Template talk:Shared IP edu/Archive 1

Archive 1

What to do?

This template is helpful, but I'm a little lost as to how to proceed.

It says "In the event of vandalism from this address, efforts will be made to contact the institution to report network abuse." and I know of a case of vanalism on Edgar F. Codd. What am I supposed to do? put a {subst:test} on the page? McKay 17:12, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi there, best to check WP:VANDAL for good instructions. I suspect we don't go to the trouble of reporting abuse to the organization for just a tire-kicking vandal. However, the vandal should be warned on their talk page, partially to let other editors know there is a pattern. -- cmh^TC 18:50, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Admin contact and school website address?

I think the template should be changed to include an admin contact for the school and the school website. I've done that on user talk:70.88.111.65, my school IP. This will make it easier to contact the school in cases of abuse. ~Crazytales !!! 12:58, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

You can link the school directly from the name. Try {{SharedIPEDU|[http://www.powerscatholic.org/ Powers Catholic High School] (Flint, MI)|host=backup.powerscatholic.org}} --Geniac 18:12, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. But what about modifying the template to include an administration contact? ~Crazytales !!! 12:54, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I think these links to school websites should be done. I'm not sure the best way, though. User:Selket says he/she needs us a list compiled of school websites (and contacts), in order for the bot to add the links. Alternatively, we could manually add them when we give subsequent warnings. --Aude (talk) 20:26, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll work on that soon. I'll have to figure out how the new page preloader works though. I'm planning to split off contact details into a separate subpage and have it transcluded back onto the talk page. We need to keep contact details separate as a safeguard against tampering which is time consuming to detect if a talk page is very active itself. --  Netsnipe  ►  16:57, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Police image

Is there really no place for the image removed in this diff? I suppose it doesn't really matter but I find the reasoning to be quite dubious. Yonatan (contribs/talk) 03:27, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

I'd have to agree that removing the image because "Many users live in regions where the police are not "friendly", to say the least" is a bit odd. If the police image is a problem, how about Image:Nuvola apps important.svg () instead? auburnpilot talk 21:03, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I just ran across this discussion. My reasoning, which I could not expand on very much in an edit summary, is that many people on this planet live under police states, and Wikipedia should not appear to be working in alliance with those state's aims. I personally feel anxiety and distress at the image of a cop's hat, and I have only resided briefly in a police state, and was never a citizen of one. If it is preferred to have an image in that area to call attention to the warning, Image:Nuvola apps important.svg would be great. Thanks to auburnpilot for that suggestion. ··coelacan 19:52, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I added the Image:Nuvola apps important.svg () image. Let's see how that goes. -- Avi 22:03, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Link

The template has a link to Wikipedia:Blocking_policy#Options_for_IP_blocks which is not present. It should be changed.--Scheibenzahl 15:16, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Done. Mangojuice^talk 16:09, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Similarly, it links to Wikipedia:Requests for investigation which is inactive. Gary Kirk [Talk] 09:33, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Done; thanks. -- Avi 13:53, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

replacement image

Resolved

 – Done.

Note: In the event of persistent vandalism, anonymous editing from this IP address may be disabled for up to 6 months at a time while abuse reports may be forwarded to your school administration for investigation in case of long-term abuse by registered users.

Can we replace image with just the important with clockimportant?Jer10 95 Talk 18:48, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Sure. -- Avi 16:25, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Please remove unwarranted limitation to "primary and secondary schools"

The above box now reads:

Note: In the event of persistent vandalism from primary and secondary schools, anonymous editing may be disabled for up to 1 year at a time. Abuse reports may also be forwarded to your school administration for investigation in case of long-term abuse by registered users.

Apparently, the highlighted text has been inserted without discussion, and I see no sense whatsover in limiting ourselves here. We want to protect ourselves from any vandalism, regardless of what kind of institution it comes from. Can this please be changed back? — Sebastian 17:19, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Please take this request seriously. This insertion clearly violated our policies and guidelines:

• "[A]dministrators should not make significant changes to these pages without prior discussion" (WP:PPOL);
• "Always fill in the summary field. [...] [M]entioning one change but not another one can be misleading [...]" (WP:ES). That was the case in the edit summary of the insertion.

