User talk:194.126.175.154

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

194.126.175.154 (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Request reason:

I got two block messages when editing the "Objections to evolution" page, I do not know which applies: Your IP address has been blocked on all wikis. The block was made by Vituzzu (meta.wikimedia.org). The reason given is Open proxy: hosting on hetzner.de + spam from 176.9.44.163. and Editing from 176.9.0.0/16 has been blocked (disabled) by Materialscientist for the following reason(s): webhosting, past open proxy on 176.9.3.104 Both refer to a different IP addresss than the one I used (176.9.46.141) and both reasons are untrue. As background: hetzner is one of the largest hosters in the world. Blocking whole /16s for extended periods of times (months!) is completely unreasonable. This is the same as blocking a whole dial-up ISP because of a few users (switching IP addresses is fast and free). In fact, it is worse: dial-up isps usually use dynamic IP addresses which can be hard to block, while hetzner uses static IP addresses, which are easy to block (switching addresses takes time and costs money). If blocking whole /16s of static address space is fine with the blocking policies, please improve your policies.

Decline reason:

First, I find no evidence of even a rangeblock affecting this IP. Second, you were indeed able to edit that page ten minutes before posting this unblock request. Third, yes, we would block entire ranges of static addresses ... if we came to believe that they were all open proxies. You don't need to edit as an IP, and I daresay that if you would like to edit as an IP you can find another computer to edit from near you. If you're getting messages meant for another IP range, then I think the problem is at your ISP, not here. — Daniel Case (talk) 00:08, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

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.

File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

194.126.175.154 (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Request reason:

This is surreal. I just verified that my IP is still blocked, as well as the few others I have access to in that range. I was not able and am not able to edit this page or the original page due to this block.

My only explanation is that the declining admin didn't even bother(!) to read the unblock request and checked against the wrong IP address. The IP ranges and ip adress are clearly mentioned though, so this doesn't seem too likely.

Second, it's surreal to assume that 20000+ customers of a provider (all different physical hosts) would all run open proxies, so these blocks look more and more bogus. Also, suggesting my ISP would somehow generate block messages in the name of two wikimedia/wikipedia administrators is bizarre, to say the least.

Third, I cannot edit the talk page of the declining admin to discuss this further, so I made another unblock request

Decline reason:

176.9.0.0/16 is blocked for as a web host, which it obviously is. We have no choice to hardblock the range because that's what the range could be used for (see WP:Open proxies). I can find absolutely no evidence that this IP (194.126.175.154) is blocked, please copy and paste the whole message you receive about the block onto this talk page so we can try and work it out. Callanecc (talkcontribslogs) 04:31, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

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.

File:Orologio rosso or File:Orologio verde DOT SVG (red clock or green clock icon, from Wikimedia Commons)
This blocked 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). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

194.126.175.154 (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Request reason:

This gets more and more surreal. Isn't there a single admin that actually reads this unblock request? I can only repeat what I already said, as all information requested has been provided already, and the bogus blocking reason just gets repeated: 1. I cannot edit from the 176.9.0.0/16 range (specifically, from my computer, still at 176.9.46.141), this is why I changed to edit from another address. 2. I already stated the _exact_ two block messages I get in the original unblock request. Exact Copy & Paste. What else would you need? Did you even bother to read it? 3. The IP range might also be used by web hosting companies, but the blocked IP is not used by a web hosting company. 4. You tell me that web hosting companies *have* to be blocked and refer to the open proxies page, but these are obviously completely different things! The blocked IP address neither runs an open, anonymous, or tor proxy, and web hosting is a *completely different* concept than *proxies*, so quite obciously the block reason is bogus - if the block reason really is because of open proxies, then the block obviously is wrong. The page you refer to says nothing about web hosting having to be blocked, it is about *open proxies*. PS: while editign this page I got blocked again with the following message: "Open proxy: hosting on hetzner.de + spam from 176.9.44.163.". Again, the IP address mentioned is unrelated to my IP address, which is still 176.9.46.141, and still doesn't run an open proxy, and still is not a web hosting company

Decline reason:

Hi,
  1. You can't edit because it's a webhost range. We often find people will set up open proxies on hosting companies servers, and these can come and go very rapidly (too rapidly for us to keep up with). As webhost ranges are pretty much always servers in some datacentre, we feel there's no real reason that people should be editing a website from a server.
  2. I have read your unblock requests.
  3. The IP range is owned by a webhosting company.
  4. Webhosting may be a different concept from proxies, but two lines of configuration in a webserver can turn a webserver into an open proxy (over HTTP, assuming Apache). Given this company also offers dedicated and virtual servers, a customer could quite easily setup an open proxy using some other software too. While the IP you're trying to use may not have any open proxies or tor exit nodes running, it's highly likely that a fair number of others in that /16 do. Too many for us to deal with individually across many different webhosts. The range block is intended to prevent harm to the encyclopedia, and unfortunately there is occasionally some collateral damage. However, with a server cluster likely in a data centre, there's little reason to expect editors would wish to edit from there.

The block message mentions a specific IP, but this is intended to mean one is being particularly problematic.

My advice is not to edit Wikipedia from a server. [stwalkerster|talk] 03:07, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

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.

Ok, I understand this finally. Still, giving me bogus explanations twice, and then some handwaving reason that's not described in any policy documentation very much sounds like arbitrary harassment by admins. Blocking IPs for no reason certainly feels arbitrary.