numbered 0-9, but the 0 represents 10, since writing 10 would require that face to have a different font size. It is still a d10, since the die has ten sides, and still cannot roll at 0. The d100 variant does the same thing with 100, but for the added reason that the 00 face actually does mean 0 when the other die rolls a 1-9. This is the convention, so a die that actually writes 10 on it instead of 0 will be rare. [[User:Stardragon|Stardragon]] ([[User talk:Stardragon|talk]]) 23:14, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

You've all been nerd-sniped. [[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 10:53, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

Combinatorics degree? Does such a degree really exist? --[[Special:Contributions/162.158.130.37|162.158.130.37]] 17:19, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
:There are degrees for all kinds of things. A quick search reveals a number of "Combinatorics" or "Combinatorics and <Foo>" (e.g. "Optimisation") degrees. Some of them are marked as Masters degrees, and I haven't dug into the others to see if there are any 'pure' undergraduate ones (apart from anything else, I know there are crucial differences between the structures and scopes of UK and US 'degree courses' to consider, in particular), but there seems to be representation on both sides of the Atlantic (and elsewhere, e.g. Oceana).
:At the very least, it could be a selected specialised segment of an even wider mathematical degree course, or a cross-disciplinary one (like my own, which was part under Physics and part under Computing, but could have included a Stats-based element). [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.49|162.158.74.49]] 19:07, 24 November 2024 (UTC)
::So "Combinatorics and <Foo>" would be meta-combinatorics, since it is combining something with something else. :) [[User:RandalSchwartz|RandalSchwartz]] ([[User talk:RandalSchwartz|talk]]) 20:19, 28 November 2024 (UTC)
:::I shall do my degree in "Combinatorics, Selectivity, Comparison, Decision Making and/or Cross-Designation (Choose Any Three)"... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.5|172.70.90.5]] 21:28, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

I'm trying this on my DM. -[[User:Psychoticpotato|P?sych??otic?pot??at???o ]] ([[User talk:Psychoticpotato|talk]]) 15:11, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

Can someone put into the Explanation the current details regarding the nature of cursed arrows, in whatever edition of DnD we're currently up to. (8th? I've lost track.) In different DnD-like media, I know that it can act somewhat negatively (reduces aim accuracy) or even outright problematic (it curses the person loosing the projectile; or even renders the bow otherwise useless, as analogue to a cursed weapon), or else reduces/inverts the damage (breaks easier, or essentially acts like a thrown beneficial potion to increase health/strength/stamina/etc of the target). I assume that it one of these, from the assumption that the player desires a "good enough" roll to avoid. On the other hand, cursed projectiles could be treated akin to poisoned arrows or vengeful weapons in doing more, better or more targeted damage (in which case it's a powerful aid, the archer is instead taking a chance of using up a stock of 'special arrows', perhaps in line with not knowing whether their foe ''needs'' that extra degree of offensive power). But, at least from the explaining text's approach to dice-roll results, that doesn't exactly mesh with the typical "higher is better" rolling mantra. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.129|172.70.86.129]] 22:43, 25 November 2024 (UTC)

I don't think making an M-of-N mechanism with physical locks would be "extremely cumbersome". For example you could have a bolt that must be drawn back to open the mechanism, with several padlocks over it, where the shackle of each padlock blocks the motion of the bolt, such that the distance you can draw the bolt is proportional to how many padlocks are removed. Removing any m of the n padlocks gives you enough range of motion to open the mechanism.
[[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.224|172.71.154.224]] 23:17, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

A DM with a degree in Combinatorics would be unlikely to find this annoying.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.62.245|162.158.62.245]] 05:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

With up to three D&D dice, it is impossible to achieve 2/9 exactly. The closest you can get is with d6 + 2d10x10 >= 146 (where d10x10 denotes the tens die, ranging from 10 to 100) yielding a probability of 133/600 = 0.2216667. [[User:Vandof|Vandof]] ([[User talk:Vandof|talk]]) 06:27, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

With four D&D dice, 2d6 + d8 + d10 >= 21 and d10 + 2d12 + d20 >= 36 are alternate solutions. The former is more feasible than 3d6 + d4 for those who don't have three d6's. [[User:Vandof|Vandof]] ([[User talk:Vandof|talk]]) 06:49, 30 November 2024 (UTC)

You can do it with two dice, although not by summation. Roll 2d3; if 1,1, or 3,3 pass, else fail. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.167.88|162.158.167.88]] 19:41, 3 December 2024 (UTC)

Could someone explain option 6, multiplying two six-sided dice, with a threshold of > 20? I think 66, 65, 64, 56, 55, and 46 all work, making it ... equivalent to 1D6.
[[User:JimJJewett|JimJJewett]] ([[User talk:JimJJewett|talk]]) 07:25, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
:It's >= 20, so 54 and 45 work as well. That brings the probability up to 8/36 = 2/9. [[User:Vandof|Vandof]] ([[User talk:Vandof|talk]]) 13:31, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

;Scales for locking
Wouldn't using scales for the chests that measure their current mass and lock/open the doors based on whether the chest still has the object work for an M-of-N encryption? A simple example: A chest has 2.5 kg of Au, with the chest itself and its combination lock being 20 kg. The next door opens iff the chest's total mass is less than 21 kg. Removing all the Au from the chest opens the door. The second one has an object with the mass of 3 kg, and the chest itself is 22 kg, with ''that'' door opening if the chest's mass is between 23 and 24 kg. Removing the object and replacing it with 1 kg of Au opens the door. Long story short: no, one does not need magic for realizing an M-of-N encryption, one just needs scales for a physical M-of-N encryption. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.245.25|172.68.245.25]] 08:16, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

== Randall doesn't understand probability or games ==

You don't need to combine the probabilities. You just make two checks. The first check is even odds of cursed / normal. If the check fails and it's cursed, presumably you proceed with the consequences of grabbing a cursed arrow, whatever that might be. In any case, whether the first arrow was normal, or the curse doesn't prevent you from grabbing and firing another arrow, the second check is either 4:9 (if the first arrow was normal) or 5:9 (if it was cursed). (These odds are written as the number of normal arrows remaining : the total number of arrows.)

There is no reason to roll the dice given in the comic. He just made up some dice rolls vaguely similar to those that he heard someone mention in the context of tabletop games, and he's certainly never actually played in one. You can convert these probabilities into decimal form and use a d100 for every check. Probabilistic results like these are the reason the d100 is in the game. (You can also roll 2d10, selecting one of them to be the tens digit and the other to be the units digit.)

The chance of succeeding (choosing a normal arrow) on the first check is 50%, so you can use any type of dice, and success is rolling above X/2, X = faces of the dice.

The chance of succeeding on the second check is 4/9 if the first arrow was normal, or about 44%. So you succeed on a roll of 44 or less. The chance is 5/9 if the first arrow was cursed, or about 56%. So you succeed on a roll of 56 or less.

You don't need a degree in anything to reach these conclusions. {{unsigned ip|172.70.83.67|20:51, 17 March 2025‎}}

== Am i the only one being '''extremely''' confused by the trivia section? ==

This is the current trivia section, emphasis mine:
:When this comic was originally released, the '''official title of this page was "xkcd: D Combinatorics", instead of "xkcd: D&D Combinatorics", due to an apparent error on Randall's end.''' [...]

:Whatever the precise problem, the ampersand also presumably [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Admin_requests#RSS_Feed_Broken|broke the RSS feed]], an issue that is said to be only fixable by [[User:Jeff]], who has been inactive for over a year now.

Am i the only one who sees the issue?
*3 times it says (or alludes to the fact that) Randall made a misktake on the xkcd.com website, which has nothing to do with this wiki.
**"official title", so on xkcd.com
**""xkcd: D Combinatorics", instead of "xkcd: D&D Combinatorics"" - only pages on xkcd.com start with "xkcd: "
**"error on Randall's end"

*2 times it says (or alludes to the fact that) the issue was on '''our''' end.
**"title of this page" - "this" means the one you're reading, the wiki
**"presumably [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Admin_requests#RSS_Feed_Broken|broke the RSS feed]]" - Our wiki's rss feed

Am I missing something? Was this an error on xkcd.com, on this wiki, or both? People keep treating it as if it's coherent. --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 17:10, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

:Ok the trivia is definitely wrong, as you can see [https://web.archive.org/web/20241123024448/https://www.xkcd.com/ here], it's the official xkcd.com page name that was wrong. Also, and this isn't mentioned anywhere, the official title displayed on the xkcd.com site was wrong too! It had an additional semicolon. The trivia needs to be updated, i also added it to edited comics cat. --[[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 17:22, 20 March 2025 (UTC)
::As I understand it (and understood it at the time), Randall did something wrong in creating his initial comic such that the "Created by a BOT" script created the page (and Talk page, and ''possibly'' populated a new RSS entry) with erroneous data.
::Whether that was done before or after the web.archive page, I don't know (my browser insists it can't open a secure connection there), nor if/when any subsequent change was done by Randall.
::I do know that I tested several browsers, at the time, and "&D" (and/or "&D;") and the lower-case equivalents only ever showed as a literal. But some kind of ''cleanHTML()'' function might well have been less willing to 'transmit' an unknown code, as it doesn't necessarily have access to all the DTD <!ENTITY ...> settings that a downstream browser might use (or the inbuilt latest HTML5 standards) so might have wanted to play safe upon finding ''anything'' that vaguely fits the "<ampersand><NAME><semicolon>" format, and just splice it out. I have no idea how RSS writers/readers deal with this (except some basic sanity checking for allowable character sequences, which seems to be the exact problem here after initially invalid data was entered upstream if it should have been &a&zwj;mp;ed when added in). I would check how my Perl environment and HTML-related modules deal with it, but I suspect it's done through sometging like PHP instead.
::(Escaped/unescaped data is notorious, when raw data is HTMLised, but that read in as raw and ''further'' HTMLised in multiple cycles, you end up with stuff like &a&zwj;mp;amp;amp;pound; popping up in things.)
::As far as most of the Trivia is concerned (including the currently hidden bits of it) I don't think it's wrong, though I can't say it's right without investigating the editor's(/editors'?) line of thinking all the way through at leisure. But it's a short and sweet precis of the basic issue, unless you want to start with XHTML Processing 101 and then get properly into DOM object parsing and various applicable WebTestKit criteria before deciding ''exactly'' where the fail-unsafe happened.
::With the "xkcd: D Combinatorics" bit, that looks like a browser header (or browser-tab's 'tab') announcing "<site name>: <page title>", but the only browsers I can test right now (Chrome and Firefox, both as Android versions) don't do that. I've used more different browsers than you've had hot keyboards, however, and I can believe that someone's does that sort of thing. If it's not a non-browser renderer/scraper, instead. Noting that the error came from xkcd(.com) and then caused problems on explainxkcd(.com), so I don't think there's an issue with that, but it's trivial to change to the browser-nonspecific (''and'' site-nonspecific) barebones "D Combinatorics" if that's what it is for someone ''with'' a better title-bar or tab-titling system than I have at the moment.
::Barring some rephrasing/reformatting, it looks Ok to me. But then I think I understood it already, so maybe I'm just not spotting the n00b-trap detail. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.241.45|172.71.241.45]] 22:14, 20 March 2025 (UTC)

explain xkcd:Community portal/Admin requests

2024-12-19T18:22:24Z

141.101.99.70: /* Vandalism */

<noinclude>{{Community links}}

__NEWSECTIONLINK__

{|-
|valign="top" width="100%"|[[File:Mop.svg|left|120px]] <big><big>Admin requests</big></big>

 Welcome to your mother's basement! Problems requiring assistance from an [[explain xkcd:Administrators|admin]]. User problems, changes to protected pages, more user rights etc. {{AddNewSection|Page=Explain XKCD:Community portal/Admin requests|Text=(+post)}}
|}
Click "expand" to see list of admins. 
<div class="mw-collapsible mw-collapsed">
'''List of Admins:''' 
{{Special:ListUsers/sysop}}
</div>

= Discussion Area =
</noinclude>

== Racism on Main Page ==
There are some extremely racist comments on the main page. See https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page. Please remove immediately!
Can admins please delete the racist comments on the main page?
The user who wrote these racist comments has the IP address of 162.158.146.163. Please block!

