Talk:No open proxies/Archives/2006

Who decided this policy?

When and who decided to make this a policy? One link to a word by old Jimbo is not an argument (apart from an argument from authority, which goes against the whole philosophy of Wikipedia). IP adress gives absolutely no anonymity, since it's like a passport for your computer. Fighting vandalism is not a legitimate argument for blocking all open proxies, at least if you don't want to swap your freedom for security (and you'll get none of them...). Some sensitive issues make you a target for hackers (for example, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict), and open proxies are a way to defend themselves from this. 81.0.225.179 18:28, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

See "Foundation Issue Violation" on Wikipedia's equivalent talk page for relevant discussion. // Pathoschild (^talk) 03:17, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Nobody has an answer for that question, really. Evidently, it was Napoleon. Thesocialistesq 14:11, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Just to make the Point

Prefering Anonymity and Freedom of Speech does not Imply Having a Lack of Responsibility.

I edited this using the TOR network, all it took was creating a username with Wikimedia. If this functionality is what is wanted by the Wikipedians, fine for me. Only writeoff is that you may need to create an account everytime you want to edit something, which can be annoying after a while. I strongly advise against using a 'normal' reusable Wiki login, as the username AND password are BOTH visible to the Tor exit node.

Although I understand the basis of this blocking, solving it this way seems a bit childish to me. Especially because an educated user might and will find ways around it.

Regards to all of you and thanks for reading.

May the responsibility be with you.

TorValds 15:49, 26 May 2006 (UTC) (Who was born and died the very same day)

The problem is that a valid username, and being logged in, does not solve the problem.

Some of the Tor nodes are restricted. Others are not.

If this truly is "No open proxies", then all Tor nodes should be blocked.

If the policy truly is "Being logged in, and accountable, is sufficient", then the code needs to be changed to reflect that -- right now, being logged in and on the right (or wrong) exit node ruins you.

I mention this more on my wiki talk page -- basically, I had to change my tor configuration, so tor would use many, many node, including slow, unreliable, or distant-continent nodes (slowing down my internet traversal) in order to have a chance of a node that was open for wiki.

--Keybounce 01:36, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Anonymity network exit nodes are blocked as well. Quite a few Tor exit nodes will be blocked over the next few days; see Meta:WikiProject on open proxies/Tor. // [admin] Pathoschild (^talk/_map) 03:28, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Solution of anonymous editing/vandalism/password security problem:

- open proxies users can edit wikipedia after logging in.

- logging in is allowed, for example, 1 week after account creation.

- account creation and logging in is done using secure connection.

Luk, 1 November 2006

plus, to block creating by user, at once, of many accounts and using them week later for massive vandalizing, account creation procedure for anonymous proxies users should be time consuming and impossible to speed up by using scripts. e.g.: writing in a page of random words from image. Luk, 12:53, 1 November 2006.

plus or instead of 1 week activation time. Luk, 13:14, 1 November 2006.

A similar solution is already being applied. The new set of templates on Meta only blocks anonymous users operating from open proxies. Users just have to create their account from an uncompromised proxy (account creation is blocked to prevent abuse), then they can edit from any open proxy they wish. However, the new system hasn't been propagated to the chapters yet. —[admin] Pathoschild 18:25, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it's a good solution, but, I think, it can be improved. See this: https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:No_open_proxies#Solution_of_the_problem:_more_action_-_more_reaction Luk, 9 February 2007

wikipedia template Template:policylist

I added the Template:policylist to this page, but its about wikipedia policies. Is this proper if this is a mediawiki page? I would like to put it on the wikipedia version, but its updated from here. How can this potential problem be solved? Fresheneesz 23:13, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Since this policy applies to all Wikimedia projects, a Wikipedia-specific template isn't relevant. I've added it to the Wikipedia page; future updates should take the difference into account. // [admin] Pathoschild (^talk/_map) 02:57, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Censorship in China

Isn't the Chinese goverment's censorship now restricted only to Chinese language Wikipedia? If it is, should the text be changed accordingly? --Бране Јовановић 16:06, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

¿¿¿¡¡Y el idioma Español!!??? --201.222.175.6 00:55, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Right now, all of Wikipedia is blocked in China, and the policy to block open proxies effectively bans users from China. I've previously used Tor to circumvent the block, but it stopped to work after I updated Firefox to version 2.0. I think it's because the Switchproxy plug-in for Firefox doesn't work. Even Tor was not a good solution, because for most users it's too difficult to install. Anyway, I've not been able to access articles since then without using an open proxy. The alternative access to Wikipedia explained somewhere else ( https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki) also doesn't work any more. I strongly oppose the ban, and I'm forced to breach it to even make this statement. —Babelfisch 03:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Secure Wikimedia seems to be working. —{admin} Pathoschild 05:17, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Not in Beijing, not any more. —Babelfisch 05:05, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Blocking all AOL IPs

Without any announcement of the change, some admins on en have started blocking all AOL IP's citing this policy as authority. This changes long standing tradition of the love-hate releationship Wikipedia has with AOL - I urge this decision to be more widely discussed before continueing the implementation. 64.12.117.5 18:15, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

See

• initial discussion after unannounced change started being implemented
• my appeal to stop blocking AOL