User talk:82.148.97.69/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Technical note

FWIW, due to the technical workings of an automated censor imposed by the sole national high speed ISP, this IP represents the entirety of the country of Qatar, which means effectively that the entire country has been blocked from editing anything. I'm sorry to see that there has been a significant amount of vandalism coming from the country, and understand the reason for the block, and see the fundamental problem as being the fault of the required censorship; however, if there were a finer grained way to do the block, it would certainly be preferable for non-vandalising users in the country. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.148.97.69 (talk • contribs) 10:04, 24 November 2006.

Perhaps it would be possible to find some compromise involving limited account creations and blocking on a per-account basis; I'm sure that Qatar is not the only nationality/organization with similar technical restrictions. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.148.97.69 (talk • contribs) 10:08, 24 November 2006.

Are logged-in users coming from this IP still allowed to edit? If so then this is only blocking anonymous editing by Qataris. PermanentE 07:43, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
Yes; the ban is only for anonymous users 89.6.43.167 17:43, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

PermanentE, I don't know whether logged-in users can edit because I can't create an account: "Account creation from this IP address (82.148.97.69) has been temporarily restricted. This is probably due to persistent vandalism from the shared IP address you are editing from, most likely from your school or internet service provider." I'd also like to add that by blocking Qatar, wikipedia is blocking the majority of Al Jazeera journalists - so much for impartiality <nwetters@cpan.org> —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.148.97.69 (talk • contribs) 08:02, 1 January 2007.

Can't the users from Qatar use a proxy to get a different IP, and create an account. Maybe they can log in with that account once it's active, even though their IP is banned? MasterDirk 10:44, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
It seems all these people are effectively using the same IP address. Can you suggest a technical solution distinguishing them from each other? On a separate note, can Qataris with an existing user account log on and edit? WLior 14:55, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
Banning a million people from anonymous posting seems an over-reaction to some vandalism Ngourlay 12:00, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
Banning a million people is not the reaction to the vandalism. It is an unintended secondary consequence. The IP block has occured due to vandalism. It might be however that the block is reconsidered *because* of the unintended secondary consequence. Toby Douglass 15:06, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
I feel the claim of partiality is utterly - ridiculously so - incorrect. The IP was blocked due to vandalism, not because Al Jazeera journalists use it. I would agree with the points made that the impact of this block is serious, but Wiki IP blocking works well with the large majority of countries; Qatar is the exception, and is the exception because of its own behaviour. Toby Douglass 15:04, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
the US has a lot of vandalism coming from it as well. shall you ban all american ip addresses? in fact, on the larget internet, a large amount of spam originates in the USA. if other countries were as 'wise' and 'logical' as the wikipedia rulers, they would ban the USA from contacting the outside world. then write a bunch of hurt and offended garbage reasoning about why its not discriminatory, was 'the only option', was 'totally necessary', and a bunch of other simple minded, foolish, thinking. as for your statements 'qatar is punished because of its own behavior', i hate to tell you this but a country is not a person. qatar is a nation of millions of people, and 99% of them did not do anything wrong, and yet are being punished by this 'wise' and 'logical' action. please tell me which historical philosopher of society would have found that acceptable or reasonable? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.185.250.195 (talk) 21:44, 1 January 2007 (UTC).
The US does not apply a State-wide firewall to Internet access. As such, net access comes from a very wide range of IP addresses, unlike Qatar, where all net access comes from one IP address. Accordingly, when vandalism occurs from the US, that specific IP address is blocked and the vandal is thus dealt with without blocking other users. There is no wish, desire or intent to block all US users because of that one person, just as there is no wish, desire or intent to block all Qatar users because of their vandals. Qatar, however, due to its State-wide firewall for censorship and monitoring of private access to the Internet, has led to matters being such that banning one IP address blocks all annoymous users in Qatar. As such, your question is wrong ("the US generates plenty of vandalism, so why are we not blocking the entire US?"), since it implies that *all* Qatar was *specifically and deliberately* blocked because of the vandalism from a few Qatar users. This is *NOT SO*. All Qatar was *inadvertantly* blocked, *because of how Qatar has arranged its net access*. If Qatar had normal arrangements for net access, only the IP addresses performing vandalism would have been blocked, and this is the wish, intent and desire of the blocking action. It is not for the Wikipedia to endure vandalism so that Qatar can continue with its unusual net access arrangements (which, I might add, are deeply unethical, since they are used to intervene in the lives of others for reasons other than self-defence). Toby Douglass 22:55, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Is the per captia volume of spam from this IP address higher than any other, given the number of people it is shared by? If not, what justification is there for blocking it over any other IP? A block amounts to guilt by association. Some people seem to be treating Qatar as a single unit (eg. using the phrase "its own behaviour". What is "it"?) It is people being dealt with here, and they should not be lumped into some faceless mass. How would you like it if your IP address was blocked, through no action of your own? It might be convenient to block the IP address of a 840,000 people, but is convenience really an excuse for trampling people? John Dalton 23:32, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Qatar is a single unit - it is a single country. That unit's (read: country's) behaviour is to route traffic through a single IP address, and by doing so, they are implying that they want to be treated (electronically) as a single entity. The people are being trampled by Internet censorship, and being blocked from Wikipedia is another consequence of said censorship. --Rossj81 07:16, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism notes

