Wikipedia talk:Miscellany for deletion/User:Vanished user 342562/Sandbox/WikiProject United States Government invitations

Ban ?
in Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Characters (Freak Neil Inc album) you stated that is banned - can you show the documentation on this (e.g. SPI/ANI/etc report?). — xaosflux  Talk 14:30, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive277. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 18:24, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Is there a preferred method or template to use in removing these posts. They are pretty obvious when seen.  I assume that a link to the ban discussion is appropriate to include in every case?  Otherwise, to readers unfamiliar to 166.x.x.x it might look like censorship of IPs when they make critical comments.  Individually, the comments border on WP:NPA, collectively without a doubt.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:47, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * That AN posting is very vague, only finds that someone people that used this address space, not everyone that could ever use this space--so every 166.0.0.0/8 edit needs to be evaluated to "is it one of these actually banned people" or someone else using these millions of address spaces - and I don't find it very appropriate for another anonymous editor to being trying to enforce this without it being abundantly clear. — xaosflux  Talk 23:19, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree, but I do see 166.x.x.x follow me around and try to kick at Ricky whenever I have had something critical-sounding to say to Ricky. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 23:25, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * while this page is obviously the wrong page - is this primarily along the lines of "edits from 166.0.0.0/8 on pages that were recently edit by you are likely to be abusive?" - wonder if we can tackle this with the editfilter. — xaosflux  Talk 00:07, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Maybe but it seems to have moved past just me in parts. I thought it was more broad than that small range though. I think the ANI approach of WP:RBI or just WP:DENY is probably the best. I think I brought up more work here than if I just removed the comment without further discussion. I'll at least try to link to the ANI discussion in the future. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 00:11, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Maybe - and if an established editor/etc would have done this I doubt I would have followed up on it as much. — xaosflux  Talk 00:17, 22 March 2016 (UTC)