User talk:38.119.112.187

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

THIS IS AN AMERICAN VPN ADDRESS USED BY A COMPUTER LAB IN THE UNITED ARAB EMIRATES. COMMENTS POSTED HERE MAY NOT BE READ BY THE PERSONS FOR WHOM THEY ARE INTENDED. IF YOU EXPERIANCE ABUSE FROM THIS ACCOUNT, PLEASE POST A MESSAGE AND A LAB ADMINISTRATOR WILL INVESTIGATE THE MATTER. PLEASE DO NOT ENGAGE IN THREATENING OR HARRASSING COMMENTS ON THIS PAGE.


[edit] ISP Info

IP address:                     38.119.112.187
Reverse DNS:                    vpn00.witopia.net.
Reverse DNS authenticity:       [Verified]
ASN:                            174
ASN Name:                       COGENT (Cogent/PSI)
IP range connectivity:          1
Registrar (per ASN):            RIPE
Country (per IP registrar):     US [United States]
Country Currency:               USD [United States Dollars]
Country IP Range:               38.0.0.0 to 38.255.255.255
Country fraud profile:          Normal
City (per outside source):      Reston, Virginia
Country (per outside source):   US [United States]
Private (internal) IP?          No
IP address registrar:           whois.arin.net
Known Proxy?                    No
Link for WHOIS:                 38.119.112.187
IP address privacy concerns

Want more privacy? Create an account. With an account the above IP address info that can be used for identification purposes will not be available to average Wikipedia users and administrators.
See: Wikipedia:Why create an account?

Contents


[edit] User:EEMeltonIV AND User:Husnock

Most of your edits under this IP address, .190 and .189 are to "Husnock"'s old favorites: SS characters, Navy ranks, Star Trek rank material, and an obscure image that Husnock uploaded. I find it hard to believe that anyone would stumble upon the obscure image and the obscure Admiral Komack bit if it the material weren't on that person's watchlist. Save for the anonymous IP addresses*, "Husnock" -- who created the Komack article -- is the only user who contributed to that article who isn't still posting elsewhere. (*By itself, I could understand one IP address switching to another and you keeping the old IP's watchlist. And I could even buy into the idea that you saw that I removed the link to Admiral Komack from the Admiral (Star Trek) article and took a look at it. But taken in with other stuff, I don't buy it.)

Stylistically, you both have the same errors and style nuances. You both revert whole edits, overlooking worthwhile grammar and spelling tweaks, to restore material of dubious notability, verifiability and/or reliability that often crosses into original research. You demonstrate issues of ownership. As with Husnock's named-account sockpuppets (e.g. "Dan Rappaport"), you claim tenuous credentials (e.g. publishing two books) that have little to do with the rationale you offer for your edits. By the way, what are you: a published Star Trek author or "an administrator of a computer lab in Dubai"? Note that the latter was posted in, of all places, Husnock's RfA. You assert "plans" for articles and ask that uncited material be allowed to linger until it gets there.

Husnock's dishonesty and reluctance/inability to grasp the tenets of WP:N, WP:V, WP:RS and WP:NOR came through in the RfA. While I don't see anything blatantly dishonest about what you've posted (although I don't believe your "credentials" or your "big plans" for Fleet captain (Star Trek)), you demonstrate the same inability to or disinterest in abiding by WP:NOR et al. Given that the articles on which you work are generally the same as Husnock's (insofar as where Husnock and I overlapped), I think you and Husnock are the same user. --EEMeltonIV 19:24, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

PS: Welcome back to Reston.

Just to clear up confusion about this issue, this ip address doesn't originate in Reston, Virginia. It is used as an American server backup to a host in the United Arab Emirates. The server might be in reston, but the ip originates in the Middle East. -38.119.112.187 12:59, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Block

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | rangeblocks | unblock | contribs | deleted contribs) has asked to be unblocked, but an administrator has reviewed and declined this 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 request while you are blocked.

Request reason: "Unfair block by a user who feels User:Husnock may have used this account. User:Ryulong is mass blocking accounts based on Husnock being "banned" (this is the second one I found so far). For one thing...Husnock wasn't banned (see: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Husnock). And for another thing, these are shared ip addresses used by hundreds of people. Block was done without much thought, it seems."

Decline reason: "Looking at the contribution log, it does not appear that this account is used by hundreds of people, at least not to edit the Wikipedia. — Yamla 13:52, 11 June 2007 (UTC)"

Please make any further unblock requests by using the {{unblock}} template. However, abuse of the template may result in your talk page being protected.

Y

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

I see no reason why the block needed to exist. You questioned his actions, he blocked you; block appeared to be inappropriate.

Request handled by: Metros 17:41, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome back

Welcome back. Have to admit I hadn't seen you in a while. --Durin 16:36, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I assume you are speaking of User:Husnock. It is a losing battle to get people to realize that more than one person uses this ip addresses. Oh well. If you are referring to the person who I think you are, please know he left the area where this ip address originates several months ago for duty further north in the Persian Gulf. If you're trying to reach him directly, recommend leaving a message on his talk page. I think he still checks it from time to time. -38.119.112.187 12:59, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
  • I think it's a losing battle to convince you the facade is completely and utterly transparent. I've e-mailed you about this already. NOBODY believes you're separate people. That said, as I've noted before, I don't care. You can keep up the act if you like, regardless of how embarrassing it is, so long as you do not disrupt Wikipedia. --Durin 17:06, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

We really have nothing to prove to you. If you want to continue to believe that there is only one person using this ip address then so be it. The main concern is that the primary ip address used by most of us over here is now blocked because admins who have abused their powers thought that Husnock had used it. Husnock, who was never blocked or banned in any way shape or form, yet they thought they saw him on Wikipedia, had personal feelings about him, so blocked without comment public ip accounts, thereby blocking an entire computer lab in the process, using terms like "banned vandal" which is simply a lie. The only embarrasing thing is the conduct of those people. Husnock and others like him serve in a dangerous part of the world, away from their homes and familes, going to work every day to defend the rights of those very same people who hate him and don't want him on this site. I just hope you are not one of those people. -38.119.112.188 05:23, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

  • I thought you said he went home? Stories aren't being kept straight. --Durin 16:58, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Its pretty clear that there are anti-military and anti-American feelings at work here, with this Durin no exception to the rule. I think we should be thanking this Husnocvk for all that he does. Thats a bad, bad part of the world over there. And as far as this stuff about the ip addresses, anyone who knows anything about the USO can tell you that the US forces over in the Middle East frequently use computer labs for the benefit of its members and sayng that Husnock is the sole person responsible for every post out of the Persian Gulf is almost laughable. -67.101.114.226 15:03, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Personal attack

Please do not attack other editors, which you did here: Talk:Battle of Wolf 359. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Dina 17:10, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I made no attacks against other users. I informed EEMelton that he should not speak or treat other Wikipedia users like we were immature high school students. EEMelton is often sarcastic, rude, and has on several occassions resorted to name calling (his favorite name to call others is "fanboy"). So, I see no attack but merely a hrashly worded response to his already existing sarcasim. In any event, I see its already been removed -38.119.112.186 21:49, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] January 2008

Welcome, and thank you for experimenting with Wikipedia. Your test on the page Spoken Chinese worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment further, please use the sandbox. Thank you. VivioFateFan (Talk, Sandbox) 13:03, 23 January 2008 (UTC)