User talk:WereSpielChequers Voyage Tips and guide

Contents

To help get you started contributing, we've created a tips for new contributors page, full of helpful links about policies and guidelines and style, as well as some important information on copyleft and basic stuff like how to edit a page.

If you are a Wikipedian then you may notice some differences in policies and the style of our articles. These include:

• NPOV → be fair (not quite the same thing!)
• be bold → plunge forward
• Village pump → travellers' pub
• External links → We do not use a separate external links section, but incorporate primary links only into the text itself.
• sandbox → graffiti wall
• stub notes → Article status notes

It may also be very useful for you to check out Wikivoyage:Welcome, Wikipedians. If you need help, take a look at Project:Help, or else post a message in the travellers' pub or on my talk page. Thanks for contributing!

By the way, I appreciate your help with images, but keep in mind that we're still transferring photos from the old site. In most cases, if you see a redlinked image, it simply hasn't been transferred yet, so there's no need to find a replacement on Commons.

Thanks again for your help! LtPowers (talk) 17:49, 12 November 2012 (UTC)Reply

I had no idea that there were mentions of staring in so many articles. :-) Thanks a lot for fixing all those typos. Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:25, 20 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

You're welcome. One interesting observation, On Wikipedia when I started fixing them a huge proportion of starings needed changing to starring, on wikivoyage when staring is wrong it is usually a typo for starting. WereSpielChequers (talk) 07:32, 20 December 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi MaqsoodAhmedZahid (talk) 17:58, 22 September 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, this was hilarious! Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:21, 31 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Good morning, I'm writing here in Wikivoyage because my IP range was blocked in Wikipedia. You're a bureaucrat, so maybe you could help me. My situation is complicated but my request will be simple. Let me tell you what happened.

1. There's a cross-wiki vandal, probably an LTA, has been disrupting for over almost 2 years the page "Dredg" and other similar pages, not only in the English wiki but also in others.
2. The vandal has been using IP ranges starting with 151, included mine which starts with 151.21, which are Italian IP ranges, quite common in the northern regions.
3. After the latest vandalism, in that case from my same IP range, the user who reverted him last week asked to protect the page.
4. An admin, Ohnoitsjamie, declined the request and, instead, partially blocked that IP range used by the vandal, 151.21.0.0/16, which is mine too.
5. When I noticed that there was a block on my IP range I asked for an unblock, because I'm not that vandal and because, if the goal is "preventing the vandal from disrupting that page", the better solution is "protecting the page" instead of blocking a single IP range and other single IPs, in fact the vandal has continued disrupting it from different IP ranges, but the request was rejected.
6. I asked to semiprotect it in the RFPP page but this request was rejected too, so I asked for "pending changes protection" which was finally granted by an admin.
7. Happy ending? No. Ohnoitsjamie unprotected the page (which was disrupted again, QED) and fully blocked my IP range (after increasing the partial block from 6 months to 2 years which had no meaning at all) so now I can neither request to protect the page nor ask for advice other admins. And nothing that justifies that has been done from this IP range!

Now I'm going to speak frankly. I don't think that Ohnoitsjamie's behavior has been correct since the beginning, he's been interfering even after the page had been protected even if he had no reason to do it, and to me it looks like he's more interested in frustrating me than in the sake of the project (why on earth unprotecting a page which continues being disrupted by new and new IPs?!), even if I may be wrong. But I know he isn't the owner of Wikipedia, he's one admin among hundreds. His way to deal with this issue is "his" way, not everybody else would have acted in the same way as him, maybe somebody but not everybody. This is what I'm asking: what can I do to have a fair judgement about this story, to have my name cleared (for him I'm still the vandal who did this and this and all the other similar vandalisms just because one of the vandal's IP ranges matches with mine), to have my IP range unblocked and, possibly, that page protected? I hate the vandal who caused all this to me, so you can imagine how being accused to be him and have to undergo the same punishment as him screws me up. I'm not the vandal, would I ever ask to protect that page from all anonymous if I were the vandal who keeps switching IPs? Ohnoitsjamie is as human as us, he isn't infallible, I'm sure he's a good person but in this case he got wrong and he's persisting in his error. I'd like to be freed from his error, do you have any advice to help me succeed or there's no way this error can be reviewed and remedied? You're a bureaucrat, if a bureaucrat can't help me out of this situation I don't know who I might ask, and what I'm undergoing because of a vandal living in my country and of an admin who was mistaken is now beyond forbearance... I'm sorry for writing so much, but please give me a reply and help me in the limits of what you're able to do, User:WereSpielChequers. 151.21.73.72 13:09, 14 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi, sorry to hear about your problems with a range block. Range blocks and exceptions to range blocks are an area of Wikipedia that I have not been involved in, but I do know the route for your sort of appeal. Please try en:Wikipedia:Unblock Ticket Request System. I hope that resolves your problem. Take care and happy editing. WereSpielChequers (talk) 18:58, 14 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

That's a good advice, thank you, I'll try doing it! 151.21.77.245 12:36, 15 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hi, WereSpielChequers. I accidently reverted your edit but have reverted my revert. Sorry about that! Although, it does bother me slightly that it doesn't ask for confirmation like they usually show you on undo's and other edits. My apologies, Jade (talk) 23:15, 17 September 2021 (UTC)Reply

Not a problem Jadedragon, that's what self reverts are for. No need to apologise. WereSpielChequers (talk) 23:27, 17 September 2021 (UTC)Reply