In this context, I also want to mention that of the last three edits from institutional IPs that I encountered, all three were from universities. This indicates that we are pulling our claws in the fight against a significant source of vandalism, just because one editor made a change that he/she didn't even deem worthwhile of an edit summary. — Sebastian 21:01, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

From what I understand, we prefer not to block entire universities for up to one year; rather, we communicate directly with their IT staff, which is why the primary/secondary is there. I could be mistaken, however. -- Avi 21:23, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your explanation, Avi. — Sebastian 00:01, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

{{sudo}} Collecting all evidence put forward above, we have:

For keeping the inserted wording

There may be some form of other communication. Either nobody knows anything about it or the people who do just don't speak up here.

For removing the inserted wording

It was inserted in violation of one policy and against one guideline. There was no consensus, and not even a single benefit put forward for its insertion. Conversely, it limits our ability to fight vandalism at one of the busiest fronts.

Please, therefore, remove the inserted text. — Sebastian 00:01, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm inclined to remove it, as it seems needlessly specific and effectively narrows the potential uses of the template without any obvious benefit (that I can see, anyway). Extraneous chance to link another article or two, maybe? Could easily replace it with "educational institutions" or "this IP address" or anything similar. – Luna Santin (talk) 23:39, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

That would be nice; thank you! This is actually undisputed; nobody has spoken up in favor of the inserted text. (I see Avi's comment as an attempt to explain it, not to defend it.) — Sebastian 04:05, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

 Done pending any further discussion or requests. – Luna Santin (talk) 08:12, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Cool, thanks! I like the wording "from this IP address". That is of course a limitation, too, since it prevents us from doing such things as whole IP range blocks, or blocking one IP for the wrongdoings of another IP from the same school. But I don't mind that since I don't think anybody ever seriously proposed such a thing. — Sebastian 17:57, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I hate to rehash an old discussion, but I'm noticing that it was said that it is prefered to contact university IT staff instead of blocking their IPs. I totally agree with this idea, but why should K12 schools be any different considering many districts employ a very tiny pool of proxy IPs (usually about two or three) to represent the entire district of schools, so why shouldn't the K12s and universities be treated in an equal manner? GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 01:06, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Abuse reports & registered users

{{sudo}}

Please remove the text "in case of long-term abuse by registered users" from the box at the bottom regarding vandalism. Abuse reports cannot be filed on registered users (see WP:ABUSE), so the statement should read "Note: In the event of persistent vandalism from primary and secondary schools, anonymous editing may be disabled for up to 1 year at a time. Abuse reports may also be forwarded to your school administration for investigation." --Darkwind (talk) 16:31, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

No, it should not include the words "from primary and secondary schools", as per the previous discussion. — Sebastian 00:07, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Y Done - I removed "in case of long-term abuse by registered users", but left it otherwise as is since I don't see consensus on what to do with that. Nihiltres^(t.l) 16:48, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Documentation

{{editprotected}}

I came to make some changes to the documentation to make it clearer that this template should NOT be subst:ed, and remembered this template is protected. So, I created the /doc subpage per WP:DOC. Please remove everything from the <noinclude> to the bottom of the page and replace it with:

<noinclude>
{{Documentation}}
<!-- PLEASE ADD CATEGORIES AND INTERWIKIS TO THE /doc SUBPAGE, THANKS -->
</noinclude>

The original categories, interwikis, and the {{pp-template}} are on the /doc page which will be transcluded. Thanks. --Darkwind (talk) 15:53, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Y Done. Thanks for the detailed request! --ais523 15:58, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Double categorisation

The template makes entries in categories on the same tree.--141.84.69.20 (talk) 20:01, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

{{editprotected}}

I agree that IPs shouldn't be categorised into Category:Shared IP addresses from educational institutions and Category:Shared IP addresses because the latter is a parent of the former. I'm an admin, but I don't know enough about the code to fix it without maybe messing something up. --Geniac (talk) 15:11, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

There is code on the page such that accounts are categorised into the first category no matter what namespace the template is used in, and the second category only in the User Talk namespace, so my guess is that someone was trying to implement some sort of system I don't understand the details of. I'm therefore not making this edit immediately until it's determined why the page is as it is at the moment, but am happy for someone else who understands what's going on to make it. --ais523 18:05, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Actually, the code in the {{#ifeq: function is much older than the Category:Shared IP addresses from educational institutions code. When that subcategory was created, the category link was added without much forethought, such that it categorises in all instances. I don't think there is anything intentional about the difference. I have changed it to only categorise into Category:Shared IP addresses from educational institutions, and only on user talk pages, which is what should have happened when the subcategory was added way back in 2006. Happy‑melon 12:57, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Template on user page?