Your recent edit to United States was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // Tawkerbot2 09:26, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits are considered vandalism, and if you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the hard work of others. Thank you. Vsmith 11:10, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for experimenting with the page Al Jazeera English on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. amitch 11:33, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Please refrain from adding nonsense to articles. It is considered vandalism. ↔ ANAS - Talk 11:43, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
You have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for repeated vandalism. If or when the block expires, feel free to come back, but please make useful contributions instead, and refrain from vandalising or this account will face longer blocks, and action could be taken against the individual who uses it. --Bhadani 16:26, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Please stop changing spelling to the British form, particularly if the article is entitled in American form already. Kukini 18:23, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Blocked
You have been blocked for vandalism for a period of time. To contest this block, add the text {{unblock}} on this page, along with an explanation of why you believe this block to be unjustified. You can also email the blocking administrator or any administrator from this list. Please be sure to include your username (if you have one) and IP address in your email.

If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia after the block has expired, you will be blocked for longer and longer periods of time.

Please do not erase warnings on this page. Doing so is also considered vandalism. Kukini 18:30, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

December 2, 2006

Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to Spoons sex position. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. delldot | talk 17:34, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Mawlid

Your recent edit to Mawlid (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 21:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Welcome, and thank you for experimenting with the page List of Metal Gear Solid 3 characters on Wikipedia! Your test worked, and thank you for reverting or removing it yourself. The best way to do tests in the future would be to use the sandbox. You can look at these pages as well: how to edit a page, the tutorial, and how to write a great article. All of these pages are good places to start. Again, welcome, and I hope that you will like Wikipedia. ~Crazytales | 56297 01:06, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Your edits to Kamahl Santamaria

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia, 82.148.97.69! However, your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, and try to reinsert the link again. If your link was genuine spam, please note that inserting spam into Wikipedia is against policy. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! Shadowbot 10:34, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Regarding edits made during December 21, 2006 (UTC) to Egypt

Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. If this is an IP address, and it is shared by multiple users, ignore this warning if you did not make any unconstructive edits. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 12:20, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to 41 shots

Your recent edit to 41 shots (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 00:02, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to List of Internet slang phrases

Your recent edit to List of Internet slang phrases (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 19:56, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Your edit to Sex.com

Your recent edit to Sex.com (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 19:31, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for a period of 24 hours as a result of your disruptive edits. You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our neutral point of view policy will not be tolerated. Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 19:31, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
W
You have been temporarily blocked from editing Wikipedia for continuing to add spam links. If you wish to make useful contributions, you are welcome to come back after the block expires. Persistent spammers will have their websites blacklisted from Wikipedia. --Yamla 16:46, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Dynamic ip

Hi .I'm from the wp:fr. I found a new maessage telling me that i was bloched. I would like to inform you that this is a dynamic ip adress . I didn't make all these changes . For exemple , i made this Wikipedia:Speedy deletions (+fr) but not those that concerns sex.com or others. 82.148.97.69 16:50, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

If you wish to avoid being blocked, please sign in using an account. Thanks. --Yamla 16:55, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
Please note that it was obviously not my intention to block the entire nation of Qatar. --Yamla 20:10, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

This user's request to have the autoblock on their IP address lifted has been DECLINED.

Chronic vandalism and spam

You have not been autoblocked. However, you have been blocked directly as stated in your block log. Since you have not provided a reason for being unblocked, your request has been declined. You may provide a reason for being unblocked by adding {{unblock|your_reason_here}} to your talk page. -- -Royalguard11(Talk·Desk·Review Me!) 20:53, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Note: declined unblock requests may only be removed after two days or when the block has expired.

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | unblock | contribs) asked to be unblocked, but an administrator or other user has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators or users can also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). This unblock request continues to be visible. Do not replace this message with another unblock request nor add another unblock request.

Request reason: "I_have_not_edited,_nor_for_that_matter_even_seen_the_aforementioned_articles._I_am_led_to_believe_that_it_is_a_shared_IP_address,_and_that_i_can_solve_the_problem_by_creating_an_account._However_I_cannot_do_so_as_the_IP_is_blocked._Help_would_be_appreciated."