Edit: Resolved. Thanks :)

== Convert to real X-Forwarded-For IP addresses? ==

Can you admins do the https://serverfault.com/a/526551 thing so you can block by real IP addresses and ranges? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.134|172.70.211.134]] 15:45, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
:That is out of my league. But maybe some of the other clever admins may know what if that can be used? [[User:Kynde|Kynde]] ([[User talk:Kynde|talk]]) 17:07, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

==Install anti-spam programs==
I think it’s time to install some sort of automated anti-spam programs that can catch these spammers fast.[[Special:Contributions/172.70.130.91|172.70.130.91]] 06:30, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

I don't want to be disrespectful, but it seems that the current set of admins lacks the collective time or ability to upgrade Mediawiki/MySQL and install widely available anti-vandalism and anti-spam measures. But you have perhaps the most technically inclined, supportive, and motivated audience you could hope for here. Why not use the main page top banner to ask for expert Mediawiki volunteers or if that doesn't work, funds to hire such a consultant to upgrade blocking and filtering tools or a new hosting solution if needed? I believe you'd be surprised with the extent of community support you can muster, and manually chasing vandalism is becoming tiresome. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.90|172.70.211.90]] 07:28, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
:I've been chasing jeff for months now because he's the only one with access to the server. I know he's alive and still active online, but he clammed up partway through the previous wave of heavy spam and the email chain is just 20 of my own emails, I'll get through eventually. '''[[User:Davidy22|y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 18:10, 24 July 2022 (UTC)
::[https://twitter.com/jeff_underscore @jeff_underscore] tweeted four days ago. Would it help if we launched a Twitter campaign to get him on board with a server update fundraiser, or something? [[Special:Contributions/172.70.214.43|172.70.214.43]] 03:36, 25 July 2022 (UTC)
::: Anyone with the skills and experience should tweet him to take him up on [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:Jeff&diff=211706&oldid=211700 his offer,] IMHO. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.118.39|162.158.118.39]] 04:12, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

== Basic punctuation standards ==
Can we please have some agreement that <code>."</code> is better than <code>".</code>? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.150.29|172.71.150.29]] 07:08, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
:That would depend.
When asked "How do you deal with endquote punctuation in quoted speech?" he answered "Yes," with a definite nod of his head, "I would always try to put the punctuation before the quote."
:...that is how I was taught to do it, <mumble>fumphty-fumph</mumble> years ago, and when it is clear quoted speech (with 66s, 99s) then that's probably best. Except when it might confuse, but then a rewrite (or clearly indicated paraphrase/part-quote) might be useful. You'll note I example-quote 'wrongly' in some places below, to accomodate other factors. Like an exclamation point as a feature of the holding sentence that makes no sense at all to be translated to within the quoted sentence(-fragmant).
On the other hand providing "a set of words", with no clear quotation to them, ellicits no such compunction.
:...it gets a bit hazy, because a partial quote of a real full sentence (or an incomplete/incompleted quote) could go either way. But I would not consider "a set of words," to be sensible.
If you give a "list", "spread" or "set" of singular terms then no, or even compounded ones if they are ultimately the "be-all" and "end-all".
:...noting that I might personally single-quote in this case (I know not why I have adopted this principle, exactly), though I've often seen such things changed by others and it may be more contested than even the terminator punctuation. I might say that the 'true' difference is whether it is a definite "literal", insofar as meaning, or somewhat 'ad hoc', 'foreignish' or just plain constructed.
:But this is just my opinion. And, regardless of my preference to quote-punctuation ordering, I've seen several recent occasions where paren-punctuation ordering was totally off (IMO). Either "...at the end of a sentence (an aside.)", which should have been "... (an aside)." instead, or "(As a whole aside of its own)." for which it ''must'' surely be "(As ... of its own.)"
:Now, obviously too much ()ing is awkward, especially if nested, but I prefer the clearer in/out indication than other methods — like the mdash — which seem to be the favoured method by some editors — and, even more confusingly, often without spacing both sides. (Like "...by some editors—and, even more confusingly..."! Looks more like a hyphen, despite "—” and "–”-users changing hyphens-used-as-dashes to one or other of the dashes to try to differentiate them.)
:Ultimately, though, the people here will have learnt (or redeveloped) their own typographical standards over a wide range of educational eras (or under teachers/mentors whose own learnt-preferences might themselves be several decades passed into history) and with additional localisation/localization complications as well. I tend to agree with you (with caveats as mentioned) but it won't be universally acceptable. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.13|172.70.85.13]] 21:34, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
: Better? No. Correct (at least in American English)? Yes. [[User:Elektrizikekswerk|Elektrizikekswerk]] ([[User talk:Elektrizikekswerk|talk]]) 13:25, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

== Propose block of (an?) IP user(s?) and suppression of their edits ==

I don't mind being insulted but I think it's clear they're bad for the community:

* https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:NotaBene&diff=296485&oldid=203158
* https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User_talk:NotaBene&diff=296486&oldid=296485

--[[User:NotaBene|NotaBene]] ([[User talk:NotaBene|talk]]) 14:15, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

: As the IP who subsequently reverted those back out of existence (wasn't sure you'd seen it, but was clear to me it wasn't a useful/good-faith commentary, and now I find that you had and had certainly ignored it in-situ) I have mixed opinions. I could not have done my (good faith) edit if somehow restricted, in a way someone had previously gotten around. Bearing in mind the idiotic vandal(s) we have had before, and always ended up dealing with through sheer force of the more righteous and honest userbase, I think that drastic actions aren't necessary. But I can think of a few minor tweaks that maybe the current adminship can still hold in reserve and occasionally employ, without preventing the likes of me (long time contributor, but not yet decided to make it 'official') occasionally poking registered users' Talk pages with genuine queries or comments under most circumstances that may actually warrant it.
: That said, we have indeed had a spate of vandalism, recently, which I'm inclined to believe is 'our old friend' who probably decided he(?) was bored again. A few novel tricks (nonsense 'cat on keyboard' edits with no clear pattern to the nonsense or what it replaces) but in association with some of the old ones (global word replacements throughout an article). Quickly recorrected in all cases, SFAICT, so not a big problem.
: The above insertion (...insertions... seeming to care about punctuation typos!) I might have left for you to blue-pen out of your own Talk page (whatever the intent behind it) except for my spidey-sense saying it really was ''just'' trolling and that you had no reason to even consider a dismissive reply, never mind argue your defence against such an accusation. (But could always restore and reply to it if you really wanted to!) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.137|172.71.178.137]] 17:57, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

:: To be clear, I'm not proposing a site-wide restriction of all IP users, just those specific addresses. --[[User:NotaBene|NotaBene]] ([[User talk:NotaBene|talk]]) 18:41, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

::: Understood, but that'd mean inconveniencing even legitimate readers routing through the same Cloudflare gateways. Which are in bunches, such that any given region of the world is served by not necessarily contiguous IP ranges, thus false-positives and false-negatives. Until you blanket-ban enough to just make for a whole lotta false-positive blocking for a segment of real users once the instigator of the mess just moves on (or enjoys the mess he made, if self-aware enough of it).
::: I won't even know, until I submit this, if I'm this time listed even in the same IP/8-block as the above (172.71.178.137), but if it turns out that I'm a 141.* this time (or maybe 142.*, I forget what I occasionally show up as) then obviously had you reason to IP-block me because of my own actions then you'd have accomplished little by even banning the whole 16-/24-block of my original. And that's without any conscious intent to bypass the default allocation system...
::: So, not that you should take my own opinion as gospel, just thought I'd mention this. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.3|172.70.90.3]] 20:23, 12 October 2022 (UTC)

== Hey ==

I cleaned everything up. You should probably restore the newest 3 topics.

:It could definitely do with a cleanup (not the only page like this!), but in a positive and considered manner, not just wiping and expecting unwarrented deletions to be restored after your removal. Archival sub-pages (restricted/fully-protected) should be involved, perhaps, for reference/history (on top of the History view itself).
:Not just wiping by an unisigned contributor, as you did. I'm a hairbreadth from just reverting it all back again, on principle, and maybe someone else will do that anyway.
:But defering to known named users (esp. the admins) and their decision on how to procede. (Please do delete this contribution if you see fit to do any restoration and make my opinions moot.) [[Special:Contributions/172.68.138.79|172.68.138.79]] 20:26, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
::I agree that it needed cleanup, and also agree that wiping everything was not the best way to go about doing it. I've moved most of the deleted content to the "talk"/archive page, and put back some discussions. [[User:Theusaf|theusaf]] ([[User talk:Theusaf|talk]]) 23:22, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

== Complaint transcluded from [[user:ArthurGreenham]] ==
:(Ok, so, the above transclusion is subject to change at any time, as proven by While False going in there and 'wikilinking' everything since I first saw the transclusion inserted here, so perhaps a little less ephemeral explanation is needed..?)
:Point the first: I have no issues with While False, in general. Seems to be a good editor in general. As I recall, did a lot to counter that particularly recurring bad-faith editor who the current expanded admin set will recall. And regular editing from you, mate..? As good as anyone else, I would say. No bad-faith detected in you at all.
:Point the second: You do seem to be a bit too gung-ho with new pages, and similar experiments with markup. Just because you can, it seems. If those with the power to remove pages choose not to, then I'm not complaining, but I still think it's a bit... self-indulgant. Not that a mere IP like me can rightfully complain.
:Point the third: Clearly, among the mass of newly registered users (who never then contribute) there is a large cohort generated by some external script(s) for the intention of SEO/propogation of linky-links. I suspect that they're set to do this on any wiki that they can create accounts upon, mindlessly and with the initiating 'intelligence' not bothered how well they do it (economies of scale, as per spamming/etc) because some will do it and fulfil whatever purpose.
:Point the fourth: But, back a long time ago, our chief admin here (and his then current peers/etc?) set it up so that new users just did not so easily create brand new pages. Without overly restricting the spamming of user-registration (or, more importantly, legitimately interested actual contributors) it stymied the scripts that were creating users that then could not create (and write their spam upon) the pages they were programmed to create.
:Point the fifth: But if someone who is an autoconfirmed user looks at the accounts created (I'm guessing here, so corrects me if I'm wrong) and decides to make the pages that new and heretofor uncontriutive users ''cannot'' create for themselves, there are times (at least two, that I know of) that the mindless spam-script has not given up and moved on from putting their random link-spam upon RandomNewname's user page. And as RandomNewname ''has'' a page, it does its preprogrammed stuff.
:...and the world does not stop turning, if that happens. But it does just marginally increase the benefits vs costs of the spam-engine technique (which are probably already breaking even and more, across all speculative spam-destinationa) and I'd suggest we shouldn't be helping with that any more than we already have to.
:Maybe theusaf could add to their own bot some sort of detection of a suspicious level of linkspamming upon a user's own pages (to neuter these that leak through, like the ones that it deals with in other circumstances), but that'd be difficult without having false-positives upon genuine new users with (once they can) a genuine reason to populate their userspace with various external links.
:Instead, perhaps hold back upon feeding the spambots the fresh ground that they seem to like to make use of. Perhaps a page for "please create my userspace!" if we want genuine users (or at least ones that can find and read instructions) to get a userspace more quickly than the normal limits apply, so any established (named) editor can give them their Welcome-templated editspace.
:We can't so easily protect against conscious bad-faith editors (we will just have to deal with them, as we have done), but we seem to have sufficient anti-bot defences. If misguided editing doesn't open up cracks in the walls.
:...Ok, that looks like a rant, but was just intended to cover (much of) the issue as I saw it in a way that explained my accumulated thinking on the matter. And I clearly think too much. This is not a diatribe against anybody (except the spambot originators), just a plea for action (or, rather, inaction) in a key way. And perhaps some moderator-level cleanup, so that the above transclusion is now effectively red-linked (then delete/archive this horribly overblown entry). Leaving it up to you lot. Have fun! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.3|172.70.90.3]] 10:34, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

