User talk:Kenyon

This blocked user is asking that his block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

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

UTRS appeal #21483 was submitted on May 10, 2018 03:06:57. This review is now closed.


--UTRSBot (talk) 03:06, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

Why should I be blocked by IP address when I'm logged in to an account?

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only. You forgot to tell us your IP address so we can't investigate your claim. You can find this using WhatIsMyIP. If you don't wish to provide this publicly, you may use WP:UTRS to provide the IP address privately. Yamla (talk) 20:23, 10 May 2018 (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.

Because the block on the IP address is configured that way, or you're being hit by an autoblock. You will need to use {{unblock-auto|IP address|autoblock message|blocking admin}} in order to contest the block. If you aren't comfortable with revealing your IP on-wiki you can try again thru UTRS. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 20:19, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I did indeed provide the addresses in UTRS. But I'll try unblock-auto. —Kenyon (t·c) 20:54, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.
Kenyon (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
2600:3c01:e002:7900::/56 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · block user · block log)

Block message:

This is my /56 which is included in an overly broad block (see link below).

Decline reason: As you were told via UTRS, MediaWiki, the wiki software that powers Wikipedia, depends on IP addresses for administrator intervention against abuse, especially by anonymous users. Anonymizing services allow malicious users to rapidly change and disguise IP addresses, causing continuous disruption that cannot be stopped by administrators. Several such attacks have occurred on Wikimedia projects, causing disruption and occupying administrators who would otherwise deal with other concerns. Unfortunately, you won't be able to edit while using this webhost. Since the /56 you use indeed is a webhosting service, the block isn't overly broad - at least not as far as you are concerned. Huon (talk) 21:04, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Excessively broad blocks: https://en.wikipedia.orgview_html.php?sq=Envato&lang=en&q=Special:GlobalBlockList?ip=2600%3A3c01%3Ae002%3A7900%3A%3A https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/block&page=User%3A2600%3A3C01%3A0%3A0%3A0%3A0%3A0%3A0%2F32 —Kenyon (t·c) 20:54, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Huon, that's absurd. You're going to end up blocking all IPv6 address space with blocks like this. How is the fact that it's a hosting service relevant? Someone could do the same abuse from their residential ISP, and then you'll block that entire ISP. With IPv6, you need to block less broadly, like at the /56 or /64. Also, if I'm logged in, why should the IP address block take effect? I'm obviously not trying to be anonymous if I'm logged in. —Kenyon (t·c) 21:10, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, since you edited my talk page, you're clearly able to edit Wikipedia despite the IP block. Secondly, WP:OPENPROXY is policy; if you want to change it, you'll need to establish a consensus for the change. Finally, is any part of that IPv6 range not Linode? Is any part not a webhosting service? Otherwise, it's not overbroad; we should indeed block all of it. Huon (talk) 21:28, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see what WP:OPENPROXY has to do with this. That's about open proxies, not hosting services. Is there a policy on blocking hosting services? I don't see one on WP:BP. Yes, I can edit just fine from other locations, but sometimes I need to use a VPN through my Linode to work around broken wifi networks. Thanks. —Kenyon (t·c) 21:45, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hosting services are, in practice, the same as open proxies to us, as they're used for much the same reasons (i.e. to avoid revealing one's real IP). They, like open proxies, are also regularly abused by blocked and banned editors to circumvent their blocks/bans. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 21:49, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]