User talk:Inter/Archive2022/April

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Inter. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

New administrator activity requirement

The administrator policy has been updated with new activity requirements following a successful Request for Comment.

Beginning January 1, 2023, administrators who meet one or both of the following criteria may be desysopped for inactivity if they have:

1. Made neither edits nor administrative actions for at least a 12-month period OR
2. Made fewer than 100 edits over a 60-month period

Administrators at risk for being desysopped under these criteria will continue to be notified ahead of time. Thank you for your continued work.

22:52, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Carletteyt

I wouldn't even bother with a final warning, they've already been given three. At this point nothing short of an indef would be appropriate. CUPIDICAE💕 11:55, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

@Praxidicae Sadly that may be the case. Looking over their history, it does seem they are editing in good faith, it's just they do not seem to be willing to learn from feedback. Oz\^InterAct 12:06, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

AIV report you declined

I blocked 1.46.146.12 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) for two weeks, your decline notwithstanding, because it had been indicated to be the latest incarnation of the Thai gun hoaxster, as indicated in the report (I know, it was subtle; I have made similar mistakes myself in the past and probably will in the future).

A lot of times these LTA socks look like they were reported too quickly. Remember in the future to read the report carefully before reaching a conclusion. Daniel Case (talk) 17:39, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

@Daniel Case Got it! Oz\^InterAct 17:45, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

OK, good. I also blocked Dracevec indefinitely as NOTHERE. You had declined the report on the grounds that the edits were infrequent, and indeed they were, but his talk page showed, as the reporting editor noted, several instances of level 4/final warnings in the last couple of days, and his overall history showed that he was here to push a nationalist POV. Daniel Case (talk) 17:47, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

@Daniel Case Thanks for letting me know, I'll add it to the experience bucket. Oz\^InterAct 17:51, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

2604:3d09:a784:3d00:f988:609:c4df:5a19

Hello, thanks for blocking this address, but for IPV6 addresses like that one, please just block the /64. See the relevant block log. Also in this case there was other similar editing by other Canadian IP's in the page history. Graham87 14:57, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

Also see a similar thread I recently started on Daniel Case's talk page. Graham87 15:00, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

@Graham87 It seems to me this is a bit of a contested action, ref linked thread. I don`t mind blocking /64 if it`s more likely to keep disruption out, however if doing a longer block I could see blocking a range could be an issue. Oz\^InterAct 16:33, 19 April 2022 (UTC)

As it says at the linked page and thread, a /64 is usually owned by one connection/person. They usually get re-assigned every year or so, but it can be longer or shorter; a Six-month/one-year block on a /64 is almost always safe. Graham87 06:47, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Regarding WikiFlame50

I didn't mean that I thought it was an issue, it just seems to be how they usually respond, to blank it and respond in the edit summary. They do respond promptly. Maybe just some guidance on how to use their talkpage effectively and tips on how to archive stuff would go a lot further? I'm just not sure that they need to be blocked at this point. Nobody seems to have really raised the issue with them previously. Just my 50c from the peanut gallery. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 14:02, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

@Mako001Ah I see. I misunderstood you then. As leniency is as ever my policy I have unblocked the editor on grounds of my misunderstanding. Oz\^InterAct 14:08, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, it was likely my fault really, as I have a way of writing which is easily misunderstood. I'm working on improving that. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 14:23, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

ANI+pblock situation that you handled has resumed

The Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#5644Khorasani pblock has expired and the editor has resumed trying to force their edit through on the target page, while refusing to participate in the content discussion about it. I don't have time to do anything admin about it at the moment. But figured I'd ping you since it was your pblock and subsequent closure of the ANI thread. DMacks (talk) 15:29, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

@DMacksThanks for the heads up. Oz\^InterAct 15:57, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you very much for blocking that Nazi! It's really a relief to see that people actually care and will speedily respond. 𝕸𝖗 𝕽𝖊𝖆𝖉𝖎𝖓𝖌 𝕿𝖚𝖗𝖙𝖑𝖊 🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦 (talk) 18:49, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Longer term block

Hi, thanks for the block on 209.91.198.48 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). Looking at their contributions it looks like they've been doing this for *years*. See this edit for example. I would've added this to the original AIV report but I only noticed it afterwards. The IP was blocked for 31 hours in October 2020 and I don't see any other meaningful contributions, would a more longer term block be in order here? FozzieHey (talk) 19:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

@FozzieHeyThanks for noticing. I see the previous block was 31 hours so I have increased the block duration. Oz\^InterAct 19:13, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! FozzieHey (talk) 19:16, 29 April 2022 (UTC)