==2696: Accuracy and precision==
This is my first edit/post here. Could someone please include the Wikipedia link to "Accuracy and precision" [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accuracy_and_precision], which is a separate article from 'accuracy' and 'precision'? Thanks! unsigned ip|172.71.98.97|16:04, 9 November 2022}}
:If someone else hasn't done already, it's trivial enough to do yourself in a similar way to how you edited here, in any one of a number of ways.
:*By bare URL (shows the URL, like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accuracy_and_precision but not really suitable here)
:*As you did it above, with [] around the URL, giving a 'reference'-like link. Occaisionally useful, but a little impersonal in most cases.
:**Or use URL and alternate text in the []s (space-separated) <nowiki>[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accuracy_and_precision like this]</nowiki>, which looks [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accuracy_and_precision like this] and is most useful for non-wiki links that you can describe well, or associate into the flow of text.
:*An internal wiki link is defined like <nowiki>[[2696: Precision vs Accuracy]]</nowiki> and renders as [[2696: Precision vs Accuracy]], which is common site practice (you could alse link to [[2696]] or [[Precision vs Accuracy]], in most cases, which are redirects) but doesn't help in the above link's case.
:**If you wanted to internally link with [[2696: Precision vs Accuracy|other text]] then using <nowiki>[[2696: Accuracy and precision|other text]]</nowiki> is the way to do it (use the pipe delimiter).
:*When it comes to wikipedia links, though, we have a nice template for it. By using <nowiki>Accuracy and precision}}</nowiki> (or with the underscored version of the title, if you wish) you get a link to {Accuracy and precision}}, with the nicer aesthetic. '''Probably what you wanted.''' You can lowercase the "A" and it will still link (usually... always good to check) and linking to something like a w|noun}} can generally be written as <nowiki>|noun}}s</nowiki> should you wish the flow of text to seemlessly render the link as being for multiple noun}}s, thanks to a little more background trickery.
:**If you want to use more <nowiki>Accuracy_and_precision|replaced text}}</nowiki> then you get aAccuracy_and_precision|replaced text}} rendering. '''Another possibility for what you'd wish to use, here.'''
:**Similar templates exist for linking the likes of emplate|wiktionary}} and evenemplate|tvtropes}}, should you need them.
:**...noting that the latter needs the NoSpacesVersion of the title and because tropes|TVTropesWillRuinYourLife|TV Tropes Will Ruin Your Life}}, it has a slightly more forboding format, even though it isn't really ''that'' much worse than [[214: The Problem with Wikipedia]]. ;)
:In case that's of any use to you, or anybody else. There are a few more tips and tricks, but this covers a lot of the usage-cases.
:Also, in discussion pages and ones like this, it's useful to sign your contribution with the four tildes. But it's easy to forget and there are templates to mark unsigned contribution. As I did above. Don't worry about it. It just lets you datestamp and demarkate elements of conversation in a useful manner. As a first edit, you can be forgiven, but just so you know for future! [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.57|172.70.91.57]] 18:21, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

** "'it's trivial enough to do yourself in a similar way to how you edited here'" Those options do not seem to be open to me if I do not set up an account; I'm not ready to take that step, so it looks like I can only edit behind-the-scenes pages, not comic pages. Thanks for the advice! I do enjoy the site when I check in! [[Special:Contributions/172.71.182.17|172.71.182.17]] 18:35, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
** Never mind. I found the option. I didn't realize the new comic page was separate from the main page. I was trying to edit the main page. Thanks! [[Special:Contributions/172.71.182.17|172.71.182.17]] 18:39, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
:...I must say, I never thought about that, or I might have not concentrated on the link-formatting stuff (which I hope was just as useful, in its own way).
:As you see, I'm also not 'ready' to set up an account. But I rarely go via the main page, which is locked against trivial vandalism, plus know that the useful editing occurs only in the transcluded source page anyway. And now so do you, happily.
:I don't know if that confusion catches out many potential editors, but at least now you know yourself. And, from one IP to another, Welcome! I hope you now find yourself productively editing away in the future, if you have anything else useful to include. No obligation, of course, except to play nice if you do. ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.11|172.70.86.11]] 19:20, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

==There's a lot of vandalism going on==

See the page history of any recent comic page. Not sure what to do about it. [[User:Equites|Equites]] ([[User talk:Equites|talk]]) 00:57, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

:Ban 162.158.107.56 and 172.71.150.83, they seem to be the perpetuators. [[User:Starstar|Starstar]] ([[User talk:Starstar|talk]]) 02:15, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

As of the 22nd, the users ChuddyCobson and CobsonTheGemson are responsible for a large amount of attacks and image vandalism, most of them NSFW (inappropiate and/or gore). Can something be done about them? [[User:Gyozaplanet|Gyozaplanet]]

I noticed the image for 1460 has been vandalized. But, in looking at the history it shows an old vandalism that was fixed. But following the link in the alleged fix gets the vandalized image. I'm out of my depth for fixing this, but couldn't find a better place to report it. It's getting too late and I'm far too tired to do more... (As an aside to what I came here for, are the above two things vandalism here? That's a rathole I'm not continuing down.) [[User:MAP|MAP]] ([[User talk:MAP|talk]]) 09:37, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

A few hours ago I decided to visit this wiki, and got quite the surprise on the front page, in that it was heavily vandalized. Decided to make an account after looking at recent changes and saw how much there was.

The accounts involved seem to be these;
* CobsonTheGemson
* ChuddyCobson
* Cobson
* Stinkycobbypoopoo
* Chud
* GotTheJakkyDoe

Kinda confused since they don't seem to be bots but I assume they're using a script or something to automate their vandalism. As far as I know, A few other people and I reverted more or less everything those accounts have done but it's possible some stuff fell through the cracks.

Also some of the gifs I reverted (most notably the gif for 381) seem to still have the same image so I'm hoping that's just a cache thing that'll sort itself out in time.

I left the above weirdness since I don't know the etiquette for deleting stuff in this section and it would remove some context to the above person's post. Hope I didn't break anything while cleaning up. [[User:Neerti|Neerti]] ([[User talk:Neerti|talk]]) 10:24, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

:Cleaned up some accounts '''[[User:Davidy22|Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 16:38, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

== Opening Certain Pages causes mediawiki errors ==

For example [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Proposals Proposals] and [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/User:Dgbrt this user page] [[User:Starstar|Starstar]] ([[User talk:Starstar|talk]]) 02:10, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

== Apparent abuse of multiple accounts ==
For a few weeks (mostly the last few days) 51 accounts with the same soon-current name [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=newusers&user=&page=User%3ASadSanta&pattern=1&year=&month=-1&tagfilter=&subtype= have been created]. To me it looks like preparation for abuse of multiple accounts. —[[User:While False|While False]] ([[User:While False/explain xkcd museum|'''museum''']] | [[User talk:While False|talk]] | [[special:Contributions/While_False|contributions]] | [[special:Log/While_False|logs]] | [[Special:UserRights/While_False|rights]] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User:While_False&printable=yes printable version] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User:While_False&action=info page information] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:WhatLinksHere/User:While_False what links there] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Special:RecentChangesLinked&days=30&from=&target=User%3AWhile_False related changes] | [https://www.google.com Google search] | current time: CURRENTTIME}}) 11:44, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
:Now, they’re 195. —[[User:While False|While False]] ([[User:While False/explain xkcd museum|'''museum''']] | [[User talk:While False|talk]] | [[special:Contributions/While_False|contributions]] | [[special:Log/While_False|logs]] | [[Special:UserRights/While_False|rights]] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User:While_False&printable=yes printable version] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User:While_False&action=info page information] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:WhatLinksHere/User:While_False what links there] | [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Special:RecentChangesLinked&days=30&from=&target=User%3AWhile_False related changes] | a late contribution | current time: CURRENTTIME}}) 17:24, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
::With the exception of being 'topical', these are quite typical of numerous other "<commonroot><randomchars>" sets of never-ever-used usernames. It is good to be aware of them, but I think this 'common root' was just randomly grabbed by the algorithm (or its master) without any particular view to be used any more effectively than before.
::I leave it to those who can actually do something to decide ''whether'' to actually do something, but I'm currently not so concerned. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.127|172.70.91.127]] 01:06, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
::Addendum - alongside "SadSanta...", we're getting a lot of [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=newusers&user=&page=User%3ANatasha&pattern=1&year=&month=-1&tagfilter=&subtype= "Natasha"s], while around this time last year (as the first time glanced back at) we had [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=newusers&user=&page=User%3APellGync&pattern=1&year=&month=-1&tagfilter=&subtype= "PellGync"] and [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=newusers&user=&page=User%3ASnawlrab&pattern=1&year=&month=-1&tagfilter=&subtype= "Snawlrab"] as the common roots concerned. Which ultimately came of nought.
::I get the impression that the limited-success script (as being used to create spam-accounts, but overwhelmingly failing to then exploit them) is set up to randomly apply two such common roots at a time (or else there's two copies of the code running, wherever, each switching out 'exhausted' roots for the next enqueued one in their own list ...as and when necessary). A quick poke into other 'recent' historic points in the Account Creation log highly supports this, but it could do with a far more rigorous analysis to be more definite. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.118|172.71.242.118]] 01:31, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

There also used to be a lot of eight-letter usernames. Too many usernames are being created every day. --[[User:ColorfulGalaxy|ColorfulGalaxy]] ([[User talk:ColorfulGalaxy|talk]]) 22:03, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

== Current troll(s) ==
There's trolls posting extremely obscene stuff on the homepage, and frankly I'm appalled. The Admins need to take several steps to lock down the main page so that it's not possible for readers to view such obscene content (for example, why are arbitrary images that don't come from xkcd.com allowed???) Why are random users allowed to post arbitrary images that are not filtered/scanned in any way? ([[User:bkayes|bkayes]])
: It's been like this forever. It's rare enough that the admins leave things fairly open, but lengthy stretches lead to the lockdowns you're asking for, usually for about a week which is usually sufficient. Mixed feelings. There are a lot of tools that could help a lot, but we can't get [[User:Jeff]] to upgrade because his hosting deal depends on some ad stuff that won't port to newer versions. :( [[User:Liv2splain|Liv2splain]] ([[User talk:Liv2splain|talk]]) 04:45, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
:: Image uploads being open is usually nicer for everyone, except in the scenario while children decide to use it as an avenue for vandalism. I got enough on my hands already to be dealing with but this probably demands some attention '''[[User:Davidy22|Color|#707|David}}y²²]]'''[[User talk:Davidy22|<tt>[talk]</tt>]] 16:38, 22 December 2022 (UTC)
::: (Rerationalised under a new header, as a different issue, though also related to a prior section's 'insertion/revival' in response to the idiot concerned, too.) Appreciated, David. Noting that the inability for me to correct the account-led vandalism, last night, is the one factor that might eventually push me to establish a non-IP presence. But we had other volunteer accounts reacting fairly well to the trouble, and I knew we'd settle down soon enough. Anyhoo, Merry Christmas to you and the others on the side of stability, while I'm here and chatting away. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.136|172.71.178.136]] 17:00, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

::: I find it unfortunate that "rarity" is any sort of excuse for allowing this to happen. XKCD is a fantastic source of quality STEM entertainment, and thus is a great resource to get younger audiences interested in such fields through humor. Many high school age and younger people regularly view xkcd content. However, some of the comics are quite obscure or contain a lot of depth, which is why explainxkcd has been such a great resource for everyone to learn things that are outside of their depth (including younger audiences). The knowledge that someone can open explainxkcd and have the slightest chance that they see extreme gore/porn is absolutely absurd and unacceptable for a wiki that is serving solely family friendly science content. I can no longer recommend explainxkcd to people I know (and especially not younger people) because of the lack of modern anti-trolling tooling, and that really sucks. I understand the issues surrounding locking down the text explanations, but the images should be a trivially solvable problem. Compare a checksum between the image found at *.xkcd.com and the image uploaded and reject an image that doesn't match, or better yet *use the official xkcd RSS feed* (https://xkcd.com/rss.xml) to download the images directly, and don't allow any user edits of the images. Then you can deal with vandalization of the text some other time, locking down the images is really the highest priority here I think. ([[User:bkayes|bkayes]]) 04:17, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

