This page is a chronological archive of past discussions from User talk:Ks0stm for the period January 2017 to June 2017. In order to preserve the record of past discussions, the contents of this page should be preserved in their current form. Please do not make new edits to this page. If you wish to make new comments or re-open an old discussion thread, please do so on the User talk:Ks0stm page. If necessary, copy the relevant discussion thread to the User talk:Ks0stm page and then add your comments there. |
New Year's greetings
|
---|
Happy New Year, Ks0stm!Ks0stm, Send New Year cheer by adding ((subst:Happy New Year fireworks)) to user talk pages. Happy New Year, Ks0stm!Ks0stm, Send New Year cheer by adding ((subst:Happy New Year fireworks)) to user talk pages. Happy New Year, Ks0stm!Ks0stm, Send New Year cheer by adding ((subst:Happy New Year fireworks)) to user talk pages. |
Hi !
I hereby request the Edit Filter Manager permission in order to be able to view private filters here which would help me at my homewikis (maithili & nepali wiki) edit filter works as well as it would give me the ability to assist other users with editfilter problems. Additional, I'm Administrator of maithili and nepali wikipedia. Also, Rollbacker and Pending Changes Reviewer here on enwiki. I always respect the local communities and their decisions and won't try to override them. Thanks for your consideration.
I wish you and your family a great new year, full of happiness, joyful. Have a great time dear. — TBhagat (talk) 08:57, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
Hi Ks0stm. Contemplating taking Urban developers to AfD, could I ask you to have a look at Urban Developers and see if it's the same company? If it is, would you please copy-paste the code from the latest live revision of Urban Developers into Sam Sailor/Temp/Urban Developers or email it to me. Thanks, — Sam Sailor 19:38, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
Excuse me. I am lead writer for the Signpost's "Arbitration Report" and am wondering if you would be interested in answering some interviews questions as a newly elected Arbitrator. The questions will be asked through email, unless answering them here would be a more suitable choice. GamerPro64 20:23, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
GamerPro64 03:32, 31 January 2017 (UTC)
You placed an unblock request at User talk:Copenhagen Plant Science Centre on hold on 9 December, and it is still on hold. I suggest it is time to go back and review it. Also, you attempted to ping another editor in the "unblock on hold" template, but pings inside such templates don't work. I guess you probably also thought that the "unblock on hold" template would automatically ping the blocking administrator, since you didn't inform him that you were putting the request on hold pending a response from him, but that too is not the case. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 17:43, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
Since you have made several edits since I posted the above message, and many hours have gone by since then, I shall work on the assumption that you do not intend to reply, and I shall decide how to close the request myself. My apologies in advance if that assumption was mistaken, and you were going to come back to it later, but I feel it is past time this matter was dealt with. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:23, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
Linguisttalk|contribs 16:31, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.
13:36, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
Hi,
Thanks very much for all your help on SPI. Not to overwhelm your workload, but this is an interesting case involving an account whose technical data is set to expire imminently, and I'd very much appreciate your help. Sorry to rush you.
Thanks again,
GABgab 16:43, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
User:Fireguy0123456789 is abusing his talk page. CLCStudent (talk) 18:34, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
I wanted to request creation of a page on Victor Mochere, a renown Kenyan Author, blogger, scholar, influencer and entrepreneur but apparently you have protected it from creation. I would like to request you to allow the page be created. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DennisMbaro (talk • contribs) 08:36, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
I forget the name of this LTA, but would rather not create a formal SPI per WP:DENY anyway. You recently blocked a couple socks, and I think GorillaFanfare and ChkUser account from a few days ago are the same vandal as well. Sro23 (talk) 03:40, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
I have discovered a vandalism edit that contains a person's phone number and Snapchat. Is this RD worthy? If so, how do I proceed without drawing new public attention to the now-buried revision? — CobraWiki ( jabber | stuff ) 04:39, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
You archived Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hanlyh before any action was taken against the master. The CU was inconclusive because of the use of proxies but, as I commented, the behavioural evidence against the master was pretty conclusive. I just wanted to check the archiving without any action against the master was intentional and not an oversight. Thanks, Cabayi (talk) 11:12, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2017).