Hello all- Anyone know if we are meant to put the template on the user page for the IP address as well as on the talk page? I didn't see any guidance regarding that in the Documentation section of the template page. -Eric ^talk 17:26, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

AFAIK, just the talk page. I'll add it to the documentation. --Geniac (talk) 15:12, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. -Eric ^talk 15:44, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

RSS feed

Why was the information about how school administrators can subscribe to an RSS feed removed? GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 00:55, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I've only just noticed that. It was quite a useful feature... (hint - if you want to access the RSS feed, view the history of a page and add "&feed=rss" to the end of the URL.) ~~ [Jam]^[talk] 22:59, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Next time someone wants to {{editprotected}} this...

Grammar. (Commas!) "For this reason^COMMA a message intended for one person may be received by another. Similarly^COMMA an innocent user may be blocked for another user's vandalism." Cheers! —Ed 17 for President _{Vote for Ed} 17:38, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Fixed. Toddst1 (talk) 18:44, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

"1 year or longer"

Previous wordings of that template included

• anonymous editing may be disabled for up to 1 year at a time
• (starting last month) anonymous editing may be disabled for 1 year or longer at a time

Since we don't apparently all agree on whether or not we can block for longer than a year (and what's "longer" than a year?), I think it might be a good idea to drop the "1 year" milestone altogether. What do you think? -- lucasbfr ^talk 09:50, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I am a rather profligate user of this template. I changed the template last month as many 1-year blocks on school IPs were expiring (new school year) and I noticed that a number of fellow admins were re-blocking these IPs who were immediately returning to vandalism (and in many cases had multiple 1 year blocks) with 18 month or 2 year blocks. I also have issued a number of 18 month or 2 year blocks, after 1 year blocks expired. It seemed disingenuous to say an IP may be blocked for up to a year, when in practice they may be blocked for longer. If folks feel that it should be changed back, I would not object. Toddst1 (talk) 14:59, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

As I explained here I would reinsert up to 1 year. However I would not object reinserting 1 year or longer as well. In any case one of both alternatives should be reinstered. —αἰτίας •discussion• 22:31, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

The original wording was up to 6 months because the admin who added it often blocked k-12 schools for 6 months at a time. Since many schools still vandalised after a 6 month block, the wording was changed to up to 1 year. There will undoubtedly be many IPs (particularly k-12 schools) that'll continue vandalising after a one year block, so the next thing you know, it may be changed to "up to 2 years". I think it's better to remove the phrase and let the block templates say the duration. Spellcast (talk) 20:12, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you, "up to 2 years" sounds kinda silly. If we really want to say something, I suggest "for extended periods of time". -- lucasbfr ^talk 15:41, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

TfD

{{editprotected}} This template has been nominated at WP:TfD, so a notice needs to be placed at the top. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 23:02, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Done. --Kralizec! (talk) 19:50, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

dnsstuff for the host field?

Is it just me, or does the DNSstuff website that you get by clicking the host link never work? I always get the message "Access to DNSstuff tool results requires that you own the DNSstuff Professional Tool Set and remain logged in". Seems kind of strange to me. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 18:43, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Request for edit to fix AR link

{{editprotected}} As part of the total revamp of the old Abuse Report system we have moved and renamed the project to Wikipedia:Abuse response. As part of the last stage of the rename the main page was recently moved. While there is a redirect from the old Wikipedia:Abuse report main page we are trying to change all the links we can. Since this high visibility template links to the abuse response system we were wondering if you could make the following change:

Replace: [[Wikipedia:Abuse reports|Abuse reports]]

With: [[Wikipedia:Abuse response|Abuse reports]]

If for some reason you are hesitant to do this edit please feel free to contact me or any of the other contacts listed on Wikipedia:Abuse response. Jamesofur (talk) 07:57, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

 Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:05, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Request to add nl versions

the two equivalents on nl-wiki are:

• [[nl:ws-school]] for primary and secondary schools
• [[nl:ws-hogeschool]] for higher education colleges and universities

Since this is a protected template and I have no admin rights here can an en-wiki colleague add these? Thanx! MoiraMoira (talk) 06:48, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

 Done (well the first one - the latter is linked from it) no admin rights required to edit the documentation subpage. Rd232 ^talk 18:57, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Link not working

The "read our advice on this situation" link is not working. It goes to Wikipedia:Why_create_an_account?#Blocked.3F, but it should go to Wikipedia:Why_create_an_account?#Can.27t_create_an_account_because_your_IP_address_is_blocked.3F. Theleftorium 21:27, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Grammatical error

The template reads:

School staff who want to monitor this IP address for vandalism can subscribe to a web feed of this page in either RSS or Atom format.

