User talk:HJ Mitchell

Admins: If one of my admin actions is clearly a mistake or is actively harming the encyclopaedia, please reverse it. Don't wait for me if I'm not around or the case is obvious.

This talk page is archived regularly by a bot so I can focus on the freshest discussions. If your thread was archived but you had more to say, feel free to rescue it from the archive.

Another, will probably lead to more, [1] v/r - Seawolf35 ^T--C 05:50, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Seawolf35 as far as I can tell, that one is isolated (which is unusual) but the ranges they're on are vast. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:26, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi HJ, please RevDel this for obvious reasons. Nobody (talk) 13:52, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@1AmNobody24 because somebody hates me? Not really grossly offensive. If anything, I take it as a compliment! ;) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:55, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen similar ones deleted so I dropped a notice, but I'm fine with it either way. Nobody (talk) 14:00, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, been looking at User:2600:1700:4006:B000:A5D0:D5FC:D17F:FD51, and I think you might have banned him unjustly. Not great edits, but definitely not vandalism. JackTheSecond (talk) 21:55, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi.
I saw you were the last of 3 admins to block this range (72.138.0.0/16) as a school block on the 12th of April of last year (expired recently). Is this still a school IP? I was looking at some IPs from the range, and honestly there's already been quite a few vandal edits in the last ~5 days since the block has expired.
I also found this appeal on the day it expired, where @Yamla says there is sockpuppetry involved: 1218609548). Just thought I should inform you of all this. – 143.208.237.220 (talk) 02:07, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also 6 blocks on IPs in the range in the last 3 days:

72.138.79.170, 72.138.168.106,

72.138.79.10, 72.138.179.154,

72.138.65.26, 72.138.132.102.

– 143.208.237.220 (talk) 02:30, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've put a long-term soft block on that /16. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:53, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What area is the target of this partial block? I don't see any defined parameters.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What a fail on my part: this is the block I'm talking about.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:01, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ponyo it just means you can't create an account from that range. If you're asking because you want to do something else with the block, feel free! :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:10, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The range is being a total PITA today. Ugh.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:18, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know right! They were creating ... unhelpful accounts earlier (hence the block). There's way too much collateral for a hard block but if you wanted to make it anon only/account creation blocked for a little while feel free. We can always put the partial block back later. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:23, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to have tapered off, so I'll leave everything as is for now. That way I don't have to remember to reinstate the partial block.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 19:32, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've been dealing with vandalism for a while, such as warning editors, sometimes reverting edits, and checking the abuse log, and have even made some reports to AIV which were responded to by a block. I'm curious what my chances of passing an RfA are. Faster than Thunder (talk | contributions) 14:23, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page stalker) Hello @Faster than Thunder! I am not an admin, but I doubt that you would pass RfA. Many RfA voters are looking for candidates with 10k+ edits, and you have less than 2000, most of which are semi-automated. Also, what would you use the tools for? —asparagusus (interaction) ^sprouts! 14:39, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]