Hello SilkTork! Welcome to Wikivoyage.
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 Wikivoyage:Help, or else post a message in the travellers' pub or on my talk page. Thanks for contributing!--ϒpsilon (talk) 17:17, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
- Thankyou. SilkTork (talk) 09:37, 21 March 2014 (UTC)
Good morning, I'm writing here in Wikiversity 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- After the latest vandalism, in that case from my same IP range, the user who reverted him last week asked to protect the page.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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.
- 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:SilkTork. 151.21.72.219 11:39, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
- This is not an issue for a bureaucrat. However, I'll give you what advice I can. If the page is protected from IP edits or your IP range is blocked it amounts to the same thing - you wouldn't be able to edit that page while editing as an IP. If what you wish is to be exempt from the IP block then you may request that via Wikipedia:IP_block_exemption, giving examples of your positive contributions. If you are unable to provide examples of your positive contributions (and this can be difficult to prove as you don't have a registered account) then you will not be made exempt. To be fair, I doubt if anyone would be willing to make you IP exc ept as you don't have an account. It is in the individual's interest and the interest of Wikipedia as a whole that an account is registered. Editing simply as an IP can lead to these sorts of issues. You could create an account when you are not editing from that IP range (perhaps at a library or elsewhere, though some public IP ranges may be blocked from account creation), and then edit positively from that registered account for a period to develop a positive contribution history. A period of, say, six months of positive editing from a registered account should be enough to grant you IP block exemption, and then you would be able to edit from home, and be able to edit that page without restriction. I hope this helps. SilkTork (talk) 14:26, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you for answering. I asked a "bureaucrat" because it should be a higher level than "sysop" so that, if a sysop makes a mistake, a bureaucrat could be able to fix it even if he doesn't agree. But you missed my point: I'm not asking to unblock my IP range "because I want to edit Dredg". I'm asking it because: (1) I'm not the vandal; (2) the vandal has been using other IP ranges before and new IP ranges now; (3) blocking "only" this IP range is useless as the vandal continues switching IP and blocking "all" the IP ranges he used and will use rather than protecting that single page would be absurd; (4) all the more reason, I didn't deserve a full block just because I asked a pair of admins for information. I don't want to edit "Dredg", I have no interest in that page except that the vandal who caused me all these troubles is prevented from disrupting it further. I want to be free to edit Wikipedia if I see anything that can be improved without seeing every time that 2-years (ex 6-months) block over my range. This time I should have been clearer, I hope that you've understood what kind of advice or action I need and I hope that you can help me or that you can tell me precisely why my unblock request can't be granted. 151.21.86.134 15:55, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
- I'm sorry I missed your point. I think my advice still stands though. If you want to edit Wikipedia, then register an account away from home, edit constructively for six months, then apply for an IP exempt so you can edit from home. I hope this helps. SilkTork (talk) 16:04, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
- It's fine, nothing to forgive! Your advice helps me in case I decide to edit "Dredg", actually I just wanted the partial block to be removed, or at least decreased (at the beginning it was 6 months, but now it's 2 years!). Even if for "this" block nothing can be done, what about the 1-month "full" block of my IP range because I dared to ask a pair of admins for help? Nobody can do anything about that too? In case you can't help me more that you've already done I'll just thank you for your help and won't disturb you again. 151.21.86.134 16:14, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
- I'm not quite sure what you wish to be done about the block. In the nature of Wikipedia mistakes or inappropriate edits or actions are done, especially when people get heated. Everyone here (apart from WMF staff) are unpaid volunteers, so we accept some poor decisions and edits now and again. Everyone is human. If there has been a serious error, then I or someone else would be willing to look into it, but attempting to both protect and keep open for editing an article by blocking an IP range in which you may have been accidently caught up doesn't appear to me to be a serious issue. If users or admins have a history of inappropriate behaviour, albeit minor, then a case can be brought and sanctions imposed, but I can't see anyone willing to look deeply into this based on what you have outlined above. Sometimes we need to look at things in proportion. I wish you well. SilkTork (talk) 17:36, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
- What I wish to be done about the block is: (1) removing the full block, which for me is on the edge of abuse because no vandalisms were made from this IP range after the partial block; (2) removing the partial block too and, in its place, protect the page, but if this can't be granted for any reason then at least change it back to 6-month instead of leaving it at 2-years, because there was absolutely no point in quadruple it since it was already prevented from editing that page. A mistake was done, an inappropriate action was done, I'm victim of this, what should I do get out of this? The serious issue is the way an admin dealt with a page disrupted since 2 years ago by different IP ranges: not really caring about the sake of the project (or he'd have protected the page, the most optimal way to keep the project safe, don't you agree?), but taking it personally when an anonymous caught in its block proposed this solution to him and to other admins while the real vandal continues switching IP and disrupt that page (yes, that's what happening, it's a fact!). He acted still "within the law", even if I'm sure that most of the admins wouldn't have acted in the same way (how many admins use to deal with issues almost only using blocks?) (I'm not surprised to see that he has over 10000 blocks under his belt!), but I'm not asking to take actions against him, absolutely not, no interest at all in this: just to free me from this unfair block, as I said at the beginning of this message. All this was to explain in the most clear way my point. Thank you for your help, you've been nice to me, if only it was you who had to deal with that case... Well, unless you think that you can do something else to help me, anything else, let's say goodbye. Thanks again! 151.21.89.157 08:08, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