And so ends the first round of the competition, with 4 points required to qualify for round 2. It would have been 5 points, but when a late entrant was permitted to join the contest in February, a promise was made that his inclusion would not result in the exclusion of any other competitor. To achieve this, the six entrants that had the lowest positive score of 4 points have been added to the 64 people who otherwise would have qualified. As a result, some of the groups have nine contestants rather than eight. Our top four scorers in round 1 were:
The largest number of DYKs have been submitted by Vivvt and The C of E, who each claimed for seven, and MBlaze Lightning achieved eight articles at ITN. Carbrera and Peacemaker67 each claimed for five GAs and Krishna Chaitanya Velaga was well out in front for GARs, having reviewed 32. No featured pictures, featured topics or good topics yet, but we have achieved three featured articles and a splendid total of fifty good articles.
So, on to the second round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:52, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
((Cu-endorse)) -> Endorsed by a checkuser. Thanks, GABgab 22:39, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
1 year back i was created some articles, my articles stayed up to 6 months. In the middle way i filed 3rr case on one editor. Then this editor with help of 2 administrators created false Afd discussions and closed the discussions through wrong way (Bad Nac and irregular closures). They deleted my articles. What can i do now? My articles have good sources...only the above editors against my articles...
I think for good purpose can open second alternate account. This is my second alternate account today i was created. If i edit with my first account the above editors immediately revert this...so at essential movement i am using this account...
Please advise me
Thanq
Edrtfyguh (talk) 11:34, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Isn't it a bit counterproductive to configure semi-protection and pending changes protection at the same time? I would have expected either one or the other. If the page is semi-protected, then the people (largely IPs) who would be allowed to edit under the condition that their edits be reviewed via pending changes won't even be able to do that. Master of Time (talk) 07:06, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello, can you please delete this page. Thanks--Alaa :)..! 08:14, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
Noah Kastin (talk) 01:40, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
I think High speed IP account, also. Sro23 (talk) 04:20, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
* Confirmed:
17:52 GMT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 38.140.109.186 (talk) 17:52, 28 March 2017 (UTC)
An article that you have edited--Pawnee, Kansas--has been proposed for merging into First Territorial Capitol of Kansas. If you are interested, please participate in the merger discussion. Thank you. RM2KX (talk) 01:32, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello, I saw that the article Militant Minority was deleted for not meeting the notability standards. However, the book article had citation to 2 reliable book reviews, which is enough per WP:NBOOK. Please check it? Thanks, --Skr15081997 (talk) 11:04, 30 March 2017 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (March 2017).
So it appears that the editor in question was a sockpuppet of a blocked or banned user as well as being a vandal. Robert McClenon (talk) 07:06, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2013 El Reno tornado you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CycloneIsaac -- CycloneIsaac (talk) 00:21, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
Volume 9, Issue 1 • Spring 2017 • About the Newsletter
|
|
The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
👍 Creeperparty568 ~ Cool Guy (talk) 21:57, 18 April 2017 (UTC) |
The article 2013 El Reno tornado you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:2013 El Reno tornado for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CycloneIsaac -- CycloneIsaac (talk) 04:22, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello how are you? My name is Andrea, I am a user of a software (Freemake Video Downloader), and I wanted to make its page on Wikipedia. But when I went to do it, I found that it had already been done but the page was deleted. I have experience in Wikipedia and I know how to do it neutral, what do you recommend?, I could prepare the article in the sandbox for you to look at?, or do you want me to upload it directly? Or (a third option) upload it as Draft and submit to be reviewed?--Ane wiki (talk) 17:53, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
to jerk you around on the indef/siteban thing. thanks for taking it with good humor. Jytdog (talk) 19:40, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
You added IPBE to this account under the justification that it might be hit by an autoblock. (And I would guess other accounts as well.) Is there still a need for IPBE? --Izno (talk) 17:30, 24 April 2017 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Auth0RiTy Contact me 20:33, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Just saw your message on the SPI page. Is there anything I need to do? --Skamecrazy123 (talk) 20:20, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
Hello! I already edited the article, please check it and tell me if you would make any changes. In the section that I now call "Criticism" I tried to leave previous concepts, but only based on the most reliable pages, it is ok?. Also, I would like to add the software details to this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_download_managers, do you think it is correct? Thank you!--Ane wiki (talk) 22:13, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi Ks0stm. I get an alert saying "Hardblocking range used by this user". What does it mean? Does it change something to me? Pamputt (talk) 08:09, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your prompt action on my request for blockage removal. I suggest that the Procseebot is too narrowly programmed with false positives and needs tweaking.
