User talk:Thrung

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! -- Avant-garde a clue - hexa Chord 2  09:48, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Confusion
I'm confused.

I submitted an Unblock Ticket Request and waited an appropriate length of time, with no response (from people whom I do understand are volunteers giving their own time freely; I feel no entitlement here).

I edited the Talk Page to request and unblock and this was rejected for valid procedural reasons.

I re-requested the unblock and was informed that individual holes cannot be punched through blocked subnets; but more significantly that a series of /24s had been consolidated into a single /20, which may be convenient, but makes it even harder to punch a hole by making the block sixteen times thicker (which is how I feel trying to understand all this).

I will resubmit my request using the Unblock Ticket Request system. EDIT: I received a verification link to my e-mail address when I submitted the form. This didn't happen last time. I must have done it wrongly before.

Professor Eugene Q Thrung III (talk) 14:01, 27 April 2018 (UTC) --UTRSBot (talk) 14:26, 27 April 2018 (UTC)

I am uncertain regarding the progress of my Unblock Request. Talk page shows "UTRS appeal #nnnnn1 was submitted on Apr 27, 2018 14:26:02. This review is now closed." It is not clear to me if this means the appeal is in progress, has been declined/denied, or is in some other state, and I am unable to find my way around Wikipedia enough to figure it out for myself. Could someone please clarify "This review is now closed", and advise what (if anything) I now need to do? If the appeal is declined and I remain unable to edit pages using a logged-in account from my static IP range then I can think of no alternatives, which would be a shame.

Thanks in advance.

1 Probably not appropriate for the appeal number to appear in my Talk Page history; apologies if that is an incorrect assumption and I should have left that number in place in this help request.

Professor Eugene Q Thrung III (talk) 10:03, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
 * The appeal was denied. The response, which was emailed to you, included the following:
 * "Looking at our logs, the IP address you're editing from belongs to a webhosting service. Open or anonymising proxies, including Tor and web hosting services, are blocked from editing Wikipedia. While this may affect legitimate users, they are not the intended targets. No restrictions are placed on reading Wikipedia through a webhost.

Although Wikipedia encourages anyone in the world to contribute, open proxies and webhosts are often used abusively. 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."
 * Note that I did not write this response, I'm simply relaying it to you. --Yamla (talk) 11:10, 4 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Interesting. All of the defined machines in 217.151.105.8/29 appear as proxies named after parts of a penis:


 * Frenula ==> Frenulum
 * Epididymides ==> Epididymis
 * Vasa defentia ==> Vas deferens
 * Prepuces ==> Prepuce
 * Perinea ==> Perineum
 * Gubernacula ==> Gubernaculum

— Berean Hunter   (talk)  14:05, 7 May 2018 (UTC) They do not show up looking like proxies with names like porn servers. They show up looking like IPs with names like the plurals of parts of the body found in the undergarments - the perineum is not gender-specific. My qualification is in medical biology and I have an odd sense of humor. The main point is that the IPs in that range do not have generic rDNS, they have explicit (no pun intended) PTR records that are all of a type that demonstrate that the /29 is a related group, and mine. The IPs above and below that range have one of "sensible" rDNS, generic rDNS or none. If the PTR records are a concern to Wikipedia I shall have them changed. They serve no purpose other than to ensure rDNS does not pattern-match a generic rDNS. Professor Eugene Q Thrung III (talk) 05:06, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
 * They do show up looking like proxies with names that look like porn servers. Is this a phallacy? Suddenly, "IP" sounds homophonic.

A Personal Appeal to Jimmy Wales
In the past I have responded to every personal appeal made by Jimmy Wales for support of Wikipedia.

Now it's my turn.

I have appealed the fact that my personally-assigned IP range is blocked from editing Wikipedia as collateral damage, because it is part of a larger IP range that has been marked as being entirely given over to web hosts, even though the presence of my IPs in that range is patent proof that this is not true.

I have made a number of appeals. All have been denied. After each appeal I read:


 * If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired.

This dissuades me from making any further appeals, but only because of inadequacies of the English language. Unconvincing implies that the appeals have failed because they are not capable of convincing. The reality is that the appeals are completely capable of convincing, but their target audience has shown itself barely or completely incapable of being convinced.

Hence this appeal. There's no point my re-stating the reasons behind my appeals, as they are unchanged. I would now like them to be read by someone else, please. If that means going to the top, so be it.

Help me, Jimmy Wales, you're my only hope.

Professor Eugene Q Thrung III (talk) 10:38, 5 June 2018 (UTC)