Template talk:Blocked proxy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is part of the WikiProject on open proxies. This means that the WikiProject has identified it as relating to open proxies on Wikipedia, which are prohibited. The WikiProject itself is an attempt to build a process to report open proxies, streamline administrator response, and reduce Wikipedia's vulnerability to open proxies. Your help is welcome.

Contents

[edit] Information

I, for one, do not know what a "proxy" is. I'm sure lots of people have no idea what an "IP address" is. Some links would be useful here. Brianjd 06:41, 2004 Dec 17 (UTC)

  • I was just thinking that, too. Maybe Wiki links to define some of the various terms, plus external links detailing some possible ways to fix an open proxy? Granted, the external links would be very difficult, as we don't know the specifics of why this user is on an open proxy and thus wouldn't know exactly how to fix it if it were a trojan... CaptainSpam 01:08, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Are you able to edit Wikipedia over an anonymous/open proxy if you are logged into your wikipedia account? Or does having a blocked IP address mean that you cannot use an account either? --ColdFeet 02:26, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

At the moment it means you can't use an account either. Solving this is Mediawiki bug 550 - David Gerard 15:04, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] copy-edit

I came across this template while following up on some minor vandalism. I'm reluctant to edit such a frequently-used template, but the last sentence is a run-on and confusing. I'd suggest: "If you did not know that you were editing from such a proxy, then you or your internet service provider may have a poorly configured system, or a trojan, that causes your system to act as an anonymizing proxy. This is a security hole; please try to fix it or report it to your ISP." Chick Bowen 05:57, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Should this template be substed?

The original instructions at WP:OP explicitly said that this template should be substed onto user talk pages. Since then, the instructions have been removed from that page entirely. WP:BP#Anonymous and open proxies and Category:Wikipedia:Blocked open proxies seem to imply that it should not be substed. I've been consistently substing it based on the WP:OP instructions, but it appears that other admins have not been doing so, and in fact have assumed that it will never be substed. Personally I have no strong preference either way, but the usage should probably be consistent. So, which way should it be? —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 16:53, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

As far as I know, this template was designed to be used in the block reason (its contents show as the block reason when someone tries to edit from the blocked proxy), the same way as {{username block}}. I don't even know why it's used on user/user talk pages. --cesarb 22:59, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Wow, does that really work? I always assumed block messages were like edit summaries, in that template syntax doesn't work. The templates don't seem to be displayed in the block log, but are they really shown to the blocked user? In any case, I suppose the template still has to be included on an actual user (talk) page for the categorization to work, right? —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 23:46, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Yes, the template is meant to be used on the user or talk page. I see no reason not to substitute it, as there's no reason to update it thereafter. If there's a need to recategorise the pages, for example, it can easily be done with a bot using very simple regex. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 23:54, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
(edit conflict) This is how it used to look, before people started getting the idea to put it on user pages. Notice how it was much better back then — a lot more information to the blocked user (and there's no way that would fit in the block reason field, which is why a template is needed). The text which appears when blocked looked like this. If you want to see it in action, just go to one of the many open web proxies I blocked, like for instance http://www.netshaq.com/cgiproxy/nph-proxy.cgi/000000A/http/en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sandbox?action=edit (you have to try a few times; that proxy has a lot of different IP addresses, and some of them have different block reasons). --cesarb 00:10, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
A quick look at the contributions of the original creator of this template shows [1] [2] [3] [4] that it was meant to be used as a block reason from the beginning. --cesarb 00:21, 1 March 2006 (UTC)
It doesn't matter whether the template is used on the user or talk page, as blocked users will realise their block through MediaWiki:Blockedtext and not through their talk pages. The current version links users to the WikiProject on open proxies, where they are greeted with bolded text suggesting they read Help:Blocked. This page provides vastly more information than could be fit into the template. // Pathoschild (admin / talk) 03:10, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Redesign of this template?