I did indeed edit from a hotel in Indonesia while traveling last week. However, I travel several times a year in this country and have never been procseebot-ted before.
Of more relevance is the need for white listing: 1. As you noted, I am now back at home using the same IP address as usual. I don't know if the blockage occurred after I logged out while editing from the hotel, but I first saw it when logging in from home after my trip. This suggests that the bot is incapable of reversing itself when the normal linkage of user/IP is re-established. Perhaps a second bot is needed to clean up procseebot false positives or transient blockages? 2. A subtler form of white listing would be to program the procseebot to ignore flagging when an edit is clearly (say 99.99% probability) being made by the authentic user despite the variance in IP address. AFAIK, the only edit I made while traveling last week was an UNDO of a revert. Isn't it highly likely that the authentic user is the one who would make an UNDO?
Thanks again for your attention to this matter and I hope procseebot can be refined for the benefit of all. Martindo (talk) 21:10, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
The article 2013 El Reno tornado you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2013 El Reno tornado for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CycloneIsaac -- CycloneIsaac (talk) 22:02, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
Hi, can you shed some light on this (I'm putting the case on hold)? If you prefer, you can e-mail me. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:35, 30 April 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the clarification without automatic banning. I have ceased editing and requested Mediation officially. I don't see how consensus can be reached via Talk if people insist on declaring Hispanic to be a race on the basis of everyone-knows-it-is-true without providing any sources or debate other than their own POV. Martindo (talk) 01:20, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
The second round of the competition has now closed, with just under 100 points being required to qualify for round 3. YellowEvan just scraped into the next round with 98 points but we have to say goodbye to the thirty or so competitors who didn't achieve this threshold; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. Our top scorers in round 2 were:
Vivvt submitted the largest number of DYKs (30), and MBlaze Lightning achieved 13 articles at ITN. Carbrera claimed for 11 GAs and Argento Surfer performed the most GARs, having reviewed 11. So far we have achieved 38 featured articles and a splendid 132 good articles. Commendably, 279 GARs have been achieved so far, more than double the number of GAs.
So, on to the third round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:16, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello, Ks0stm. The result of this discussion was to allow your username. The discussion has now been closed. If you would like to see what concerns were raised, you can find a link to the discussion in the archive. You do not need to change your username. Thank you. —CYBERPOWER (Around) 22:40, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2017).
Slightly puzzled by this edit. Our practice has long been that we don't have empty categories... AusLondonder (talk) 23:38, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for erring on the side of sanity this evening. I feel bad for all the troubled caused. I hope you and Bbb23 don't think that I filed that SPI in bad faith. The edit timings were uncanny, along with the general tendency towards aggressively removing material and challenging sources. I am pretty meticulous and don't make accusations lightly.
In fact I've bitten my lip about some pretty outrageous stuff whilst lurking over the last few months. The one thing that made me return was the recent dumping of plainly libellous material into a Jewish politician's BLP. If it hadn't been for that, I probably would have let the SPI slide too.
I feel there has been a general decline in the quality of editing and the level of debate on Wikipedia in even just the last year or so. I'm also rattled by the idea that I could so easily have been connected to my wife's account, which I don't wish to disclose (it was never abusively used). It's actually made me much less inclined to edit Wikipedia, and I feel I have made the right decision to retire now, although I may occasionally log in to monitor my watchlist, and reserve the right make a WP:Clean start at a later date.