== [[2659: Unreliable Connection]] ==

Could probably do with some page protection here. Thanks. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.231|162.158.34.231]] 23:41, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
:If you mean for the thing that [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2659:_Unreliable_Connection&diff=prev&oldid=303665 gets reverted very quickly], I think that's already dealt with quite nicely. And it isn't the only page that is targetted, so where do you stop? Whole-site lockdown, when the occasonal automated spam is equally automatically reverted? [[Special:Contributions/162.158.74.21|162.158.74.21]] 00:05, 30 December 2022 (UTC)
::Over the past couple of weeks, the edit history of this particular page has consisted of nothing but vandalism and it's subsequent reversion. The vandal doesn't seem to be targeting (m)any other pages, so protection should make them go away. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.79.158|172.69.79.158]] 21:43, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
:::Nonetheless, the same tactic has been seen (and reverted, promptly) on other comics, like #976. ''edit: ...and #2503 suffered this vandalism/reversion, again, on 15 Jan 2023.'' Block 2659 and 976 from editing and someone may easily change the config for the script and hit any othe page they please, not really reducing the ultimate change/revert frequency, just where it is happening.
:::I'll accept gradual locking down of progressively more and more of the site, if it happens, but I'm not sure it'd be of any real benefit to do so. Not my call, so just giving my POV... [[Special:Contributions/162.158.34.74|162.158.34.74]] 23:47, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Someone pointed out that the spams are more likely to occur on pages with "Connect" in their titles. [[User:ColorfulGalaxy|ColorfulGalaxy]] ([[User talk:ColorfulGalaxy|talk]]) 10:49, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

The user talk page with the same name got spammed. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.134.242|172.69.134.242]] 06:18, 28 April 2023 (UTC)

== Announcement: online chat with Randall January 31 ==

Admins: would you please consider adding this blurb to the end of the [[MediaWiki:Sitenotice]] just for this month?

: [https://libraryc.org/mountainviewlibrary/22032 Register to attend an online chat] with [[Randall Munroe]] January 31 at 11am Pacific.

Thank you for your consideration. [[User:Liv2splain|Liv2splain]] ([[User talk:Liv2splain|talk]]) 06:23, 2 January 2023 (UTC)
:Done —[[User:Theusaf|theusaf]] ([[User talk:Theusaf|talk]]) 23:29, 4 January 2023 (UTC)
::Thank you! I'm very much looking forward to the well-attended zoom chat, let alone what should come from the large pool of questions from international fans. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.134.16|172.69.134.16]] 14:04, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

Archive of livestream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dAEutGwIQ9c [[Special:Contributions/162.158.166.173|162.158.166.173]] 19:03, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

==All community portal==
Would you mind semi-protecting [[explain_xkcd:Community_portal/All|this]] and [[explain_xkcd_talk:Community_portal/All|that]] page? They don't seem to need edits. --[[User:ColorfulGalaxy|ColorfulGalaxy]] ([[User talk:ColorfulGalaxy|talk]]) 17:55, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

== Brief(?) and limited spate of vandalism. ==

It may be a flash in a pan, but there's some [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2293:_RIP_John_Conway&action=history misuse of multiple accounts] going on here as of this timestamp (with ColourfulGalaxy having mostly had to correct matters on their own, so far). FYI, on their behalf. With any luck the idiot involved will get bored soon, if not already, but making a note anyway. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.159.124|162.158.159.124]] 20:15, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

: He edited my user page just now. --[[User:ColorfulGalaxy|ColorfulGalaxy]] ([[User talk:ColorfulGalaxy|talk]]) 20:17, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

: I tried to help them, but failed. I had to turn to you for help. [[User:ChristmasGospel|ChristmasGospel]] ([[User talk:ChristmasGospel|talk]]) 20:24, 12 January 2023 (UTC)

: EDIT: By the way, don't call him "idiot", or he may be angry.

::Given that someone [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User:ColorfulGalaxy&curid=25508&diff=304689&oldid=303399 seems to be stalking you], and even snuck in some activity before ''my'' post, above, I'm starting to suspect something more. I leave it to those who can do things to sort it out. As an IP, I don't think I have any say in the matter, but I'll let others consider the possibilities. (You've got to be an idiot to clearly log in with the wrong account, though, and then fail to pick up the changes with the 'right' one. And I knew While False wasn't truly finished trying to do stupid things to the site... You're not impressing anybody, WF.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.201|172.70.85.201]] 20:28, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
:::That’s not typical WF behaviour at all. —[[Special:Contributions/162.158.222.198|162.158.222.198]] 19:38, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

== The online chat s over ==

Please revert https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Sitenotice&diff=304122&oldid=239894 [[Special:Contributions/172.70.211.92|172.70.211.92]] 18:45, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

== Users involved in spamming. ==

There are at least three 'people' involved here, using trivial character differences/substitutions:
* https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:Contributions/ElisabethPacheco
* https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:Contributions/EIisabethPacheco
* https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:Contributions/EIizabethPacheco
(...in case not obvious, especially in sans-serif, the second two use capital-I (i) instead of small-l (L), and the s/z difference should be obvious. No obvious signs of anything like using cyrillic look-alike characters, yet.)

There may be others, or will be, but these ones have just recently popped up in spamming (and then obfuscating? ...hoping to be reverted back into the spam version?) the redirect pages [[Drama‎‎]] and [[Google Maps]] (see [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Drama&action=history here] and [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Google_Maps&action=history here]), though they are currently fully reverted. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.35|172.70.90.35]] 04:33, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
:One of these also interacted with a differently named suspicious-looking/acting account:
:* https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:Contributions/CipherGuide
:Could be a coincidence, but... For reference. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.190|172.71.242.190]] 13:18, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
:And now [[User:ElisabethPacheco (do not ban me)]]. [[User:AndroidTheLucario|AndroidTheLucario]] ([[User talk:AndroidTheLucario|talk]]) 03:54, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Can someone block [[User:Email Trial 1]]? They're repeatedly adding comments on spamming other people's emails. Thanks! ~ [[user:megan|Megan]] she/her [[user talk:megan|talk]]/[[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 16:25, 24 March 2023 (UTC)

== Ongoing image vandalism ==

by [[User:Troonjak|this user]] ([[Special:Contributions/Troonjak|contributions]]). ~ [[user:megan|Megan]] she/her [[user talk:megan|talk]]/[[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 02:50, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

I suggest we raise the threshold for image uploads. After all, there's no reason for most editors to upload images. ~ [[user:megan|Megan]] she/her [[user talk:megan|talk]]/[[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 03:13, 11 March 2023 (UTC)

Bumping this since it happened again. —megan [[user talk:megan|talk]] [[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 07:54, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

== Fix obnoxious typo on the Editor FAQ ==

This page contains a typo and I can't edit it out: https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/explain_xkcd:Editor_FAQ

It's highlighted in this sentence:

"You can use the Math markup <nowiki><math>...</math></nowiki>. The other known code from Wikipedia <nowiki><chem>...</chem></nowiki> is not supported yet. It's based on LaTeX syntax and a general overview can be found at '''''it's''''' Wikipedia help page. Don't use it unless you actually understand what you are doing." Edit: Whoops, forgot to sign: [[User:FaviFake|FaviFake]] ([[User talk:FaviFake|talk]]) 09:04, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

== Update MediaWiki ==

The current MediaWiki version is 1.30.0 which ended support mid-2019, please upgrade to 1.39.x or something due to security concerns. Instructions here https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Upgrading [[User:Cam1170|Cam1170]] ([[User talk:Cam1170|talk]]) 20:55, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
Make sure to upgrade to 1.35 first, from the Check Requirements section.
Actually, 1.31 then 1.35 then 1.39 for the smoothest transition. [[User:Cam1170|Cam1170]] ([[User talk:Cam1170|talk]]) 15:15, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

I would like to add that this is still an issue. I don't know a better way to bring this to admin attention. [[User:Cam1170|Cam1170]] ([[User talk:Cam1170|talk]]) 21:28, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

== user edits someone else's comment ==

https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:2760:_Paleontology_Museum&diff=309970&oldid=309964 [[Special:Contributions/162.158.87.65|162.158.87.65]] 09:51, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
::That word is not spelled "Ye". It's "Þe". [[User:Omg Oriental Music Group|Omg Oriental Music Group]] ([[User talk:Omg Oriental Music Group|talk]]) 00:49, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
:::That would depend. We all (FCVO 'all') get your point, but is spelt (or, if you wish, "spelled", but I would like to use the other form) that way by the original commentator. And it was a signed Talk post, not an Explanation page that needs to be standardised(/standardized) by success revisions.
:::Can you also say for definite that it was not intended by the original author to be the second-person plural personal pronoun (nominative), correctly or otherwise, rather than the definite article (under a standard reduced typeset)? No reason to change it, not even if an actual tyop. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.207|172.71.178.207]] 11:56, 9 April 2023 (UTC)
:Yeah, bad practice, except where correcting clear mistakes or otherwise sanitising something best not left up in the open (for whatever good reason). Like if I'd misapplied a style "colour" tag, by accident, but not if I'd openly written "colour" in a Talk entry.
:But not necessary in this case of language-geek hyperconnection. I think a revert/re-edit to restore the original would be not an issue, but I won't do it myself.
:The best way to look smart with the "thorn" character would have been to say "You have 'Ye Olde blah-de-blah', but I hink you meant... [etc]" and own the joke and the smugness rather than try to 'improve' on the original in-situ. As one who has made typos (but also said exactly what I wanted to, perhaps deciding not to over-egg the pudding) I would prefer even a snarky "did you mean.." reply over an invisible 'improvement' that may not even be properly focused any more. Each to their own, but my suggestion, if the editor wants to revise their edit. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.65|172.71.178.65]] 15:54, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

== Deletion of wrongly-titled pages ==
Could you please delete [[:Category:Comics with small caps|this redirect]]? [[User:Memo Spike Connector|2503: Memo Spike Connector]] ([[User talk:Memo Spike Connector|talk]]) 06:18, 17 April 2023 (UTC)

Could you delete [[:Category;Comics featuring real people|this page]]? [[User:ClassicalGames|ClassicalGames]] ([[User talk:ClassicalGames|talk]]) 03:29, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

[[Usertalk:Billstz]] turned into a redirect. It should have been deleted. [[User:ColorfulGalaxy|ColorfulGalaxy]] ([[User talk:ColorfulGalaxy|talk]]) 21:10, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

== Repeated spam in user talk page ==
The page [[User talk:ClassicalGames]] got repeatedly spammed. Could you semiprotect it? [[Special:Contributions/172.69.134.242|172.69.134.242]] 02:07, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

:Hmmmmm, I think he really deserves the spam. He spammed in [[User:ColorfulGalaxy/Sandbox|someone else's user page]] without permission. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.154.228|172.71.154.228]] 03:56, 15 May 2023 (UTC)

:Easily reverted, to restore legitimate conversation. (Perhaps more such attention should go to where some people are [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=2293:_RIP_John_Conway&curid=22901&diff=312913&oldid=312626 repeatedly making entirely useless and gratuitous edits]...) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.86|172.71.242.86]] 08:59, 12 May 2023 (UTC)
::Those spammers probably knew the CG rules, and appeared to have welcomed every CG group member with a spam. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.23.33|172.69.23.33]] 09:57, 12 May 2023 (UTC)

== The relevant xkcd comic from not xkcd ==

https://thomaspark.co/2017/01/relevant-xkcd/ This comic. A reference to xkcd, in the style of xkcd, about xkcd.