If I could, I would edit this template in order do divide Category:Wikipedia:Blocked open proxies into subcategoies. I am sure there is a technical possibility to do so, but I'm not the person to do it. There are too many pages in the category, and browsing them 200 at a time isn't a very pleasant task. RaSten 12:03, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

This category isn't really intended to be browsed; it catalogues blocked open proxies so that they can be rechecked at a later time by a bot or human. Subcategories wouldn't hurt, though. Which would you propose? Offhand, possible subcategories I can think of are zombie proxies and HTTP proxies. // [admin] Pathoschild (talk/map) 13:54, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
My idea was more like one category per first byte in the IP, och first digit of first byte. I want to be able to check out whether a spamming IP is found to be an open proxy. RaSten 18:43, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Side-effects of the template

Isn't this a bad idea if the use of this template just makes Wikipedia a resource for finding open proxies? Angela. 15:39, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

The original use of this template is as the block reason (and it's still used a lot that way); when used that way, it doesn't appear at Special:Whatlinkshere. --cesarb 20:03, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but it also makes it a piece of cake to mass-block them on other projects. — May. 10, '06 [09:07] <freakofnurxture|talk>

[edit] Interlanguage Link

Please add a link to de:Vorlage:Offener Proxy. Thanks. -- kh80 18:54, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Please add a link to ru:Шаблон:Indefblocked-openproxy. MaxiMaxiMax 07:19, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Please add fi:Malline:Avoinproxy thank you. --Agony-fi 10:30, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Please add [[pt:Predefinição:Proxy bloqueado]] [[ja:Template:Blocked proxy]] [[ko:틀:프록시 차단]] Mosca2 00:21, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requested Edit

Could an admin please change the ".png" in the image to ".svg" as there is now an almost identical SVG version available on commons under the same name except with ".svg" instead of ".png" (feel free to check the new one first). Thanks - Рэдхот 19:11, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Done. —[admin] Pathoschild 23:51, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Armed Blowfish's Sandbox

 We believe your IP address is an open proxy. Since we receive an excess of vandalism from open proxies, we blocked you IP. See our policy and WikiProject. If your ISP has misconfigured their proxy, you can try bypassing it by logging into Wikimedia's secure gateway at https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/. We apologise if you have in fact come here to make constructive edits. : (

Usage: {{Blocked proxy|host=proxy.example.com (optional)}}


[edit] Editprotected request

{{editprotected}}

If I am going to be autoblocked frequently, I would like a kinder, prettier blocking message. Please replace this template with the material in my Sandbox above. Thanks, Armed Blowfish (mail) 20:19, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Please gain consensus first. Cheers. --MZMcBride 04:44, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Open proxies not "prohibited", policy downgraded

{{editprotected}}

"No open proxies" has been downgraded from a valid policy to a proposal and is currently under discussion. This template should not refer to it as a policy or claim that "editing from these proxies is prohibited"! —Babelfisch 03:22, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Discussion is still on going, and Wikipedia:No open proxies is still policy. - auburnpilot talk 16:37, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Prohibited

{{editprotected}} Since WP:PROXY and m:Proxy currently say "While this may affect legitimate users, they are not the intended targets and may freely use proxies until those are blocked" (these policies are now relatively stable), the word "prohibited" should be changed into "disabled". Melsaran (talk) 19:00, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

"Disabled" makes it seem as though there's some type of software mechanism that recognizes open proxies and disables them. As the template currently states, editing from open proxies is strictly prohibited. The two pages linked are really talking about reading from open proxies. When this template is used, it's telling a user that they've been blocked because they edited from an open proxy, which is prohibited. Cheers. --MZMcBride 00:30, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
I think 'restricted' would be a better choice of wording, since editing via open proxies is not strictly prohibited, it's just unlikely. -- zzuuzz (talk) 01:46, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New icon

Feel free to use it if you like it:

notwist (talk) 20:39, 13 April 2008 (UTC)