User talk:Ad Orientem

  1. Home
  2. Wiki


Rubbaband Mang redux

[edit]

You blocked the range 216.208.243.0/24 (block range · block log (global) · WHOIS (partial)) in October for being a sock of Rubbaband Mang/47.54.219.33. I need to tell you that they are active on that range again. wizzito | say hello! 15:02, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Wizzito Blocked x 1 year. That range is being used as a proxy. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:10, 16 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What is making mobile connections get flagged as proxies lately? wizzito | say hello! 00:19, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Wizzito If you click on an IP's contrib log, at the top of the page there is a collapsed section entitled "IP Information." If you click on it, it expands and has information identifying any known proxies that use the IP. It's not infallible. I've run across some that the IP Info did not detect. But it's accurate as far as it goes. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:44, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:82.132.192.0/18

[edit]

Hello.

My friend recently told me that he got IP banned by you years back for no reason. I checked it out, and I don't really know what to say. I'm very confused by this ban, as the IP has quite literally zero contributions, but that's not exactly the main point.

However, even more confusingly, my friend quite literally doesn't even live here (also has absolutely never been to Slough) and has a far different IP, but it seems that this specific ban affects him for whatever reason? I'm wondering if you have any sort of explanation for this, and if not, at least anything that can be done about this? Setergh (talk) 14:12, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Making a named account would solve the concern rather quickly. I'm getting somewhere near the point of advocating for no IP edits, especially since there is a plan to hide all IP addresses from histories. Randy Kryn (talk) 14:28, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nevermind, issue mainly solved, turns out my friend is only restricted on phone but not on PC. I checked the IP, I think it's something to do with telecommunications, which might mean a range of IPs/phones were affected by it. Setergh (talk) 14:42, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Good news. Happy editing. -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:44, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Setergh I can't answer your question with any specifics as I have no idea what the IP in question is. I can only suggest that you please check the block log for the IP and see if it is a rangeblock, and what the cited reason for the block is. Unfortunately, it is often necessary to block multiple IP addresses due to pervasive disruption within a given range. Regrettably this sometimes results in inconveniencing good faith contributors. I would also second Randy Kryn's above suggestion. The easiest way to avoid problems associated with editing anonymously, is register for a WP:ACCOUNT. It's easy and free. Best regards... -Ad Orientem (talk) 14:40, 17 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Large range block

[edit]

Hi, Ad Orientem. You have blocked the IPv6 range 2a00:1fa3::/32 for 6 months, with talk page editing disabled. However, as far as I can see, all of the relevant vandalism has come from the much smaller range 2A00:1fa3:400::/38. Since a /32 range is a really huge range to block for so long, especially without talk page access, I think we should reduce it to the /38. The only vandalism I have found in the corresponding /36 range but outside the /38 this year is this single edit, and I see no reason to think that wasn't just a one-off edit from someone else, so it doesn't seem that anything wider than /38 is needed. In fact even less than that might be enough: two blocks, on 2A00:1FA3:500::/40 and 2A00:1FA3:600::/40, seem to cover it all. Your message above about travelling has emboldened me to go ahead and replace your block by one on 2A00:1fa3:400::/38 without consulting you first, but please let me know if you know of a good reason for a wider block that I haven't seen. JBW (talk) 15:47, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@JBW Thank you. No issues with your block adjustment. -Ad Orientem (talk) 22:41, 20 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nationalistic nuisance editor

[edit]

Hi, Ad Orientam. If you could suspend or block 'Zdyhan', it would be appreciated – this user has been going to location articles in order to add Polish names that have never been significant there (only Polish ones), and deleting the historical German names from Polish places – again, only the German ones, I believe (eastern Germany was much larger before). It may be possible to have nuanced arguments about this, but the edits (and edit summaries) clearly breach MOS:ALTNAME, and Wikipedia just can't be having such shameless POV editing. Thanks – 1RightSider (talk) 05:35, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@1RightSider I've left a note om their talk page. -Ad Orientem (talk) 23:23, 26 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. @1RightSider I think you are on safe ground if you want to revert these changes. -Ad Orientem (talk) 05:08, 27 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ITN recognition for Phil Robertson

[edit]

On 29 May 2025, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Phil Robertson, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page. Schwede66 01:55, 29 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]