- Goodbye. I wish you well. And think on what I have suggested. Remaining an IP editor is going to be problematic for you. Creating an account is your best way forward. SilkTork (talk) 08:20, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
- What I wish to be done about the block is: (1) removing the full block, which for me is on the edge of abuse because no vandalisms were made from this IP range after the partial block; (2) removing the partial block too and, in its place, protect the page, but if this can't be granted for any reason then at least change it back to 6-month instead of leaving it at 2-years, because there was absolutely no point in quadruple it since it was already prevented from editing that page. A mistake was done, an inappropriate action was done, I'm victim of this, what should I do get out of this? The serious issue is the way an admin dealt with a page disrupted since 2 years ago by different IP ranges: not really caring about the sake of the project (or he'd have protected the page, the most optimal way to keep the project safe, don't you agree?), but taking it personally when an anonymous caught in its block proposed this solution to him and to other admins while the real vandal continues switching IP and disrupt that page (yes, that's what happening, it's a fact!). He acted still "within the law", even if I'm sure that most of the admins wouldn't have acted in the same way (how many admins use to deal with issues almost only using blocks?) (I'm not surprised to see that he has over 10000 blocks under his belt!), but I'm not asking to take actions against him, absolutely not, no interest at all in this: just to free me from this unfair block, as I said at the beginning of this message. All this was to explain in the most clear way my point. Thank you for your help, you've been nice to me, if only it was you who had to deal with that case... Well, unless you think that you can do something else to help me, anything else, let's say goodbye. Thanks again! 151.21.89.157 08:08, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
- I'm not quite sure what you wish to be done about the block. In the nature of Wikipedia mistakes or inappropriate edits or actions are done, especially when people get heated. Everyone here (apart from WMF staff) are unpaid volunteers, so we accept some poor decisions and edits now and again. Everyone is human. If there has been a serious error, then I or someone else would be willing to look into it, but attempting to both protect and keep open for editing an article by blocking an IP range in which you may have been accidently caught up doesn't appear to me to be a serious issue. If users or admins have a history of inappropriate behaviour, albeit minor, then a case can be brought and sanctions imposed, but I can't see anyone willing to look deeply into this based on what you have outlined above. Sometimes we need to look at things in proportion. I wish you well. SilkTork (talk) 17:36, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
- It's fine, nothing to forgive! Your advice helps me in case I decide to edit "Dredg", actually I just wanted the partial block to be removed, or at least decreased (at the beginning it was 6 months, but now it's 2 years!). Even if for "this" block nothing can be done, what about the 1-month "full" block of my IP range because I dared to ask a pair of admins for help? Nobody can do anything about that too? In case you can't help me more that you've already done I'll just thank you for your help and won't disturb you again. 151.21.86.134 16:14, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
- I'm sorry I missed your point. I think my advice still stands though. If you want to edit Wikipedia, then register an account away from home, edit constructively for six months, then apply for an IP exempt so you can edit from home. I hope this helps. SilkTork (talk) 16:04, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
- Thank you for answering. I asked a "bureaucrat" because it should be a higher level than "sysop" so that, if a sysop makes a mistake, a bureaucrat could be able to fix it even if he doesn't agree. But you missed my point: I'm not asking to unblock my IP range "because I want to edit Dredg". I'm asking it because: (1) I'm not the vandal; (2) the vandal has been using other IP ranges before and new IP ranges now; (3) blocking "only" this IP range is useless as the vandal continues switching IP and blocking "all" the IP ranges he used and will use rather than protecting that single page would be absurd; (4) all the more reason, I didn't deserve a full block just because I asked a pair of admins for information. I don't want to edit "Dredg", I have no interest in that page except that the vandal who caused me all these troubles is prevented from disrupting it further. I want to be free to edit Wikipedia if I see anything that can be improved without seeing every time that 2-years (ex 6-months) block over my range. This time I should have been clearer, I hope that you've understood what kind of advice or action I need and I hope that you can help me or that you can tell me precisely why my unblock request can't be granted. 151.21.86.134 15:55, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
Good evening SilkTork, I have a question to ask you, I hope that you can help me. Do you know if a list of sysops who deal with the UTRS exist? Or maybe a template in their user page showing that they do? It's for this old case of mine, unfortunately it seems that no UTRS sysop, so far, has read with any attention what I wrote in my appeals, unlike you did, but they just used predefined replies to decline without grasping my point... So, if I can speak directly with one of them, maybe I'll be able to find one that can review my block seriously. Please let me know, and thank you again for your pieces of advice back to last year! 151.21.84.234 21:51, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
- There possibly is such a list, but I don't know where it is if it exists. SilkTork (talk) 21:58, 23 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oh ok, I'll try asking other admins who might know more. If I may ask, are you a UTRS admin too by any chance? 151.21.80.222 20:22, 24 March 2022 (UTC)
- No. I was on the ArbCom Committee when UTRS was created to relieve the Committee of the weight of unblock requests, but I didn't have much involvement in it. SilkTork (talk) 01:31, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
- Got it, thank you for your time. Best regards! 151.21.85.152 19:44, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
- No. I was on the ArbCom Committee when UTRS was created to relieve the Committee of the weight of unblock requests, but I didn't have much involvement in it. SilkTork (talk) 01:31, 25 March 2022 (UTC)
- Oh ok, I'll try asking other admins who might know more. If I may ask, are you a UTRS admin too by any chance? 151.21.80.222 20:22, 24 March 2022 (UTC)