Can I make a page about it? Please? :)

== What's a "comic incarnate"? ==

[[User:Memo Spike Connector]] seems to have a friend group of users with the names of various comics. E's been changing their user pages ''and signatures'' to match the comic pages and titles. Is this some sort of cult? It sounds fun! Where do I sign up? --[[User:AndroidTheLucario|Your favorite aura doggo]] ([[User talk:AndroidTheLucario|talk]]) 03:18, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
:To answer the title, "incarnate"=="made flesh". Reincarnation is when you're given a new body, again, incarnation can therefore be taken as when the 'spirit' first assumes a tangible (or visible) form.
:To ponder on this fad of creating comic-related user accounts... pretty much unnecessary and has no reason to be encouraged, I suppose. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.62|172.70.162.62]] 03:52, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
::How do I join? I wanna be cool like them! --[[User:AndroidTheLucario|Your favorite aura doggo]] ([[User talk:AndroidTheLucario|talk]]) 03:59, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
:I think this needs to be taken more seriously now. [[User:Memo Spike Connector]] has had their page added to the *category* of Cursed Connectors, despite not being an official comic. It's starting to feel like a very unusual case of vandalism, but I'm not sure. [[User:Tsumikiminiwa|Tsumikiminiwa]] ([[User talk:Tsumikiminiwa|talk]]) 19:37, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
:: Addendum, [[User:Unreliable Connection]] has their page added to the Internet and Social Interactions categories. Everything else I said before still stands. [[User:Tsumikiminiwa|Tsumikiminiwa]] ([[User talk:Tsumikiminiwa|talk]]) 19:41, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

== Main page in phones category ==

The [[Main Page]] is now in the [[:Category:Phones]] category. [[User:ClassicalGames|ClassicalGames]] ([[User talk:ClassicalGames|talk]]) 03:25, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
:Surely because [[2789: Making Plans]], currently transcluded there, is legitimately given that category. I'd be more surprised if it wasn't. (Until Wednesday's new comic release changes this, if it does.) What's the problem, and how is it related to 'your' issue, above? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.146|172.71.178.146]] 10:04, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
::I moved this to its own section, but you can change the section title if you want. --[[User:AndroidTheLucario|Your favorite aura doggo]] ([[User talk:AndroidTheLucario|talk]]) 19:43, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

== please block u|Vandal (and many more)==

cf. [[Special:Contributions/Vandal]] 11 page blankings today. Thanks. [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 21:24, 4 July 2023 (UTC)

Actually, looking at [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Special:Log/newusers&limit=500&type=newusers&user= Special:Log/newusers] is pretty ominous. Nearly all of the last 500 (within the past 4 days), and also the next few thousand, are suspicious. The CAPTCHA probably needs to be replaced with something more difficult that is perhaps not as trivially automatable? And all those users blocked? Not sure. [[User:JohnHawkinson|JohnHawkinson]] ([[User talk:JohnHawkinson|talk]]) 22:05, 4 July 2023 (UTC)
:As a regular checker of such things, I know for a fact that you get hundreds of 'suspicious' accounts created every day, and most of them 'go nowhere'. The account creation speedblocks may not be very good. Or, possibly, tens of thousands of accounts are ''tried'' to be created, with 'just' a small percentage of them getting past the CAPTCHA/etc to get noticed by us - the actual top-level site admins will have access to the 'failed to register fully' logs. ''But'', the actual page vandalism is very rarely any of these 'mechanised spam accounts'. I presume because the CAPTCHAs throttle down the 'lucky' accounts' abilities to do anything they were programmed to do ''once'' registered. And, no, the accounts aren't blocked (i.e. disabled accounts, except on very ''rare'' occasions when an Admin gets annoyed with a conspicuously used spam-login), if the actual Block Log is to be believed, but so many get created and ''never'' used so it looks like the "new user early posts" precautionary checks do a very good job.
:We're also getting that idiot (I presume the same idiot as we've had for a year or two now) who manually creates accounts, such as you have been dealing with (and me, and others) over the last 24 hours or so. As a stupid human rather than a 'smart' bot, the CAPTCHA is no block to him/her/them. And the occasional IP gets used in that way, too (and I mostly successfully revert vandalism as only an IP; usefully, I hope) which might just be lazy vandalism, on top of the baseline stupidity. But the precautions against them are different. As with the 'Eric's ("Hi, I see your website needs improving - Eric"-types of message), which also seem to be handled by the community (and/or our automated blocking/reverting).
:I don't see increasing the severity of the CAPTCHA to be a solution to much, honestly. Not from my perspective, certainly, though I know there's no reason to take my own unattributable word on that.
:Instead, we should keep on keeping on. The community handles these things as they need to be. The admins know the 'hidden fight' going on in the background, but won't (and shouldn't) reveal too much about the extent of the first-line defences against bad faith 'automated' edits and the rest. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.140|172.70.90.140]] 08:13, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Vandalism appeared again in [[2800]]. [[User:ColorfulGalaxy|ColorfulGalaxy]] ([[User talk:ColorfulGalaxy|talk]]) 20:07, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

== Ban fake IP ==

Could you ban [[User:172.68.102.XXX]]? His edits sound suspicious, and he seems to be fighting against us. [[User:ColorfulGalaxy|ColorfulGalaxy]] ([[User talk:ColorfulGalaxy|talk]]) 19:41, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

== Vandalism by 172.69.214.158 ==

Large number of extreme vandalism, which ThatoneU is valiantly yet inefficaciously fighting:

example from https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=1193:_Externalities&action=history

<pre>
(cur | prev) 01:04, 24 July 2023‎ 172.69.214.158 (talk)‎ . . (6,765 bytes) (-15,000)‎ . . (Undo revision 318344 by ThatoneU (talk)) (undo)
(cur | prev) 00:47, 24 July 2023‎ ThatoneU (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (21,765 bytes) (+15,000)‎ . . (undo)
(cur | prev) 00:46, 24 July 2023‎ 172.69.214.158 (talk)‎ . . (6,765 bytes) (-15,000)‎ . . (undo)
</pre>

== Vandalism on page 2805 ==

The latest comic page (2805) is currently being vandalized. Can an admin please look into it?

== Problem with new accounts and IPs ==

So I'm sure many of you are well aware of the vandalism happening recently. But what concerns me the most is that all the edits were done by many, many different IPs, meaning that we can't just block one, and this site could get overrun by systematic IP vandalism. Also, the new accounts being created seem very suspicious. For such a small community, there's no way that there can be around 100 new users each day. The actual usernames of the users seem to follow a very repetitive pattern (generic first name + generic last name + random number). [[Special:Contributions/172.70.42.209|172.70.42.209]] 18:44, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
:As a fellow IP (and not a vandal myself, at least by intent) I find that the advantages of being able to leap in and correct (often 'named') damage outweigh the relatively small amount of IP-led vandalism. And the details of how the IPs represent the (limited, but geographically distributed) Cloudflare gateways has been noted before a number of times, together with what can be done about/with them.
:About the new accounts... Look back for ''years'', and you'll see the same (or similar) patterns. Almost all the truly rogue (presumably automated generation/'registering') then do nothing else as the site blocks the (still automated) attempts to do something with them.
:The worst danger this site is threatened by is the actual manually-posting individuals who (IPed or named) can do what they like so long as (like us legitimate editors) they are prepared to be sat at the keyboard and spend/waste the time in navigating the initial CAPTCHAs/etc to set down their changes. And there's not much more anybody can do about them without ruining everyone else's experience to a similar degree. Perhaps there's some adjustments possible, but none seem necesary to address the account-spam and other precautions are intercepting/reverting the lion's share of the edit-spam (with or without accounts).
:Not up to me, but I trust in those who it is up to. To continue with what is happening right now or to respond in new ways to anything that needs a new approach. Not saying that I don't have ideas of my own, for if I were able to intervene, but I doubt it'd be useful to voice them. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.158|172.70.162.158]] 21:12, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

== Large amounts of vandalism involving disturbing imagery. ==

Page 2805 has a huge vandalism problem. Vandals (it seems to be the same few people over and over, or maybe one person with multiple addresses) keep covering the page with weird, disturbing photos and way-too-bright colors.
A few people have been valiantly fighting back but that doesn't mean this isn't a problem.
I would like to please request that the page be locked to prevent further vandalism, and that you please ban all the people that have vandalized it in this way before (and/or take some other action to prevent future vandals) . Thank you very much! [[User:(insert name here)|(insert name here)]] ([[User talk:(insert name here)|talk]]) 01:20, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

There also seems to be a parser problem where instead of vandals replacing the page source, the vandalism is appended to the end, even though it isn't in the source. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.174.230|172.71.174.230]] 03:39, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

The optimal way to go would be to add bots that automatically replace questionable content like divs and detect image/word spam (like the one in Wikipedia). They would always be on so the vandals would get overwhelmed. Similarly I'd suggest monitoring the constant stream of IP addresses and created accounts. Most editors are IP addresses though, so you might want to watch out for that. Does ExplainXKCD have semiprotection capabilities? You would definitely want to do that, especially the important articles like [[xkcd]], [[Randall Munroe]], [[Cueball]], [[1:_Barrel_-_Part_1]], and ALL of the templates (the vandals were targeting those the most). [[User:84596Gamma|84596Gamma]] ([[User talk:84596Gamma|talk]]) 11:53, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

: I agree that the important pages (primary pages, plus all templates) need to be protected somehow so that this can't happen again. It's nice to have a low threshold to editing; it's nicer having a resource that can be depended on and doesn't require random volunteers jumping in to save. (Let's be honest; the images the vandal posted could have been much, much worse.) -- [[User:Dtgriscom|Dtgriscom]] ([[User talk:Dtgriscom|talk]]) 12:28, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

:: What the heck is 'Explain XKCD Administrator' doing? He seems to also be doing some weird div BS, making it so that it's impossible to scroll or click on templates or some comics. Blocking would be heavily advised. [[User:84596Gamma|84596Gamma]] ([[User talk:84596Gamma|talk]]) 12:39, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

== Becoming an admin? ==

Hi. I've been contributing occasionally for eight years now, and I think I've been helpful. But, almost half of the edits were last night in that wave of vandalism. It was very frustrating knowing that I had the same tools as the (14-year-old?) vandal, and the only end-point to the fun would be one of us throwing in the towel, and it was probably going to me (bedtime).

I don't have the time and/or commitment to do regular moderation work, but I (think I) am a reasonable person, who deals with conflicts rationally and could help out in a pinch. Is there a chance I could be given some more powers to help out if (when) such a crap-storm happens again? Thanks for your consideration... -- [[User:Dtgriscom|Dtgriscom]] ([[User talk:Dtgriscom|talk]]) 11:14, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

:I saw your efforts, early on in my own day, definitely looked to be amongst the helpful editors. I later picked up several cases (might have missed a couple, that others IDed before me) after I got online, and undid that latest form of vandalism in both templates (agree with above, they probably should be semi-protected) and pages. A simple Undo even at my level was sufficient to revert practically everything. What might have been handy was one of the top-moderators being around to use the mass-revert tools to streamline that, and keep on top of the account (or account''s'', as the problematic one would definitely open new accounts - we've seen them do this before) deserving to be blocked and banished. Unfortunately, the freedom of a wiki (which I value) doesn't really work well with over-administration. But that's a discussion to be had by those already at the top levels. I don't envy them. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.164|172.70.90.164]] 18:08, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