Decline reason: "Unfortunately, this address has been a source of problems; to prevent abuse, we've been forced to put a little "roadblock" -- if you find a different web connection and register an account from there, you'll be able to bring that account back over here and edit over this block while logged in. Let us know if you need any help with that. To request additional review, you might consider the unblock-en-l mailing list. Luna Santin 22:20, 31 December 2006 (UTC)"

This template should be removed when the block has expired, or after 2 days in the case of blocks of 1 week or longer.

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | unblock | contribs) asked to be unblocked, but an administrator or other user has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators or users can also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). This unblock request continues to be visible. Do not replace this message with another unblock request nor add another unblock request.

Request reason: "this IP address is one of the addresses assigned to QTel's proxy servers. In Qatar, all internet traffic is censored by QTel, and by blocking these addresses, you are effectively preventing an entire country from posting to wikipedia -- nwetters(at)cpan.org"

Decline reason: "I have modified the block to allow account creation. This means that you'll be able to edit if you create an account and log in. Thanks, -- Martinp23 13:42, 1 January 2007 (UTC)"

This template should be removed when the block has expired, or after 2 days in the case of blocks of 1 week or longer.

Dear people...

I have no idea what the hell this is all about, I don't recall editing anything.

Perhaps it is my ISP doing justice again by giving most people the same friggin' IP.

PS: Feel free to remove any thing I edited (as I edited nothing).—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.148.97.69 (talk • contribs) 12:34, 1 January 2007.

I'm sorry for the inconvenience. You should now be able to create an account so that you can edit the site freely (a change to the block was made by another admin). Note to any admin that modifies this: please leave a conspicuous note on this talk page about the change. -- Kjkolb 14:04, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

gyuh hyuk. 67.164.71.230 19:18, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

If you are in Qatar and you are blocked from editing Wikipedia, please click on this link to open a user account in order to continue editing. Anonymous editing from this internet address is currently disabled due to a large volume of spam and vandalism that we have received from this address. We apologise for the inconvenience.

The banning

The banning of an entire country ip subnetwork is an affront to civilization. It is against everything wikipedia, nay, the internet, was supposed to stand for in the first place. The internet was supposed to be 'better than meatspace', ie, there would be no racial, ethnic, sexist, or national bigotry and communication would be free. Of course astute observers could have observerd the 'punish many for the crimes of the few' mentality of the so-called "new" internet leaders back on the IRC (internet relay chat) when country-wide bans became standard tactics, and questioning them was tantamount to being an 'network terrorist'.

Now we see the full promise of what the internet really means - centralized control of information by self righteous blowhards who do not even want to debate the principles they supposedly stand on. If any 'meatspace' court system applied a punishment to a whole class of people for the actions of one person, it would be branded as medieval, ancient, idiotic, illogical, backwards, a betrayal of the philosophies responsible for the progress, of civilization, and most of all, completely ineffective.

The wikipedians, nay, the internet 'revolutionaries', have shown their true colors, finally, after all these years. Like every other supposed savior, who thinks they must then rest the revolution from the hands of the 'ignorant masses', they become soon autocrats, and quickly replace or replicate the very system they claimed to rebel against in the first place. Revealed is their true motive: not revolution, but their own power.

So much for the internet. At least we still have books.

Nobody can ban you from putting pen to paper. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.185.250.195 (talk • contribs) 21:40, 1 January 2007.

Your edit to British Army

Your recent edit to British Army (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // AntiVandalBot 07:35, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Message

Whoever gets this message, please do not have a "test of wikipedias abilities..." in your edits. While we realize that this IP belongs to an ISP that services the entire nation of Qatar, that does not mean that you should in any way disrupt Wikipedia to make a point. We apologize for what had to be done, but we now realize the issues at hand with this ISP.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 07:46, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

As one who was affected by the block, I'd like to clarify. On 30 December 2006, a Wikipedia admin placed a one-month block on the IP address 82.148.97.69 for reasons of chronic vandalism and spam. The IP address turned out to belong to a QTel proxy server, and thus anonymous posting from the whole of Qatar was blocked. Account creation was also blocked, but this condition was later relaxed after the ban was widely reported across technology sites. Ngourlay 11:21, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for unblocking , this is now much more better . 82.148.97.69 13:12, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Internal coverage

Users familiar with the issue at hand may wish to improve a small section within the Qtel entry that I created this morning. I've already been factually corrected once, and it seems to me that this issue might be of interest to future readers. --Thatnewguy 16:53, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../8/2/2E/User_talk%7E82.148.97.69_Archive_1_9f1e.html"