Thanks, (1)AnotherNewAccount (talk) 02:42, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Wildlife SOS, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Encroachment (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.
It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:06, 4 May 2017 (UTC)
Could you now restore this page now that the actual album is now out? — Preceding unsigned comment added by LuigiYoshiU (talk • contribs) 19:27, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
Hi Ks. Check your email. Need a response very quickly (24 hours). ~ Rob13Talk 03:29, 11 May 2017 (UTC)
Hi Ks0stm, thanks for renaming my user account about a couple weeks ago. I'm contacting you because I noticed that I couldn't access AWB since my new username is not on the check page (my previous one was). I'm aware that this is automatically resolved every once in a while by a bot, but looking at the history of the page, it seems that the bot has clerked the page twice (2 + 9 May 2017) since my rename including renaming another user, but my old username has not been changed. Could you do this manually, since the page is fully protected? Thanks —72 talk / contribs 15:49, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
can you remove the sanctions placed on this article? United States presidential election, 2020
thankx Crewcamel (talk) 18:18, 14 May 2017 (UTC)
On 16 May 2017, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 2013 El Reno tornado, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that the 2.6-mile (4.2 km) wide 2013 El Reno tornado, which was rated EF3, is the widest tornado ever recorded in the United States? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2013 El Reno tornado. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, ), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page. |
Mifter (talk) 03:24, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
Hello Ks0stm! Warned editor here :P. Anyways, quick question if you wish or are willing to acknowledge for me. I'm trying to archive at least discussions (1–60) from my current talk page to User talk:Adog104/Archive 1, which includes an Arbcom discretionary sanction notice, since the total page exceeds 100,000 bytes. In trying to save the archive page with the 60 discussions still located on my talk page, I was met with this notice. Can I just remove the discussions from my talk page first and then save them on the archive page, do I have to leave the notice on my talk page, or am I just over-complicating this seemingly simple notice and there is just a simple work-around? Thanks. Adog104 Talk to me 00:43, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
You deleted my article on the VRV streaming service. I don't believe this is fair, because I see less notable streaming services having their own article. I know the article wasn't written perfectly - I'll admit it was vaguely advertise-like, but instead of deleting the article it could have been revised and improved upon. I believe it does fit the notability guidelines. There were multiple articles that bracket the streaming service with no article to be found. I was just trying to fill in the gaps as I see them. Please reconsider your deletion.
Mr Ernie (talk) 18:26, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
Possible sockpuppetry or meatpuppetry: (Removed)edits of a banned long-term abuser [1][2] and edits of the user[3][4]. 185.197.72.214 (talk) 11:55, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
News and updates for administrators from the past month (May 2017).
At User:LillHas/SupaStarLT I weighed the 6 or 7 (depending on which you count) self serving links against the skeleton content that includes nothing independant of the artist. I considered it link spam. Legacypac (talk) 03:17, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
Halo friend, thank your for editing in Aman (album), please, I need upload cover file of the article, file link MyriamTzz (talk) 04:38, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
@Ks0stm: Could you please help? This user 112.198.73.9 (talk · contribs) continues to add messages to my talk page without any proof and insists that I'm the same user as 73.94.24.81 (talk · contribs), I don't know how I can be that user when they geolocate to the United States. I've begun ignoring their messages on Materialscientist (talk · contribs)'s and Xdeluna (talk · contribs)'s page but it's becoming annoying continuously seeing their "sockpuppet" templates popping up as messages whenever I click on a Wikipedia page. (121.219.136.184 (talk) 08:04, 4 June 2017 (UTC))