:: Well, the 14-year-old is back. I'm losing interest in fighting this mud-fest without real admin tools. -- [[User:Dtgriscom|Dtgriscom]] ([[User talk:Dtgriscom|talk]]) 20:11, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
::: We really need to stop this wave of persistent vandalism with protection. When will the admins notice our suffering? [[User:84596Gamma|84596Gamma]] ([[User talk:84596Gamma|talk]]) 20:23, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
::: I feel your pain. I caught (and had to recatch) a few of them as he turned up whilst I was browsing/considering proper edits. nd then I noticed you had appeared and were also retroing them, just as I thought I was barely keeping pace. But he's slackened off, so maybe you arriving here has made the difference. (And I'm fed up with pictures of fire hydrants!) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.214|172.70.91.214]] 20:20, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
::::Me too... I'm coming to help. Hopefully we can fight that manchild off. Also I call death and destruction to Captcha. [[User:84596Gamma|84596Gamma]] ([[User talk:84596Gamma|talk]]) 20:22, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:::: It's frustrating to watch the same few IP addresses wreak all this havoc. Being able to ban them would be a joy; why can't we have that power? -- [[User:Dtgriscom|Dtgriscom]] ([[User talk:Dtgriscom|talk]]) 20:31, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
::::: OK: 2/3 of my contributions have been in the last 24 hours fighting Bozo-Man in all his flamboyant IP addresses. Without further powers, I'm done, because (unlike Bozo-Man) I have better things to do. Sorry... -- [[User:Dtgriscom|Dtgriscom]] ([[User talk:Dtgriscom|talk]]) 22:39, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
:::::: What powers do you need? --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]])
::::::: I'm not looking for Super Duper Guru™ powers, just something that would even the battle a bit. No, that's not true: I'm looking for something that would make the battle ''unfair'' by making it easier to clean things up than it is to vandalize them. For instance, of the 123 vandalisms I reverted over the pat 24 hours, a third of them were from the top four IP addresses, and two thirds were from the top ten. If you only look at the first three quads of the IP addresses, half came from just two subnets. Block a few IP addresses, and the moderation load would go way down. (And that ignores the work the other users did.)
::::::: It makes sense that you wouldn't want to be handing out Thor's Hammer indiscriminately, but (IMO) something needs to change. If MediaWiki's moderation permissions aren't selective enough for your tastes, I'd be happy to follow your guidance (e.g. no blocking people for more than 24 hours). -- [[User:Dtgriscom|Dtgriscom]] ([[User talk:Dtgriscom|talk]]) 01:16, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::::::: Congrats, you are promoted, thanks for helping out. See me in a week if you still want the powers. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]])
::::::::: Thank you. Any guidance for the newbie admin? Or should I just "moderate moderately"? -- [[User:Dtgriscom|Dtgriscom]] ([[User talk:Dtgriscom|talk]]) 01:33, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
:::::::::: Block and move... block and move. Great power / great responsibility and all that. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]])

== Preventation of vandalism ==

I'll bet the entire budget of the Death Star II that the vandalizer is going to strike again in a few hours. We should be more prepared - I've already cut links to templates, and we should be vigilant about the pages they are going to attack: the current comic, templates, important pages. [[User:84596Gamma|84596Gamma]] ([[User talk:84596Gamma|talk]]) 00:06, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
: What do you need to help? Let me know. --[[User:Jeff|Jeff]] ([[User talk:Jeff|talk]])
:: Semiprotect all the templates. [[User:84596Gamma|84596Gamma]] ([[User talk:84596Gamma|talk]]) 00:52, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

== Username request ==

It looks like an impersonator registered an account under my name. Is it possible for me to get that username? [[User:Randall Munroe 2|Randall Munroe 2]] ([[User talk:Randall Munroe 2|talk]]) 04:41, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
:: To ask an obvious question: who are you? And, if you say you are the Randall Munroe of XKCD fame, how can we be sure? -- [[User:Dtgriscom|Dtgriscom]] ([[User talk:Dtgriscom|talk]]) 12:41, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
::''May I have your attention, please?''
::''May I have your attention, please?''
::''Will the real Randall Munroe please stand up?''
::''I repeat''
::''Will the real Randall Munroe please stand up?''
::''We're gonna have a problem here...''
::(...but, in my assessmemt, Randall would have actual more direct ways of introducing himself to; if he suddenly decided to muddy the water by descending to our level when his interactions even with the forum were minimal; if he hasn't already been here/there/wherever all along, incognito and with/without the administrators knowing this. But Randall's technical and connected enough to not need to ask the above the way it was asked.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.162.181|172.70.162.181]] 15:36, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

== user page ==

how do i put stuff in my profile? others have done it but for mine it says that i don't have permission to create that page [[User:An user who has no account yet|An user who has no account yet]] ([[User talk:An user who has no account yet|talk]]) 16:01, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
: Don't know why you couldn't, but I now have created your user and talk pages; let us know if you now can't edit them. [[User:Dtgriscom|Dtgriscom]] ([[User talk:Dtgriscom|talk]]) 16:08, 5 September 2023 (UTC)
:: There appears to be a rather restrictive page creation policy (it may be dialled up fairly high to age of account, possibly more so than any mere contributions-count), at least in regard to User-typed namespaces. Many account-creators have noted this, and had to be helped out. I suspect it's just their making that An User was ever prevented from. After all, even I can add things to User (and, more correctly and politely, User Talk) pages. And I'm not even a usernamed person. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.230|172.70.85.230]] 20:28, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

== Unable to edit ==
For the last two months, I was unable to make any edits. Is my account secretly locked? Also, I couldn't even post tweets. Did I offend you? [[User:ConlangGuide|ConlangGuide]] ([[User talk:ConlangGuide|talk]]) 23:38, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

:Also, I tried to post on ClassicalGames's talk page but it was messy. [[User:ConlangGuide|ConlangGuide]] ([[User talk:ConlangGuide|talk]]) 23:43, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

== cannot create user page ==

Like all the other instances of this, it just says "There is currently no text in this page. You can search for this page title in other pages, or search the related logs, but you do not have permission to create this page." At least it isn't just me [[User:SomeoneIGuess|someone, i guess]] ([[User talk:SomeoneIGuess|talk]]) 16:43, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

: Created your user and talk page with placeholder text (".") -- [[User:Dtgriscom|Dtgriscom]] ([[User talk:Dtgriscom|talk]]) 19:20, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

:: much thanks! now to wait until i can make my own custom css page [[User:SomeoneIGuess|someone, i guess]] ([[User talk:SomeoneIGuess|talk]]) 19:38, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

:I didn't want to create yet another discussion topic for the same issue, so I put it here. Could someone create my user page as well? Thanks. [[User:Obwankenobi|Obwankenobi]] ([[User talk:Obwankenobi|talk]]) 20:14, 9 February 2024 (UTC)

=== Same here. ===

I'm almost glad I'm not the only one with this issue with the user and talk page. I was kind of asking myself what I've done not to be permitted a user page, you know. I remember trying to create one once upon a time, which included a link to my own webcomic. It didn't save for some reason and after that I wasn't permitted to create a user page. So if a link to your own hobbyist scribblings is considered illicit advertising, please let me know in order to avoid misunderstandings. [[User:PaulEberhardt|PaulEberhardt]] ([[User talk:PaulEberhardt|talk]]) 14:54, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
:With a dozen edits (up to and including the above), and a decent amount of time, I'd have expected you to be over the nominal threshold to give you the right to create your pages.
:(I'm not entirely sure what the criteria are, off the top of my head, though I know it's been discussed elsewhere. And if I were configuring it, I'd not put too much weight on "the number of edits" or "the net amount of added bytes"/whatever, as it could encourage pointless editing-for-the-sake-of-editing, rather than relying upon 'time served' to weed out those who are in a rush to create havoc... but there's arguments to make it a combination of criteria. And it's not up to me, anyway..!)
:Firstly, have you tried again recently, like right now? If you have, and it still won't 'take', or even let you get that far, then there's plenty of longer-term/higher-intensity users that ''might'' look kindly upon your participation and answer your plight. But do try again.
:And I'd say that (within reason, like avoid linking to anywhere dodgy or uploading masses of total junk) you're free to make your User page into anything you want. I'm pretty sure you aren't going to want to cross any 'line' (official or otherwise), so all the best. And bumping your request. (Also slightly sub-headering, because it is rather a reply to the above header. I might just have added an indented reply straight off, but... again... it's not really for the likes of me to say, so I'm only tweaking it, not merging it in.) [[Special:Contributions/162.158.38.71|162.158.38.71]] 20:57, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

::Cheers for the info, and for the tweak! I didn't know how to make sub-headings (yes, I'm that wiki-illiterate - lol), or I'd have done it myself. Possibly I'm just not over this mysterious threshold, being a somewhat irregular visitor with a slight penchant for bad puns, but I certainly do intend to make contributions that actually contribute to something whenever I can (btw. my own webcomic, actually two webcomics by now, are both All Ages and hosted on a well-known webcomic community site, so it's certainly nothing dodgy from my point of view). I don't want to make a fuss about it all, either. If nothing works after a year or so, I'll just start over with a new account or something and see what happens. [[User:PaulEberhardt|PaulEberhardt]] ([[User talk:PaulEberhardt|talk]]) 18:24, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

== Small css-related changes to two templates ==

I've explained what changes I want made in the talk pages for [[Template:Comic]] and [[Template:Comic discussion]] already, but I think I might need to mention them here too. Changing the templates shouldn't cause any adverse effects, and allow for more versatility for users who create their own CSS. [[User:SomeoneIGuess|someone, i guess]]([[User talk:SomeoneIGuess|talk i guess]]|[[Special:Contributions/SomeoneIGuess|le edit list]])

: You should sign your comments with "-- ~~~~", which will insert your username. And, there's a very low chance that anyone with the power to change the CSS to wander by; we've been on our own for a while. -- [[User:Dtgriscom|Dtgriscom]] ([[User talk:Dtgriscom|talk]]) 22:01, 20 October 2023 (UTC)

: Added the class names. —[[User:Theusaf|theusaf]] ([[User talk:Theusaf|talk]]) 15:39, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

:: THANK YOU!!! The face of pure shock and excitement i felt when seeing this was beyond my wildest dreams ˶ᵔ ᵕ ᵔ˶ [[User:SomeoneIGuess|someone, i guess]]([[User talk:SomeoneIGuess|talk i guess]]|[[Special:Contributions/SomeoneIGuess|le edit list]]) 15:46, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

== Math Module breaks all pages with it ==

[[2070]] and [[2034]] appear to be broken for some reason. They wont load at all with the following reason:

<code>
MediaWiki internal error.

Original exception: [ZUPRak3GkbeSokPCcKIp8AAAAJI] 2023-11-02 16:42:18: Fatal exception of type "MWException"

Exception caught inside exception handler.

Set $wgShowExceptionDetails = true; at the bottom of LocalSettings.php to show detailed debugging information.</code>

[[User:SomeoneIGuess|someone, i guess]]([[User talk:SomeoneIGuess|talk i guess]]|[[Special:Contributions/SomeoneIGuess|le edit list]]) 16:42, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
:: [[2295]] also broken. Must be related to the Math module. [[User:SomeoneIGuess|someone, i guess]]([[User talk:SomeoneIGuess|talk i guess]]|[[Special:Contributions/SomeoneIGuess|le edit list]]) 16:44, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
:: Full list of broken pages:
::* [[128: dPain over dt]]
::* [[687: Dimensional Analysis]]
::* [[849: Complex Conjugate]]
::* [[899: Number Line]]
::* [[969: Delta-P]]
::* [[1047: Approximations]]
::* [[2028: Complex Numbers]]
::* [[2034: Equations]]
::* [[2048: Curve-Fitting]]
::* [[2059: Modified Bayes' Theorem]]
::* [[2070: Trig Identities]]
::* [[2117: Differentiation and Integration]]
::* [[2295: Garbage Math]]
::* Possibly more [[User:SomeoneIGuess|someone, i guess]]([[User talk:SomeoneIGuess|talk i guess]]|[[Special:Contributions/SomeoneIGuess|le edit list]]) 00:14, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
:::On further analysis, it seems to be related to the MathML setting. [[User:SomeoneIGuess|someone, i guess]]([[User talk:SomeoneIGuess|talk i guess]]|[[Special:Contributions/SomeoneIGuess|le edit list]]) 19:23, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

== Way to contact the site hosters? ==

I have tried posting at Jeff's talk page to no avail. Maybe yáll admins have a red phone hotline to Jeff? See reasons at [[explain xkcd:Community portal/Technical#Way to contact the site hosters?]]. [[User:Aaron Liu|Aaron Liu]] ([[User talk:Aaron Liu|talk]]) 01:34, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

