User talk:162.119.231.132

January 2015

Hello, I'm A.amitkumar. An edit you recently made to Brady Campaign seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, the sandbox is the best place to do so. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.  A m i t  웃   16:34, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Not a proxy

This user is asking that their block be reviewed:

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

---

Request reason:

Caught by an open proxy block but this host or IP is not an open proxy. This is not an open proxy. It is a public IP attached to a medical center, which is where I'm sitting right now. It's use ain't against the rules. I'm the guy who made all the edits in 2015 with this IP. @Mike V: placed a broad range block, 162.119.0.0/16. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/Mike_V. It was apparently triggered by a spurious SPI. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Darknipples The block is a serious inconvenience. I've been making positive contributions. Please unblock this address for my benefit and for future users who are stuck in waiting rooms. 162.119.231.132 (talk) 15:15, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=Caught by an open proxy block but this host or IP is not an open proxy. This is not an open proxy. It is a public IP attached to a medical center, which is where I'm sitting right now. It's use ain't against the rules. I'm the guy who made all the edits in 2015 with this IP. <span class="template-ping">@[[User:Mike V|Mike V]]:</span> placed a broad range block, 162.119.0.0/16. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/Mike_V. It was apparently triggered by a spurious SPI. [[ Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Darknipples]] The block is a serious inconvenience. I've been making positive contributions. Please unblock this address for my benefit and for future users who are stuck in waiting rooms. [[Special:Contributions/162.119.231.132|162.119.231.132]] ([[User talk:162.119.231.132#top|talk]]) 15:15, 26 January 2015 (UTC) |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=Caught by an open proxy block but this host or IP is not an open proxy. This is not an open proxy. It is a public IP attached to a medical center, which is where I'm sitting right now. It's use ain't against the rules. I'm the guy who made all the edits in 2015 with this IP. <span class="template-ping">@[[User:Mike V|Mike V]]:</span> placed a broad range block, 162.119.0.0/16. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/Mike_V. It was apparently triggered by a spurious SPI. [[ Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Darknipples]] The block is a serious inconvenience. I've been making positive contributions. Please unblock this address for my benefit and for future users who are stuck in waiting rooms. [[Special:Contributions/162.119.231.132|162.119.231.132]] ([[User talk:162.119.231.132#top|talk]]) 15:15, 26 January 2015 (UTC) |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=Caught by an open proxy block but this host or IP is not an open proxy. This is not an open proxy. It is a public IP attached to a medical center, which is where I'm sitting right now. It's use ain't against the rules. I'm the guy who made all the edits in 2015 with this IP. <span class="template-ping">@[[User:Mike V|Mike V]]:</span> placed a broad range block, 162.119.0.0/16. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/Mike_V. It was apparently triggered by a spurious SPI. [[ Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Darknipples]] The block is a serious inconvenience. I've been making positive contributions. Please unblock this address for my benefit and for future users who are stuck in waiting rooms. [[Special:Contributions/162.119.231.132|162.119.231.132]] ([[User talk:162.119.231.132#top|talk]]) 15:15, 26 January 2015 (UTC) |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}

While yes, it is a medical center, there are still open ports being used. Here's the results from an nmap scan. Mike V • Talk 15:34, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Extended content

Starting Nmap 6.47 ( http://nmap.org ) at 2015-01-26 15:24 UTC Nmap scan report for 162.119.231.132 Host is up (0.091s latency). Not shown: 986 filtered ports PORT STATE SERVICE 17/tcp open qotd 21/tcp open ftp 80/tcp open http 389/tcp closed ldap 636/tcp closed ldapssl 1723/tcp open pptp 2323/tcp closed 3d-nfsd 5080/tcp closed onscreen 8080/tcp open http-proxy 8081/tcp open blackice-icecap 8082/tcp closed blackice-alertsv 8083/tcp closed us-srv 8088/tcp open radan-http 8888/tcp closed sun-answerbook

You're the expert - I dunno what most of that means. If I register an account will I still be unable to edit from here? If I can't that'd be a serious inconvenience. I'm stuck here a lot. 162.119.231.132 (talk) 15:39, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

I agree that this block should be reviewed. If the IP is a WP:PROXY, policy says that open or anonymising proxies may be blocked from editing - if they're being used abusively. WP:SOCK lists about a dozen inappropriate uses (and about an equal number of legitimate uses). The IP user is not me and they are not Darknipples, and since no-one else is trying to introduce pro-control balance to gun-control articles at this time that I'm aware of, I don't think the IP is someone "Contributing to the same page or discussion with multiple accounts." Probably the best guess, if the IP editor is abusing a proxy, is that he/she is circumventing a sanction, but I don't know of a blocked pro-control editor at this time. There are three pro-gun editors topic-banned from GC articles right now, and one who is site-banned.

Unless this IP editor has done something wrong, they should be unblocked. I have posted a DS alert re gun control below. Lightbreather (talk) 15:36, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm not circumventing any ban by editing this stuff. I'd have used an account to begin with but I didn't think I'd be doing this much. I'm not even that interested in gun control. Then I read a few articles that were crappy and figured I'd make 'em better. No good deed goes unpunished. 162.119.231.132 (talk) 15:45, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Discretionary sanction (DS) alert

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding governmental regulation of firearm ownership; the social, historical and political context of such regulation; and the people and organizations associated with these issues, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message is informational only and does not imply misconduct regarding your contributions to date.

Template:Z33 Lightbreather (talk) 15:32, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Yeah, kinda already know about it, seein' as how I just filed a case under it. 162.119.231.132 (talk) 15:35, 26 January 2015 (UTC)