User talk:160.2.59.92

July 2022

Please refrain from using talk pages such as User talk:160.2.59.92 for general discussion of the topic or other unrelated topics. They are for discussion related to improving the article in specific ways, based on reliable sources and the project policies and guidelines; they are not for use as a forum or chat room. If you have specific questions about certain topics, consider visiting our reference desk and asking them there instead of on article talk pages. See here for more information. Thank you. Zinnober9 (talk) 05:22, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Unblock Request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

160.2.59.92 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Caught by a colocation web host block but this host or IP is not a web host. My IP address is 160.2.59.92. I am not using a proxy or vpn, I am using my home Wi Fi. Do you have any idea why the ip range was caught up in this type of block? I would really appreciate that the issue of this unjust blocking would be resolved for the good of all involved. Also, why was this page deleted for vandalism? It is a user talk page meant for discussion, my topics here are meant to start discussion. Yes, I have made a lot of silly topics, but thats just to provoke dicussion via comedy and a creative style. What is wrong with doing that on a discussion page? 160.2.59.92 (talk) 05:23, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

There is no block on this IP so I can't unblock. If your registered account is where the block is, request it there, or consider going to WP:IPECPROXY and following the instructions there to request IP block exemption. — Daniel Case (talk) 06:45, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

160.2.59.92 (talk) 05:23, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Request 2:

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

160.2.59.92 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I originally submitted an unblock request stating: "Caught by a colocation web host block but this host or IP is not a web host. My IP address is 160.2.59.92. I am not using a proxy or vpn, I am using my home Wi Fi. Do you have any idea why the ip range was caught up in this type of block? I would really appreciate that the issue of this unjust blocking would be resolved for the good of all involved. Also, why was this page deleted for vandalism? It is a user talk page meant for discussion, my topics here are meant to start discussion. Yes, I have made a lot of silly topics, but thats just to provoke dicussion via comedy and a creative style. What is wrong with doing that on a discussion page?" The response was: "There is no block on this IP so I can't unblock. If your registered account is where the block is, request it there, or consider going to WP:IPECPROXY and following the instructions there to request IP block exemption" My response: There are two huge problems with the response I was given. Firstly, I pointed out how my talk page was wrongly deleted and blanked for what was simple, if a bit humorous, discussion topics. I asked how it could be justified for discussion on my own personal talk page to be purged. With a simple edit from the admins, all of the things I had wrote was gone. It was unwritten by an un-elected technocrat. It would be one thing if I was spamming stuff on a actual talk page, but no, it was on my personal page. I should have the right to do as I please with MY OWN page, my own personal property. If I don't have the right to write what I want, then what rights do I have in life? Not allowing people to have discussions on their own talk pages is a chilling and authoritarian violation of our natural rights laid out in the 1st amendment of the U.S. constitution. It was a gross overreach of powers. It is unlikely many people would have seen what I had on my talk page. Beyond some mild criticism of Wikipedia policy relating to how they judge what is noteworthy of relevance, my discussions contained no attacks on Wikipedia. Heck, I even praised the site on it! So I had a page which very few people would have seen of which the contents were not a threat to Wikipedia's public reputation in any way. It was a completely harmless page full of harmless discussion. And yet it was purged. Unwritten. By a single person. If Wikipedia admins have the power to purge harmless speech like this, imagine what they have the power to do against important speech? Speech that tells the truth that can and should tear down institutions of power? If Wikipedia is willing to purge my harmless speech, I have no doubt Wikipedia would remove important speech even quicker, helping decay our society. Please, if you want to work toward a society where people have the power to make just change and our rights are properly upheld, protect our rights to simply discuss things on our own personal pages. Our own writing is a sanctuary that should not be touched. Do the right thing. Protect our freedoms. On to the matter of my block, the admin also claimed that I was not actually blocked. This is not true. I do not know why my block is not showing in the system. When I try to edit a page, I recieve a notice saying I cannot edit and that "The IP address or range 185.236.200.0/22 has been blocked (disabled) by ‪ST47‬ for the following reason(s):" and below gave the template explaining that " The IP address that you are currently using has been blocked because it is believed to be a web host provider or colocation provider." Is there any reason why this block would not be showing on your end, and is there any way this matter can be resolved? I sincerely hope both the matters of the suppression of my speech and my unwarranted blocking can be resolved to everyone's benefit. Thank you. 160.2.59.92 (talk) 10:40, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

"Suppression of my speech" really? Knock it off. You have no free speech here, see WP:FREESPEECH. Anyway, it's true, there is no block on this IP address. On the different IP address you provided, those addresses are, correctly, blocked as proxies. Once you disable your proxy, you need to wait a full 24 hours until the block clears. At that point, I advise you take a different approach here. Yamla (talk) 10:50, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Unblock Request 3

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

160.2.59.92 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I originally submitted an unblock request stating: "Caught by a colocation web host block but this host or IP is not a web host. My IP address is 160.2.59.92. I am not using a proxy or vpn, I am using my home Wi Fi. Do you have any idea why the ip range was caught up in this type of block? I would really appreciate that the issue of this unjust blocking would be resolved for the good of all involved. Also, why was this page deleted for vandalism? It is a user talk page meant for discussion, my topics here are meant to start discussion. Yes, I have made a lot of silly topics, but thats just to provoke dicussion via comedy and a creative style. What is wrong with doing that on a discussion page?"

