User talk:Oneidman

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

Caught by a colocation web host block but this host or IP is not a web host. Blocked in error. My IPv4 address is 64.187.167.226. My IPv6 address is 2001:470:a:783::2. My ISP recently began defaulting to the IPv6 address, and this is what Wikipedia is blocking. This address uses an IPv6-over-IPv4 tunnel supplied by Hurricane Electric LLC, which makes it appear to be a "web host." It is. however, a legitimate IPv6 address that I receive from my ISP, Wave / Condointernet.net. As a good Internet user, I would prefer to normalize this IPv6 usage rather than attempt to override it. Thank you for your attention

Decline reason:

Unfortunately, the he.net tunnelbrokers are blocked as they are functionally an anonymizing proxy. Any user may request multiple tunnels, and move them / change the addresses easily, at will.

We won't be able to lift this block at this time, unfortunately.

As a sidenote, I've never seen an ISP use that free service, which has no SLA, in a production environment - especially one with access to BGP, that owns multiple huge IPv6 address pools: [1].

It may be worth double-checking your setup, and making sure that the tunnel isn't running somewhere on your own network. ^{!ɘM γɿɘυϘ}⅃ϘƧ 05:48, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Your citations for Appelbaum's article

Heya, just saw your edit to Appelbaum's article. It looks like you replaced the cryptome primary source. Unfortunately, secondary sources can't be a news aggregate site (like YCombinator, Slashdot, Digg, Reddit, etc), and they can not be a blog post that only copies the original material. From WP:SECONDARY, secondary sources contain "an author's analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis of the facts, evidence, concepts, and ideas taken from primary sources." Your best bet is to use a source from a notable news organization that references these emails. --Elephanthunter (talk) 05:55, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback. I'm learning a lot of Wikipedia lore from this latest experience. Here is the problem with these two primary sources: No website except for aggregators appears to have published full text or links to full text on Cryptome. The letters were both released anonymously and were received by Cryptome and many other news organizations. Several articles exist that refer to the letters or even quote them, but none of these articles provides a reference or names a source. I can cite these articles, but I would also like to provide a link to the primary sources that the articles themselves suppress. Any suggestions? Oneidman (talk) 23:00, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is meant to be a tertiary source of information, summarizing information gleaned from reliable secondary sources. If reliable secondary sources (such as news articles) have written about these documents ([2][3]), then we can write about the documents as well; but if they haven't, then we can't. When you say that several articles exist that refer to/quote the documents, what articles are you referring to? --Dodi 8238 (talk) 12:09, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I found some secondary coverage about Appelbaum's March 2015 suspension. One of the articles refers to the letter that the Tor Project's HR-manager had written to Appelbaum at the time.[4][5] I haven't found any secondary coverage of the Tor/Appelbaum Separation Agreement. --Dodi 8238 (talk) 19:05, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I also found the earliest publication of the suspension letter and substituted that for the Cryptome citation, which came two days later. The Wired reference only has Andrea alluding to the suspension, so I cited instead a lengthy German article on golem.de that also points to a different primary publication of the letter. I think the suspension letter is nailed down now. I will look for secondary sources about the separation agreement next. Oneidman (talk) 19:40, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. Please check Talk:Jacob Applebaum QuelleChose1 ™ —Preceding undated comment added 12:21, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reference errors on 12 August

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Jacob Appelbaum page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:18, 13 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:24, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]