== Escape speed is no longer incomplete ==

Can you delete the text at the top of every page except the main page that says ''"We still need to complete some explanations like this one: 2765: Escape Speed. All incomplete explanations are here."''? Escape speed is no longer incomplete, so that is wrong.[[User:B_for_brain|B for brain]] ([[User_talk:B_for_brain|talk]]) ([https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCg4bo-hj-mDyOOUp_Yp0pug youtube channel] [https://bforbrain.weebly.com/ wobsite (supposed to be a blag)] 14:03, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

This keeps happening with other comics too [[User:Moderator|Moderator]] ([[User talk:Moderator|talk]]) 21:44, 18 April 2024 (UTC)

== Vandal Issue ==

we've got vandals all over [[2875: 2024]], and they're getting persistent [[User:SomeoneIGuess|someone, i guess]]([[User talk:SomeoneIGuess|talk i guess]]|[[Special:Contributions/SomeoneIGuess|le edit list]]) 16:50, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
:At least one vandalism per minute. Even with Someoene and I both reverting, it's showing the racist message most of the time. Can Explainxkcd protect a page? [[User:Nitpicking|Nitpicking]] ([[User talk:Nitpicking|talk]]) 17:54, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
::Deleting the vandal's ignorant... let's call it "self-defense" to be generous. What exactly is supposed to be "not racist" about a derogatory term for black men - which features prominently in the edit summaries is left as an exercise for the reader. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.146.181|162.158.146.181]] 18:35, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
:Preferably also rev-del the revisions and summaries. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.71.13|172.69.71.13]] 18:40, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

== XKCD Browser ==

I made a [https://github.com/kristianbenoit/XKCD XKCD browser] in python with pygame and think it could be useful to others. The idea was to popup a comic the morning after it was published from a crontab. There could be a hotkey to point to todays discussion on explainxkcd. I wonder where/how would be the place to advertise it ? [[User:Kbenoit|Kbenoit]] ([[User talk:Kbenoit|talk]]) 15:36-40, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
:Here's a good start. Perhaps on the comic discussions for similar things ([https://uni.xkcd.com/ unixkcd], etc). As and when you get a User page here then you can perhaps expound on it there (assuning you aren't leaving the explanation to the github webspace. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.178.172|172.71.178.172]] 16:01, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
::You (other IP, in the 160s.*) meant well, but [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=explain_xkcd:Community_portal/Admin_requests&diff=prev&oldid=335412 the person who linked my text] was not me and that link isn't directly useful for K's purpose. Maybe indeed I should have pointed at [[UniXKCD]], or [[Talk:UniXKCD]], but I wasn't sure that was even the best place on here. Look around the [[:Category:Interactive comics]], and/or ones featuring browsers lrominently, maybe.
::I repeat that you (Kristian, with our help at bumping the contribution here) have already now made it known/knowable, at least to those who browse this site widely, but once you get a Userspace page you can perhaps do a little bit more in your own free space and also push people there through subtle pointers or signature-links in further on-context contributions. This isn't really a place for random advertising, but definitely contextual links to offsite xkcd 'fandom' is not something I'd personally have issues with (certainly compared to some other things that might get snuck on here). [[Special:Contributions/172.70.91.62|172.70.91.62]] 13:43, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

== Vandalism-related Ban Request ==

Hey, if any of the admins see this, can you please ban Jupitale? They’ve made 11 vandalism-related edits, within the time frame of about 21 hours. Even though they haven’t ben active since February 28, I feel like it’s better to err on the more cautious side. Thanks! ^_^ [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 01:09, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
:It'd be even more cautious not to [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=User:Ash123&action=history create userpages] for a user that [https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:1211:_Birds_and_Dinosaurs&diff=prev&oldid=336532 was only here to spam us].. (Note to admins: add Ash123 to that todo list, if we're calling them out, and I know I've reverted some other single-spamming usernames recently.) But you just know that a ban for anyone like 'Jupitale' (as much as they'd deserve it) is going to be of no actual consequence to them.
:And hold off on all those other userpages, 42. It's not your job, and you might not be right about the usefulness of the ones you're (seemingly randomly) creating. Without even being asked. [[Special:Contributions/172.69.194.217|172.69.194.217]] 01:55, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

== Countdown ==

Can we please have an xkcd-like countdown on the top of every page for how many days left till the next april fool's comic? (Eg. today it would say "7 days untill the next april fool's comic!") [[User:B_for_brain|B for brain]] ([[User_talk:B_for_brain|talk]]) ([https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCg4bo-hj-mDyOOUp_Yp0pug youtube channel] [https://bforbrain.weebly.com/ wobsite (supposed to be a blag)] 10:26, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
:What certainty is there that there'll be one? If/when get the April Fool, or past it, do we reset for the next, or start counting down to the next hypothetical New Year, Christmas, Halloween comic or "Two/Seven/Ten Years" reanniversary? We need to know a few more details to the idea.
:And I presume you meant "a countdown in a suitably xkcx-ish manner, as there have been countdowns for books/etc but not a consistent approach, just some wide ranging but apt creative teasers [[Special:Contributions/172.69.194.225|172.69.194.225]] 11:32, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
:Shhhh, it's supposed to be a surprise! I mean, in my opinion, I'd rather want to see people caught off guard in the comments rather than warn them. [[User:Asdf|Asdf]] ([[User talk:Asdf|talk]]) 12:35, 25 March 2024 (UTC)

== Unblock request ==

Hello! I tried to sign up for an account a couple years ago, but I happened to sign up during a major vandal attack, and an admin blocked me based on a mistaken accusation of vandalism and sockpuppetry. I had used the account [[User:Danny E. Corchado]], then I used [[User:Danny Corchado]] to attempt to appeal my block shortly afterwards; both accounts are now blocked. I no longer have the password to the former, but I can log in to the latter account. Can someone please unblock [[User:Danny Corchado]]? If someone creates [[User talk:Danny Corchado]], I should be able to edit that page to prove I do control the account. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.151.21|172.71.151.21]] 02:26, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
:ill give you the benefit of doubt-done and done [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 04:19, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
::Really? You actually think this could work like that? Both(/'both'?) of you? I wondered why you (42) randomly created that user's page from (from 'your' perspective) the mists of time. Which doesn't help unblock anyone, there's not even any logic in that request. (Once unblocked, whoever controls the account can prove that ''they control the account''. But where does that lead anyone?)
::And why would you associate ''in any way'' with an account 'of no account' that was linked with vandalism? You can only be judged by your actions, as you can choose any name (within reason) that you want. "Mr Corchado" still has uncounted options left if he absolutely must post, in all good faith, as 'Dan Corchado' or similar. You've been here long enough (longer than your current username) to know all this. Sheesh... [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.77|172.70.85.77]] 11:03, 1 April 2024 (UTC)

== Adding images from 2916: Machine ==

I created most of the page for 2916: Machine, but do not have permissions to upload images to embed for each object/character, could someone either upload all the images I have linked on the page, or allow for me to upload the images? Thanks [[User:Claire Kholin|Claire Kholin]] ([[User talk:Claire Kholin|talk]]) 18:56, 6 April 2024 (UTC)

== Main Page Deletion ==

Hi. When I logged in today, I saw that the Main Page was deleted just 2 minutes before by Mark Hurd. If I remember correctly, he was confirmed to have passed on Wikipedia, and other Admins were talking about de-sysopping him. Can someone please explain this? Thanks, [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 15:44, 11 April 2024 (UTC)
:After Kynde restored the Main Page, he didn't protect it. Could someone please protect it so that trolls and vandals can't mess with it, like last time? Thanks. [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 00:18, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

== "Interesting" Account Creations ==

Hi. So I was looking at the user creation log, and I noticed a suspicious number of accounts-at least 90% of them-are being created using a <Semi-generic first name> <semi-generic last name> <usally two or three numbers>. This would be kinda weird in the first place, however, almost none of the accounts are active. That and the fact that these accounts are being created no less than 10 minutes from each other made me think somethings a little weird. Maybe I'm just dumb. Just wanted to bring it to your attention in case this wasn't a normal thing.[[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 17:17, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
I looked a bit further, the exact same thing happened two months ago as well, but the names were random letters instead [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 17:34, 15 April 2024 (UTC)
:It's been happening (in various forms) for years. Maybe a decade, if not more. For as long as I've been paying attention, certainly, which might well be that long.
:Without access to the whole admin logs, it seems to reflect the intention of 'bots to spam, spam and spam again, automatically, creating accounts they will use to do so but then hitting the actually rather effective anti-bot defenses, so they do absolutely nothing (well, maybe they're lucky every now and again, but practically insignificant successes, and IP-only spams seem to dominate, at maybe twice a week for who-knows-how-many wctual attempts).
:Amongst the current bunch randomly created names, I see a few that are clearly created around the word "Ingredients" (rather than a feedstock to create 'FirstnameLastname', which has long been the main default). I take it that each meta-pattern we see as indicative of a different bot-farmer's efforts, so this might have been started up for a particular spam-theme. Which maybe we'll get an idea of if it gets lucky. Though I'm in no hurry to find out such details. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.13|172.71.242.13]] 12:39, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Awesome, glad that its under control then :) [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 14:32, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
:Recently created a public-facing wiki and I can confirm these accounts are would-be spambots (they started spamming my wiki until I made it impossible to register an account without already having one). —Megan [[user talk:megan|talk]] [[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 09:07, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
::Not to question your decision on how to do this, but idly wondering how many people who already have an account would want to register a new one, and why... RPing with alts actively encouraged, and nobody new joining in? Sounds interesting, but I feel I've misunderstood somehow. (And solving the problem however you want to is your perogative.) [[Special:Contributions/172.69.195.123|172.69.195.123]] 10:35, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
:::It's a small wiki mostly for me and my friends; I was silly and thought nothing could go wrong if I left account creation wide open since the wiki isn't linked from anywhere . I guess it must have been someone scanning the IPv4 address space. I don't need anyone registering anymore unless I make new acquaintances/friends, in which case I'll make an account for them. —Megan [[user talk:megan|talk]] [[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 14:41, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

==Block request==

Can someone block 42.book.addict on my profile and vice versa? We're having issues and I wanna stop with them. 19:34, 29 April 2024 (UTC)

== Problem with email verification. ==

I'm not getting the verification email. I checked everywhere in my inboxes, and dodecatuple-checked the email address I provided. Can anything be done? Although I guess it doesn't seem to be strictly necessary. Thank you. [[User:Paintadot|Paintadot]] ([[User talk:Paintadot|talk]]) 17:10, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

== Reclaim user account "rosuav" ==

I tried to sign in to make a small edit to #2954, but I can't create an account with my standard user name "Rosuav" due to one already existing; yet there's apparently no email address on file for that username. Is there a way to prove that I am that person, and request that it be unlocked? I use the same name everywhere eg GitHub, Twitch, Discord, Twitter (if that's at all relevant any more), and am the owner of the rosuav.com domain as well. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.144.144|172.68.144.144]] 06:10, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
:My instinct is that it could be done, but won't be. Even demonstrably owning the domain (with provable history) doesn't really trump the rights of any person who may have equally logical reasons for having beaten you to choosing 'their' username here. Yes, it leaves the way open for malicious cybersquatting/cybergazumping (haven't checked the history of this interloper account, to see if it's been unused/abused in 'your' name), but otherwise it sets an awful precedent of claim and counterclaim.
:I think you might just have to accept that you'll need a (totally, or slightly) different username here. Or do without, as you and I currently are.
:...not wishing to speak for the 'admins' here, who may suggest otherwise, but fairly safe in thinking that the hoops needed to be jumped through to 'correct' things in the fairest way are too untrivial, compared to the relative importance of task and any vital need. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.163.120|172.70.163.120]] 11:56, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

::Are the admins able to rename accounts? [[Special:Contributions/172.71.147.86|172.71.147.86]] 12:46, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

:::I think I've seen it done, maybe once, definitely a long time ago, unless I'm thinking of a completely different wiki(-like) server. But for totally different reasons than shuffling usernames in and out of use (in ways that didn't involve just account deletion, which is the clearer 'first step' that could possibly be justified).
:::Think about it, there's potentially a completely separate existing 'owner' of the contentious username. There's no pre-existing presumption that "<n> years of idleness" ever makes an identity forfeit, certainly not explicitly stated. Unlike various other login-mediated services, there's no real 'private space' to argue over ownership (and legitimate access) for, which saves some problems but then renders moot various possible reasons for making exceptional admin-changes.
:::For any purpose that mattersz it doesn't matter if you sign up as <code>JoeBloggs</code> or <code>Joe Bloggs</code> or <code>The Real Joe Bloggs</code> or <code>JoeyBloggs2008</code> or <code>JB003½</code> or <code>The Name's Bloggs, Joe Bloggs. Licenced To Kill, And Drive A Heavy Goods Vehicle</code>. Look at the [[Special:Log/newusers]], and see how meaningless any given username is, and not worth directly contesting in this sort of circumstance.
:::This is just my observation. I'd defer to any actual Admin who might have a more refined opinion (possibly quite different), Or actual community decisions, by ''named users'', that firmly suggested otherwise. But it looks like there's only three/four of us IPs who have anything to say on the matter. Or it's just me, pointlessly arguing with myself. ;) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.242.60|172.71.242.60]] 14:44, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

== [[Category;Comics featuring real people]] ==

Can someone please delete this? It's obnoxiously showing up as an autocompletion whenever I'm about to search for categories (i.e. when I type "Category" into the search bar, it shows up). It's a main-space article and a cross-namespace redirect. It was probably created as an accident based on the fact that the person who created it soon redirected it to the correct name. It is not linked from any page except this one. —megan [[user talk:megan|talk]]/[[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 00:26, 14 July 2024 (UTC)

== Removal of administrator permission for [[User:Markhurd|Markhurd]] ==

''Note that this request requires a bureaucrat, but for almost a year neither of our two bureaucrats have been active.''