The response was: "There is no block on this IP so I can't unblock. If your registered account is where the block is, request it there, or consider going to WP:IPECPROXY and following the instructions there to request IP block exemption"

I then submitted a 2nd unblock request stating: "There are two huge problems with the response I was given. Firstly, I pointed out how my talk page was wrongly deleted and blanked for what was simple, if a bit humorous, discussion topics. I asked how it could be justified for discussion on my own personal talk page to be purged. With a simple edit from the admins, all of the things I had wrote was gone. It was unwritten by an un-elected technocrat. It would be one thing if I was spamming stuff on a actual talk page, but no, it was on my personal page. I should have the right to do as I please with MY OWN page, my own personal property. If I don't have the right to write what I want, then what rights do I have in life? Not allowing people to have discussions on their own talk pages is a chilling and authoritarian violation of our natural rights laid out in the 1st amendment of the U.S. constitution. It was a gross overreach of powers. It is unlikely many people would have seen what I had on my talk page. Beyond some mild criticism of Wikipedia policy relating to how they judge what is noteworthy of relevance, my discussions contained no attacks on Wikipedia. Heck, I even praised the site on it! So I had a page which very few people would have seen of which the contents were not a threat to Wikipedia's public reputation in any way. It was a completely harmless page full of harmless discussion. And yet it was purged. Unwritten. By a single person. If Wikipedia admins have the power to purge harmless speech like this, imagine what they have the power to do against important speech? Speech that tells the truth that can and should tear down institutions of power? If Wikipedia is willing to purge my harmless speech, I have no doubt Wikipedia would remove important speech even quicker, helping decay our society. Please, if you want to work toward a society where people have the power to make just change and our rights are properly upheld, protect our rights to simply discuss things on our own personal pages. Our own writing is a sanctuary that should not be touched. Do the right thing. Protect our freedoms. On to the matter of my block, the admin also claimed that I was not actually blocked. This is not true. I do not know why my block is not showing in the system. When I try to edit a page, I recieve a notice saying I cannot edit and that "The IP address or range 185.236.200.0/22 has been blocked (disabled) by ‪ST47‬ for the following reason(s):" and below gave the template explaining that " The IP address that you are currently using has been blocked because it is believed to be a web host provider or colocation provider." Is there any reason why this block would not be showing on your end, and is there any way this matter can be resolved? I sincerely hope both the matters of the suppression of my speech and my unwarranted blocking can be resolved to everyone's benefit. Thank you."

This request was again declined, with the admin saying "Suppression of my speech really? Knock it off. You have no free speech here, see WP:FREESPEECH. Anyway, it's true, there is no block on this IP address. On the different IP address you provided, those addresses are, correctly, blocked as proxies. Once you disable your proxy, you need to wait a full 24 hours until the block clears. At that point, I advise you take a different approach here.

My response to this is: I am again extremely unsatisfied with this response on both matters. I explained why suppressing speech is dangerous to our society. Wikipedia so easily doing so with completely harmless speech on personal talk pages is scary when considering how much more effort they must put into suppressing important speech that threatens the institutions in power. This issue was completely laughed off, with the admin linking a scary article flat out saying that I don't even have free speech here. I am well aware of that issue and I did not need to read a long article explaining what I have already experienced. That is a huge problem with this site for the reasons I laid out. It is fair to protect talk pages from vandalism and keep them on topic. But when it comes to our personal talk pages, people should be able to discuss as they please as long as it isn't violating laws. It is imperative to a free society that we can do so, and I have yet to hear a justifiable reason for why not allowing us this right on Wikipedia is remotely justifiable. Unless a good justification can be explained to me on that, I believe that Wikipedia only restricts speech on talk pages to protect the establishment and help them infringe on our rights. And that is a very sad reality for what is supposed to be an unbiased website. I sincerely pray that Wikipedia does better and comes to their senses.

Now onto the matter of my block. The admin's response here made no sense. They claimed that because I had used my vpn during the last 24 hours, that the block against the vpn also applies to my other ips even when the vpn is not being used. This makes no sense at all. An ip block only applies against the ip that is blocked, not against other ips that happen to be used on the same day. How is it fair to not let me edit on my home wifi connection because I used a vpn earlier in the day for other things? What is the justification for this? The only thing it seems to do is discourage vpn usage. Since vpns are a great way to protect our privacy, and Wikipedia seems to not support our rights, it brings me to the unfortunate conclusion that this nonsensical policy is in place purely to discourage vpn usage and leave us more open to corporate surveillance. I don't want to believe these things, and I sincerely hope that better justifications for these policies can be given. Thank you. 160.2.59.92 (talk) 11:13, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You are clearly the same user as 98.36.244.15, previously blocked for timewasting disruption similar to the above. I will now block this IP directly without talk page access. Favonian (talk) 12:35, 10 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This is the discussion page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users. If you are an IP user, you may create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Registering also hides your IP address.