On May 1 you posted this notice on the Talk page. I assume you also created the editnotice on the article page at the same time. I have shied away from enforcement of arbitration sanctions because I find them increasingly more complex unless you are an administrator who does it frequently. However, in this case I'm speaking as an ordinary editor. I don't see anything in the American politics sanctions that impose a general 1RR rule or consensus - just the latest standard discretionary sanctions. What am I missing? This concerns me because that article gets a lot of disruptive edits, and if I have to worry about such rules in undoing that disruption, I'll take it off my watchlist. Even worse, I'll have to worry about the rules, whether posted or not, on any article related to American politics post-1932, which, even though I don't edit very many, covers a lot of articles. Anyway, lucky you, you're an arbitrator. I'm confident you can explain this to me. --Bbb23 (talk) 16:05, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello Ks0stm. Regarding your proposal for renaming. Though you could have a kind of argument for renaming, the new title does not come trippingly off the tongue: "Template:Post-1932 American politics discretionary sanctions/1RR consensus required ". How about (instead) a change in what the sanction says? Recall that you and your Arbcom colleagues got rid of the consensus requirement for ARBPIA editing on 19 May. In my opinion their change is an improvement and will make AEs easier to close. It is much easier to know whether someone reverted again within 24 hours than to decide if the person managed to obtain consensus before reverting again. What would you think of doing the same for the AP sanctions? Make the reverter wait 24 hours rather than wait for consensus? It would take another AE but some people might support it. My impression is that the current AP sanction wording is mostly the creation of User:Coffee so AE ought to be able to change it. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 20:43, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello. I saw your closure at Wikipedia talk:Harassment#RfC: Harassment of non-editors. I'm not here to disagree with the outcome; well, I agree that there may have been consensus. I just wonder whether you can summarize the "Oppose" arguments without changing the outcome, i.e. expand your rationale. Thank you. --George Ho (talk) 23:19, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
Messaged me through wikipedia! | |
Thank you for actually messaging , I was very, very surprised. Plus, you seem very nice. AlisaWartooth27 (talk) 23:27, 7 June 2017 (UTC) |
Hi User:Ks0stm, sorry if I'm asking the wrong person but do you know if this source [5], is reliable to be used on a song article? It explicitly calls "Wild Thoughts" R&B so I'd like to use it if possible. What do you think? --Theo Mandela (talk) 22:04, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
Persistent edit warring by IPs https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nam_Joo-hyuk&action=history — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.243.213.111 (talk) 02:24, 29 June 2017 (UTC)
The third round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 288 points being required to qualify for round 4. It was a hotly competitive round with all but four of the contestants exceeding the 106 points that was necessary to proceed to round 4 last year. Coemgenus and Freikorp tied on 288, and both have been allowed to proceed, so round 4 now has one pool of eight competitors and one of nine.
Round 3 saw the achievement of a 26-topic Featured topic by MPJ-DK as well as 5 featured lists and 13 featured articles. PanagiotisZois and SounderBruce achieved their first ever featured articles. Carbrera led the GA score with 10, Tachs achieved 17 DYKs and MBlaze Lightning 10 In the news items. There were 167 DYKs, 93 GARs and 82 GAs overall, this last figure being higher than the number of GAs in round 2, when twice as many people were taking part. Even though contestants performed more GARs than they achieved GAs, there was still some frustration at the length of time taken to get articles reviewed.
As we start round 4, we say goodbye to the fifteen or so competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them (some people have fallen foul of this rule and the points have been removed).
If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 05:37, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
Hello, if you might remember, you granted IPBE (which will expire on 23:57 4 November 2017) for Prinsipe Ybarro on 4 May 2017. The said user requested global IPBE in meta, which may at first seems legit (because the user has IPBE here), but if you will look closely, their IP address is an "open proxy" (which Prinsipe believes it is not open), which is in a range globally and meta blocked by Masti and tlwiki blocked by WayKurat. I ask you to reconsider your decision because the IPBE you placed is only to prevent a legitimate and established user to be affected by a block of an IP address/range they are using, not to use open proxies (unless you permitted them to use open proxies and Tor). I don't think of any reason for them to use open proxies or any anonymity tool like Tor at all while editing Wikipedia. Sure, probably to safeguard their privacy, but they live in the Philippines, and it is not the United States where the NSA monitors all the data of the citizens, nor China where they block access to Chinese Wikipedia. Furthermore, martial law and the suspension of the writ of habeas corpus is declared only in the Mindanao group of islands, not (yet) the whole Philippines. Thanks, Poyekhali (talk) 07:15, 30 June 2017 (UTC)