User talk:2A00:23C6:1A04:FF01:50BB:430D:9C89:17F0

October 2021
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Nadine Dorries have been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 13:40, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * For help, take a look at the introduction.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this message: Nadine Dorries was changed by 2A00:23C6:1A04:FF01:50BB:430D:9C89:17F0 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.955045 on 2021-10-03T13:40:25+00:00

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Nadine Dorries. Your edits appear to be vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Serols (talk) 13:41, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Nadine Dorries, you may be blocked from editing. Serols (talk) 13:45, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Serols (talk) 13:47, 3 October 2021 (UTC)

Talking about my "obnoxious behavior" makes it sound like the long length of the block is there as punishment, which is not the purpose of blocks according to the blocking policy. 2A00:23C6:1A04:FF01:50BB:430D:9C89:17F0 (talk) 14:16, 3 October 2021 (UTC)


 * For convenience of keeping a conversation in one place, for ease of reference, I am copying the following message from User talk:2A00:23C6:1A04:FF01:A588:AF7D:8077:9F6C to here, and I shall answer it here. I suggest getting a user account, as that would avoid such communication difficulties. JBW (talk) 10:00, 5 October 2021 (UTC)


 * JBW Regarding your comments here, I thought I'd explain my reason for wanting the block shortened (though I do not believe it is reasonable for me to ask or believe that the block will be immediately lifted). The block is a range block, which thus means it likely affects more people than just me, which does make me feel guilty that my actions resulted in this and thus I apologize for the vandalism I committed. I realize such a long block should not have been necessary to make me realize that. I also would like to commit to not intentionally disrupting Wikipedia articles again, particularly in the form of replacing articles with satire. In your comments you mentioned I gave no indication that my future editing wouldn't be disruptive. While I can see why you think that, I would like to point out that in the unblock requests, I asked the block to be shortened, but not lifted. I would though like to give more indication that I won't vandalize again. So I will not vandalize again because I have no intention of causing harm to potential Wikipedia editors by effectively getting them blocked through no fault of their own. I would also like to note that vandalizing again would only result in a longer block for me, so there is no real benefit for me to vandalize for my own amusement. 2A00:23C6:1A04:FF01:A588:AF7D:8077:9F6C (talk) 23:08, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Firstly, the risk of collateral damage to other people wishing to edit is probably far lower than you think, unless you know a bit about how ISPs allocate IP version 6 addresses. However, moving on from there,, this latest post from the editor, unlike the unblock requests, does give an indication of accepting that previous editing was unacceptable, and an undertaking not to continue in the same way. I am therefore willing to unblock, on the basis that any return to unacceptable editing will result in a longer block. Do you wish to express any opinion? JBW (talk) 10:10, 5 October 2021 (UTC)


 * There's nothing punitive in the length of this block. We've seen disruption from this range for a month now, including fiddling with AIV reports in early September and early October. Unfortunately, only a single IP address was previously blocked instead of the whole range. So, one month block covers the overall activity, and it's pretty easy to see that there is only one individual behind this. This is obvious trolling and indeed obnoxious. I wouldn't be surprised if one of our LTAs was behind this. So: no to unblocking, but yes to talk page access removal if anything of this sort continues. I think we have fed this troll enough. Widr (talk) 15:37, 5 October 2021 (UTC)