[[User:Markhurd|Markhurd]] ([[User talk:Markhurd|talk]]) ([[Special:Contribs/Markhurd|contribs]]) has been inactive since 2016 and is blocked because he has passed on. Yet his account still has administrator privileges which may be dangerous, since blocked administrators can still perform certain actions (e.g. blocking the administrator that blocked them). Thus, the account should have its administrator privileges removed. —megan [[user talk:megan|talk]]/[[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 05:56, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

Actually, on this wiki, per [[Special:ListGroupRights]], administrators have the <code>unblockself</code> user right, allowing them to unblock themselves. So blocking an administrator doesn't really do anything at all. —megan [[user talk:megan|talk]]/[[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 06:05, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

== The crapper is back ==

And eir username is [[User:💩💩💩💩💩]]. [[User:AndroidTheLucario|Your favorite aura doggo]] ([[User talk:AndroidTheLucario|talk]]) 13:41, 16 July 2024 (UTC)
:Looking through the search archives, I see now. Maybe it's the person I had a brief revert skirmish with on 11 March 2023. Seems like that account stopped vandalizing a while ago, though their vandalism of a highly transcluded template makes me worried. —Megan [[user talk:megan|talk]] [[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 10:06, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
::Never rule out copycats, who did a bit of basic research. Or who were around the two or three times that this particular pattern occured, before, perhaps they weren't bored enough to join in then, or suddenly their hormones kicked in and they decided now was the time to rebel. Motives aren't easy to establish, beyond "because I can" and some strange urge to act out. For a number of minor reasons, that I'll not go fully into (because explaining would take more time than I place value on their actual correctness), I don't think it was "the crapper" seriously trying to revive their art.
::One other (broad) guess I have is that it's just a 'tagging' exercise/dare concocted by the off-site group from whom the original came, to have a new member fulfil initiation. I'm all but certain that certain lessons learnt by the original individual(s) weren't remembered, yet the choice of blindingly obvious emoji-username does seem like a relatively 'new' thought, so probably a different mind behind the implementation.
::Maybe they've even now got a sweepstake on how long it takes for the offending username to be banned? (Really should have been, already, though it doesn't matter in the long run if/when...) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.19|172.70.85.19]] 11:05, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
New crapper: [[Special:Contribs/The crapper is back]]. For some reason these users aren't really doing much - they seem to edit a bit and then back off. —megan [[user talk:megan|talk]] [[special:contribs/megan|contribs]] 05:46, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
:Interesting to note that the crapper reappears at very close to the point in time that a number of CGs become active, by the way. Which is absolutely not the first time they both coincide (sometimes 'helping de-crap').
:Also CG accounts have a nasty habit of reverting an error recently added by (usually) an IP, and, if they can't find enough actual useful typos to correct (the spate of searching for rogue "the the"s was actually mostly useful and correct, but didn't take enough care about it). Also, CGs tend to revert any things that even ''suggest the CGs are linked'' as if to try to erase that idea from everyone's memory, rather than laugh it off or ignore it or say "yeah, and..? ...your problem is?" and I rather expect that this comment will get the same treatment. Which doesn't link 'them' to the crapper, but does become rather tedious in its own right. So perhaps 'they' should take the hint to stop that. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.160.249|172.70.160.249]] 10:44, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
:Addendum, an IP (other than me, obviously) has reverted CG's genuine (or at least correct) "the the"-like corrections several more times than the one that you (Megan) did. I re-reverted them. So that nobody else needs to. Nobody. (It could also be a game being played, or some weird steganographic alteration, but I'm defering back to just being 'helpful' but careless behaviour on behalf of a genuinely non-CG and otherwise CG-unaffiliated IP address.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.163.121|172.70.163.121]] 11:07, 22 July 2024 (UTC)

==Ba'al the Soul Eater==
Hi, so I didnt know wether this should go on admin requests or feature suggestions, so i put it here. I think Ba'al the Soul Eater needs a character category (and I dont know how to make one). They've been in more comics than many named other characters, droptablestudents is one example, and yet they dont have a character page. [[User:Apollo11|Apollo11]] ([[User talk:Apollo11|talk]]) 16:52, 12 September 2024 (UTC)

==Ban all the Chinese users==
I REALLY CAN'T BELIEVE I'M SO ANGRY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
THE CHINESE USERS ARE SO ANNOYING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
GET THEM ALL BANNED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
[[User:World's most angry sinophobe|World's most angry sinophobe]] ([[User talk:World's most angry sinophobe|talk]]) 13:51, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
:Not helpful. Probably not serious. If serious, definitely not justifiable.
:Either a bad joke, a bad attitude or both, IMO. [[Special:Contributions/172.71.26.55|172.71.26.55]] 14:52, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
:What's more, if we ban them, then we'll receive less money from Chinese users if Explain XKCD gets sued due to copyright. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.85.63|172.70.85.63]] 22:36, 29 September 2024 (UTC)
::What, what and what? (In that order, if you prefer.) [[Special:Contributions/172.70.58.30|172.70.58.30]] 23:09, 29 September 2024 (UTC)

== Some IP editor keeps erasing my user pages. ==

The same happened with 42.book.addict earlier. Please send help. [[User:CalibansCreations|'''Caliban''']] ([[User talk:CalibansCreations|talk]]) 16:05, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
:I’ve come to accept that vandals will be vandals and trolls will be trolls. Honestly, if an admin protects your page, then they’ll just go to another user’s page. There’s not much that we can do, since they’re an IP. Just revert and move on, until you see it again. We do have strength in numbers, so there shouldn’t be much interference other than annoyance. [[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]] ([[User talk:42.book.addict|talk]]) 16:12, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

== Adminship Needed ==

Hi all, it's [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]] here. I forgot my password, and my email confirmation isn't working. I'm not able to recover my account, and I need my adminship rights back. Could someone please help me out? Thank you! [[User:Davidy21|Davidy21]] ([[User talk:Davidy21|talk]]) 02:38, 15 November 2024 (UTC)
:Pull the other one. It's got bells on it. (I'd say "nice try", but it really wasn't.) [[Special:Contributions/172.71.26.106|172.71.26.106]] 04:06, 15 November 2024 (UTC)

== Hide the red and green numbers ==

I recently found that my talk page has been spammed. The red and green numbers in the history page are really offending. Please hide the numbers if possible. I know that admins can hide titles, edit summaries and usernames, but I don't know whether they can hide numbers. [[User:ChristmasGospel|ChristmasGospel]] ([[User talk:ChristmasGospel|talk]]) 19:40, 29 November 2024 (UTC)
:As gone into length after your similar request in TheusafBOT's Talk page, for all kinds of reasons I predict that this will not happen. Yes, they could ''perhaps'' hide the edits (vandalisms and the autoreversions), but not the numbers. And the justification to upend the edit histories for anything this trivial (I'm not convinced it isn't!) is severely lacking. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.86.130|172.70.86.130]] 20:40, 29 November 2024 (UTC)

== RSS Feed Broken ==

The RSS feed has been broken since xkcd 3015, I believe due to the ampersand in the comic title.

XML Parsing Error: not well-formed
Location: https://explainxkcd.com/rss.xml
Line Number 71, Column 18:
<title>3015: D&D Combinatorics</title>

I assume this requires an admin's intervention, so I'm posting it here even though it's also more directly a technical issue. There are a couple recent posts about it there as well.[[User:Tolozen|Tolozen]] ([[User talk:Tolozen|talk]]) 00:08, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
:I will email [[User:Davidy22]] and send a message to [[User:Theusaf]] '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 16:07, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
::I'm unsure if I can do anything about this, since `/rss.xml` is likely controlled by software external to the wiki, which I do not have access to. The title of the comic might need to be changed as a workaround for this issue --[[User:Theusaf|theusaf]] ([[User talk:Theusaf|talk]]) 00:46, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
:::I have emailed [[User:Davidy22|Davidy22]], here’s what he had to say: '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 18:06, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
:::{{quote|My server login doesn't work. I actually wrote the RSS script, would be able to figure it out if I can get jeff to respond to me}}
:::Additionally, I have emailed [[User:Jeff|Jeff]] about this issue. '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 18:06, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

== Vandalizing user ==

[[User:KikeUNTERMENSCH]], as one might guess from his name, has done nothing but vandalize templates, sometimes to post racist comments on the main page and other times to post pictures of a dead goat. Please block him. Thanks! --[[Special:Contributions/172.68.54.209|172.68.54.209]] 04:43, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
:copied this request to [[User talk:Kynde|Kynde's]] talk page, as he is more likely to respond to that page. '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 05:28, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

== Vandalism ==

Hello, there is vandalism here.

https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Template:reflist&action=history
{{unsigned ip|162.158.10.130|05:03, 19 December 2024}}
:Noting that this has been sorted, already. But there seems to be a "change comic-info" IP vandal and a "derogatory username vandal" (probably the same moron, switching tactics) that has been operating in the short time before the above report. Mostly dealt with (automatically and with manual assistance) but I'll mop up any other instances that I see.
:Obviously, the DUV instance needs blocking, at least so we get to see a completely different idiotic username next time they decide that their next net contribution to the world is going to be just as futile. [[Special:Contributions/172.70.90.119|172.70.90.119]] 12:28, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
::I would recommend sending Kynde a message on his talk page, as he checks that more often than this. '''[[User:42.book.addict|42.book.addict]][[User talk:42.book.addict|Talk to me!]]''' 17:55, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
:::Note that it has been sorted (by Kynde), by the time you made this suggestion.
:::Also, while it's trivially true that an appeal direct to Kynde may currently produce the (joint-?)quickest response time, that may be less true if there are other admins around and checking their own pages (and this) somewhat more directly than those of their brethren/sistren/othren amongst the admins.
:::In the current reality, it probably doesn't matter much at all. Practically any obvious 'note', in any namespace at all, will get probably a near identical response. And, in that circumstance, perhaps best to uphold the expectation that someone, who doesn't know exactly ''who'' to go to, might find the Admin Requests page the most logical destination. If only because future editors might learn more about past reports than having to stumble over whatever might have been posted to who-knows-who's userpages as were suitable for the time.
:::...it ''might'' be good to have a bit of a clean-out (cut'n'paste things into an archival page, at Admins' discretion only) to leave only current/long-standing 'needs'. But that's a job-and-a-half! [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.70|141.101.99.70]] 18:22, 19 December 2024 (UTC)