This should read "may subscribe..." --Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:56, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Hello Walter- I think can is good there, as may carries a connotation of permission or likelihood. For example: Students who have questions can call the professor at home, but may not do so after 10 pm. In any case, you can see how to request a template edit by going to the template tab, then the view source tab. Eric ^talk 14:58, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

registered to v used by

In some cases it is clear which specific educational institution has long-term use of an IP address (eg by editing a specific school page), but the WHOIS doesn't make it clear that it's a school. What about an extra field |usedby ("appears to be used by") to accommodate this situation? Rd232 ^talk 18:52, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Stylistic updates and changes

Please indicate any feedback on changes that may be viewed at Template:Shared IP edu/sandbox and in comparison at Template:Shared IP edu/testcases. The changes are to make wording consistent, increase visability of the symbol, add a descriptive title, minimize instructions to administrators consistent with other templates, and change certain images consistent with their meanings on user warning templates. Please note that the documentation template is commented out on the sandbox page to avoid unintentional category listing. I'd like to proceed with replacing the code in three days unless feedback warrants delay. --Bsherr (talk) 09:30, 12 August 2010 (UTC) {{editprotected}} --Bsherr (talk) 19:52, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Looks like an improvement to me.  Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:36, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Edit Request because of improper formatting, and down tool

{{editprotected}} This template currently has a whois tool link for the hostnames, not all schools or even organzations do there DNS in such a way.

Side Note: Currently the host in the tool is samspade which is down. I would suggest what you use for your IP User footer, the rdns tool doesn't work.

I suggest for IP users

• Example of an External IP tool, that does RDNS and GeoLocate
  • http://www.dnsstuff.com/tools/ipall/?tool_id=67&token=&toolhandler_redirect=0&ip=71.168.81.235
• Example of an External IP Tool, that does Whois
  • http://www.dnsstuff.com/tools/whois/?ip=71.168.81.235

But, for the current template I would like it changed to show the ip, and a ip whois tool using the current whois tool we have on the tool server, or the one I mentioned above, otherwise including anything in the template is pointless in my opinion.

• ToolServer Tool - Only does NIC Whois
  • http://toolserver.org/~chm/whois.php?ip=71.168.81.235

Thanks --Wolfnix • Talk • 17:02, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

I concur. It should be the ToolServer utility. So this request is eleventh in the queue, huh? --Bsherr (talk) 22:18, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

There is Overlord's tool but a good single external tool seems to be What is my ip (Example 1 w/ geo) and yes, Protected pages have a long que.

or maybe something similar to 71.168.81.235 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) that uses DNSStuff already --Wolfnix • Talk • 20:13, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

CHM's tool is used on the bottom of the IP pages now, but dnsstuff would be fine too. So long as it works. --Bsherr (talk) 20:18, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Nods, they have been around for years now. --Wolfnix • Talk • 20:32, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Not done for now: So many ideas have been discussed that I am unclear what exactly is being requested. Please make your required changes to Template:Shared IP edu/sandbox and reactivate the request. Thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:45, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Everything is set up at the Sandbox, thank you. --Wolfnix • Talk • 16:21, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done, hopefully as you intended. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:12, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Edit protected

{{editprotected}} If a block is needed, [[Wikipedia:Administrators|administrators]]should consider a [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy#Setting block options|soft block]] with the template <tt>{{[[Template:schoolblock|schoolblock]]|''optional comment''}}</tt> as the block reason.

Needs to be changed to:

If a block is needed, [[Wikipedia:Administrators|administrators]] should consider a [[Wikipedia:Blocking policy#Setting block options|soft block]] with the template <tt>{{[[Template:schoolblock|schoolblock]]|''optional comment''}}</tt> as the block reason.

