This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page. |
Reason: Suspicious edits
As to the identity of the IP, well, the series of edits which one-sidedly resumed an old war between two banned editors tells a story and is itself the evidence. Anon IPs who make controversial edits are usually reverted on sight, and that would apply to the IPs of both banned editors. Banned editors who evade blocks and edit anyway can often do it for long periods of time as long as they abide by the rules and avoid controversy. It's still wrong, but it happens. In this case the edits were very controversial and reverted. If this is an open proxy, then it should be blocked. -- Brangifer ( talk) 17:16, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Reason: Discovered open port 80/tcp on 79.142.79.10 -- Gordonrox24 | Talk 19:02, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page. |
Reason: Suspicious edits
As to the identity of the IP, well, the series of edits which one-sidedly resumed an old war between two banned editors tells a story and is itself the evidence. Anon IPs who make controversial edits are usually reverted on sight, and that would apply to the IPs of both banned editors. Banned editors who evade blocks and edit anyway can often do it for long periods of time as long as they abide by the rules and avoid controversy. It's still wrong, but it happens. In this case the edits were very controversial and reverted. If this is an open proxy, then it should be blocked. -- Brangifer ( talk) 17:16, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Reason: Discovered open port 80/tcp on 79.142.79.10 -- Gordonrox24 | Talk 19:02, 17 February 2011 (UTC)