(space after "administrators")

Thanks. ~NerdyScienceDude 13:35, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done, gracias. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 17:22, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Typo

{{editprotected}} Can someone please fix the typo "This IP Address,(IP Address appears here), ..." to "This IP Address, (IP Address appears here), ..." (The lack of a space between the first comma and the IP address). Thanks in advance, Ks0stm ^(T•C•G) 20:43, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Also  Done. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward: not at work) - talk 21:46, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Formatting

Is the template supposed to look like this? I believe the bold and non-bold formats are reversed. (Or am I using it incorrectly? This is how I've always used it.) -- Gyrofrog (talk) 16:26, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

I've adjusted some missing markup;[1] hopefully the right things are bolded now. Thanks. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 16:39, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Looks OK to me, thank you! -- Gyrofrog (talk) 20:46, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Cleanup

I've been working on a cleaned-up update to this template in the sandbox: Template:Shared IP edu/sandbox. There are no major changes, just a neater layout to organise bits and pieces that have been added along the way. — Pretzels ^Hii! 01:01, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Any comments/objections...? — Pretzels ^Hii! 19:38, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

In Internet Explorer 8's compatibility mode, the graphic shows overlapping the text (instead of inside the left margin). However it looks fine in IE 8 native mode, as well as Firefox 3.6 and Opera 10.6. — Kralizec! (talk) 21:15, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

I can't replicate that: my version of IE8 calls it "compatibility view" but I assume that's the same thing? — Pretzels ^Hii! 22:30, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Can you use a vector graphic (SVG) like the current template? -- Avi (talk) 23:18, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Updates to appearance

{{edit protected}} Please replace with Template:Shared IP edu/Sandbox. These changes follow changes made to SharedIP and SharedIPGOV, and ensure uniform appearance and message among the shared IP templates. To summarize, these global changes adopt tmbox, and make the message clearer and more concise. Thanks. --Bsherr (talk) 16:57, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi Pretzels. Regarding the image, I want to make sure the symbol used has design consistency among the shared IP templates, as the current one does, and that it's a vector graphic. --Bsherr (talk) 20:21, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

OK. The current image doesn't function as a useful icon by adding understanding to the message, as it's unclear the building is an educational institution and "IP" in a circle doesn't mean anything. — Pretzels ^Hii! 20:44, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I don't disagree. (Although I do think the red schoolhouse is a stereotypical, recognized representation of a school.) But new images should be proposed as a group to replace the ones at Template:SharedIP and Template:Shared IP gov too. Just replacing one ruins the consistency of the templates. And the icons really should be vector graphics. --Bsherr (talk) 20:51, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

No other comments forthcoming, so  Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:01, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Whitespace fix

{{editprotected}} Change:

('''<tt>[{{fullurl:tools:~overlordq/cgi-bin/whois.cgi|lookup={{urlencode:{{{{{subst|}}}PAGENAME}}}}}} {{{{{subst|}}}PAGENAME}}]</tt> ''')

to:

('''<tt>[{{fullurl:tools:~overlordq/cgi-bin/whois.cgi|lookup={{urlencode:{{{{{subst|}}}PAGENAME}}}}}} {{{{{subst|}}}PAGENAME}}]</tt>''')

This will fix the extra space that comes between the IP address and close parenthesis (e.g., on User talk:75.149.203.217). —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 11:51, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

 Done, thanks. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 12:03, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Please add

Interwiki [[sk:Template:Zdieľaná IP školy]]. Thank you MoiraMoira (talk) 10:58, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

 Done. --Nlu (talk) 14:05, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Editprotected request involving this template

This message is to inform people monitoring this talk page that there is an "editprotected" request involving this and several other templates at Template talk:! cymru.lass ^{(hit me up)}⁄_{(background check)} 20:28, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

blocked notice

We could add a parameter to add

instead of it being there always. We could make it (blocked=yes). We will also change it to:

It would be simpler than adding another template, and why put "may be blocked"? Also, another change is hyperlink for "blocked".~~EBE123~~ ^talk_Contribs 19:32, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

This template is not subst'd, so the parameter would need to be reset at expiry - not very practical. It also serves as a warning for when a school user (or administrator) looks at the talk page to see warnings prior to (or without) a block. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 19:42, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Additional wording

I would like to suggest the addition to this template of some wording that is already on {{Whois}}: If you are an unregistered user operating from this address, note that it is possible for the owner of the IP to determine who was making contributions from this address at a given time. I have found that when I add {{whois}} to an IP talk page, they are MUCH less likely to repeat vandalism than if I don't add this. I'm convinced that this statement informing users that someone can identify who is editing has a positive effect on preventing repeat vandalism. If the same effect could be realized in relation to schoolchildren's edits, I think it could be a considerable benefit to Wikipedia. Deli nk (talk) 21:04, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Please make your proposed changes to Template:Shared IP edu/sandbox and then wait for comments from other editors. To avoid banner bloat please consider removing something so that the banner stays the same size/length. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:13, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

I have added my suggested wording to Template:Shared IP edu/sandbox. In order to avoid banner bloat, I have also removed the phrase, "Review contributions carefully if blocking this IP or reverting its contributions" which really does not convey any useful instruction to administrators beyond what should already be standard practice for them anyway. Deli nk (talk) 16:41, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Since there hasn't been any objection, I would like to request that the suggested changes described above (Template:Shared IP edu/sandbox) be incorporated into the template. Deli nk (talk) 19:10, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant to come back and follow up on this! Deployed now. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:43, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. Deli nk (talk) 22:43, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from , 24 November 2011

Please update the interwiki's here: ca:Plantilla:IP escolar cs:Šablona:Sdílená IP škola fr:Modèle:IP scolaire ja:Template:SharedIPEDU nl:Sjabloon:Ws-school ru:Template:SharedIPEDU simple:Template:schoolip sk:Template:Zdieľaná IP školy sv:Template:Skoldator MoiraMoira (talk) 10:42, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

Interwikis for most templates with the blue "documentation" box are stored on the documentation page, which is normally not protected. You should be able to update the interwiki links for this template at the bottom of Template:Shared IP edu/doc. Anomie⚔ 13:41, 24 November 2011 (UTC)

IP addy =\= person

The template currently states "it is possible for your institution's administration to determine who was making contributions from this [IP] address" which is blatantly false. I think we've learned this much from the RIAA vs. Does lawsuits. I suggest we change the wording to "may be possible" to accurately reflect reality. Palosirkka (talk) 10:48, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Support change. -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 15:14, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Done. Perhaps there are similar wordings used in other templates at Category:Shared IP header templates if you wish to look - otherwise I will add it to my list. Rjd0060 (talk) 02:34, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks guys! I cursorily glanced the category and looks like at least this page could use similar rewording. Palosirkka (talk) 17:19, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Odd behavior

The line "This IP address, [ip], is registered to" displays as "This IP address, , is registered to". Also everything with a pre tag (in the doc and the above sections Documentation and Whitespace fix) shows a blank space. -Auric talk 21:17, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Differences with {{SharedIPCERT}}

What is the difference between the template {{SharedIPCERT}} and {{Shared IP edu}}. Thanks···Vanischenu^「m/_Talk」 11:44, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Not accurate for IPv6 addresses

IPv6 addresses are almost never shared, but we still need to mark educational IPv6 addresses as that. Should we change the current template or make another one?--Jasper Deng (talk) 20:20, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

My vote would go for change the current one. It keeps things simple that way. People already know where to look for this one. Zell Faze (talk) 22:14, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

If it's not shared, it's not in the spirit of this template to tag them this way; that's what {{whois}} is for. If one were to actually READ the template, it's a reminder to assume good faith (which is something we're supposed to do), but it's more or less become a "keep reblocking me long term indefinitely even if they reassign me to something that isn't a school or even if someone with a brain in their head wants to edit from a school" template, almost like a virtual "kick me" sign. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 05:02, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Update to make more like Template:Shared IP

{{Shared IP}} has been updated to make the template friendlier, perhaps we should do the same with {{Shared IP edu}}, {{Mobile IP}}, and {{Shared IP gov}}? PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 05:00, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

{{ISP}} and {{Shared IP}} have long since been updated so that they are "friendlier," and I just updated {{Shared IP gov}} and {{Mobile IP}} as well. Below is what I propose for this school template (the only reason I didn't get rid of the white box is because the white box may contain the abuse contact for the school) PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 23:35, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

I've moved your proposal to the proper place, Template:Shared IP edu/sandbox, both so that it can be tested (see WP:TESTCASES) and also to save disrupting this talk page. Please check it to make sure I didn't leave anything out. --Redrose64 (talk) 23:47, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I don't think you left anything out. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 00:10, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Done. Sorry for the wait. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 09:31, 25 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. PCHS-NJROTC ^(Messages) 03:50, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

September 2014 - edit request

The link(s) to the whois of the IP go to toolserver, which is (obviously) dead. The sandbox has a fixed version, which mainly involves changing the paragraph starting with Your <span class="sharedIP">...—LucasThoms 00:44, 16 September 2014 (UTC)

 Done The links go to http://www.dnstools.com/, which is a server of WMF Labs. Not sure about the sandbox, which has different links. – Paine Ellsworth ^CLIMAX! 01:54, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

@Paine Ellsworth: If you look at User talk:131.111.8.97, the link of the IP itself goes to a dead toolserver page. —LucasThoms 01:56, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

You got me! Okay, that should fix it – if you still see the toolserver link, then be sure to purge the page by adding ?action=purge to the URL. – Paine Ellsworth ^CLIMAX! 02:56, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Already tried it out, and the links look great! Thanks! —LucasThoms 02:57, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

Pleasure! – Paine 

Template-protected edit request on 17 October 2014

1. Please change <div id="lastRevInfo" class="floatright" to <div id="SharedIPEDU" class="lastRevInfo floatright" to prevent id conflicts when multiple warning boxes are used on one page.
2. Please replace all instances of <tt>...</tt> with <code>...</code> to bring this template up to HTML5 standards.

— {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 03:22, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

DIV Change made, tt->code change not made yet (I'm getting pulled away IRL and wanted to ensure it didnt have any issues--will attempt later, or anyone else patrolling can do this!) — xaosflux ^Talk 13:57, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

 Done — xaosflux ^Talk 16:41, 19 October 2014 (UTC)

Edit request

Please remove the following:

In response to vandalism from this IP address, [[Wikipedia:Abuse response|abuse reports]] may be sent to its network administrator for investigation.

The Abuse Response project has been marked as historical. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 16:00, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

I think that should be left, but just unlinked. Jackmcbarn (talk) 02:17, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

 Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:13, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

The tmbox below also has an abuse reports link, can someone remove it please?

... your institution's administration to determine who was making contributions from this address at any given time and [[WP:Abuse response|abuse reports]] may be sent to them for investigation.

Thanks, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 14:59, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Added Requested Edit box for attention.—LucasThoms 02:24, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Removed that part. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:22, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 13 December 2014

I do not know exactly what changes were made recently, but whatever they were the template is now broken. See User_talk:207.151.35.5 and User_talk:74.92.45.17. Thanks. Tony Tan⁹⁸ · talk 21:36, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

I think the edits that broke it were made by @Mlpearc:, but I cannot be certain. Tony Tan⁹⁸ · talk 21:39, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

 Done by Rjd0060 --Tony Tan⁹⁸ · talk 21:54, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Note: It was apparently a caching server error because adding the exact same changes to the sandbox displays it was working properly... So, please restore the edits (or copy and paste directly from the sandbox in case there was a hidden character causing the issue that was removed when I copy and pasted from the diff. Thank you. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 22:00, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

• Oh, I misspoke, I thought it was an exact copy, but I was wrong. Forgot I changed the {{{subst|}}} to subst:<noinclude />. The diff is compare 637875670 to 637961155 — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 22:04, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Done — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 15:58, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Template not displaying correctly

Hi all,

I tried to add this template to a talk page using Twinkle, but it won't display correctly. The page is here: User talk:166.91.10.194. If anyone could fix it/tell me why/how I broke it I'd be grateful.

Thanks GoddersUK (talk) 16:07, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Actually I removed the broken template for the time being. To see it look at this diff: https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:166.91.10.194&oldid=638366908

Thanks GoddersUK (talk) 16:10, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

• GoddersUK, how is it broken? Looks fine to me. Can you provide a screenshot please? Thanks. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 17:11, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
•  Fixed There was an include only section tied to a specific parameter that was not on any of my test pages that was not properly closed. — {{U|Technical 13}} ^{(e • t • c)} 17:27, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! :) I was just about to say that it had started working for me again, including on the old diffs. GoddersUK (talk) 17:33, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Schoolhouse image

It's my view that the one room schoolhouse image is juvenile, and as such encourages school vandals to continue with their juvenile behavior. Let's discuss replacing the schoolhouse with a more "grown up" image, such as an icon of a graduate wearing a square academic cap.– Gilliam (talk) 17:07, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 16 June 2015

Wikipedia:WikiProject on XFFs is now a soft-redirect to meta:XFF project, so having sentences linking to both are redundant. Please remove "Alternatively, you can list this IP address at Wikipedia:WikiProject on XFFs". Thanks. Kharkiv07 (T) 23:50, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Done — Mr. Stradivarius ^{♪ talk ♪} 01:05, 17 June 2015 (UTC)