Don't hesitate to contact.
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 need help, check out Help, or post a message in the travellers' pub. If you are familiar with Wikipedia, take a look over some of the differences here.
Editing by 188.8.131.52
In this edit you said to 184.108.40.206, "Frank, please sign your comments and refrain from referring to yourself in the 3rd person in them. It sounds puppety and we don't want to open that worm can again."
User:W._Frank was recently blocked for 3 days for disruptive editing, as the community has developed a lower tolerance of disruptive editing, particularly by him. Unfortunately, dealing with W. Frank's editing was complicated by allegations that he has also used a sock puppet. Even if the allegation was true (and I doubt it), the allegation has not been helpful. Along with the lower tolerance of disruptive editing, some of us are adopting a lower tolerance of unverified allegations of sock puppetry - see this thread re checkuser.
It seems likely to me that the person editing from 220.127.116.11 has previously edited WV from another account or IP. However I doubt that they have edited as User:W._Frank. You have suggested it is Frank. If you have very strong evidence of that, you are welcome to produce it. If the suggestion is incorrect, it is unfair to Frank. If you do not have strong evidence, would you mind removing the suggestion from Wikivoyage talk:Search Expedition please. As you said, "we don't want to open that worm can again", but by raising the issue, you have opened the can yourself. I think it would be beneficial to all if you closed the can again. Thanks. Nurg (talk) 00:12, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
- If the suggestion is that user: W. Frank has used the IP address that appears in my signature in the last 3 months then, because I have just examined three months of contribution records for this IP, I can assure you that only one person (me) appears in that contribution record. While I would like to preserve my anonymity, I am perfectly happy to phone either of you (I assume that Nurg and I are both currently in New Zealand) and discuss how we can put this allegation to rest. My e-mail address is 118.93nzp AT gmail.com (please note that I am too busy right now to have e-mail exchanges on this topic, but I am eager to have a phone conversation with either or both of you, where you may learn some things to your advantage. I do guarantee you confidentiality if you will guarantee mine.)
- Unfortunately, I have no direct control over the IP that Vodaphone New Zealand allocates to me (other than the ability to reset it by turning my mobile device off and then on again) and I do confirm that I have used a variety of IP addresses to edit both Wikitravel and WMF projects such as Wikivoyage over the course of the last decade or so. Sorry to be the unintended source of such unhelpful allegations. Thanks! --18.104.22.168 00:41, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
- NOTE: I have no interest in engaging with Frank in any of his various incarnations, including this latest IP above [which he has chosen to delete]. My reply below is directly to Nurg. It is only out of respect to tradition that I do not simply erase Frank's comments from my user page.
- What's your basis for "doubt" that Frank is a multiple, chronic puppeteer? He has been banned from more than one wiki for it. It's not my personal belief. He's doing it, there's no doubt at all. And in this particular case it's classic Frank: using one account to bolster his own public proclamations, to try to coerce a community into enacting his policy changes by making it seem that he has support when he doesn't. He's not an intelligent puppeteer but he does have multiple IPs to work from, and obviously is paying for the privilege. Just because other editors are reluctant to put an end to his behaviour (he ought to be banned permanently, all of him), doesn't mean you should come here and try to intimidate me into going along. Proof is impossible to come by, even with checkuser, when multiple IPs are used. Frank is a fucking menace and I'm sick of people protecting him for lack of "proof." How many editors is it worth losing from wv just to keep this manipulative asshole happy?--SpendrupsForAll (talk) 01:24, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. If you do not engage with W. Frank or 22.214.171.124 that should be helpful all round. (I am very disappointed that 126.96.36.199 wrote on your Talk page as I requested them not to react.) Nurg (talk) 02:10, 8 November 2013 (UTC)
Yet another Frank account
When does this become so ludicrous and such a waste of time that somebody decides enough is enough?--SpendrupsForAll (talk) 21:02, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
- A sock-puppet allegation is rather a big deal, so if you are making such an accusation please be sure to provide evidence in the form of links to checkuser reports or some other form, otherwise these things tend to degenerate into neverending witch hunts. For now I've removed the accusations made in teh Pub in the hope of preventing further drama. -- Ryan • (talk) • 21:17, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
Ryan: What is the endgame here? A CU will show the same IP or a different IP. What is that supposed to prove? That Frank has an IQ above 70 and knows to use different proxy ranges dedicated to his different accounts? Anyone with as much time on his hands as this retired loser has, surely figured that out in Troll School 101. If what you're saying is that you're happy to let wv be totally taken over by one manipulator's puppets over time since there's no hard proof, then we're fucked. He was banned from WP-- why are we tolerating him here?? I'm just about done with this circus, and I understand why Peter & Jani were too.--SpendrupsForAll (talk) 01:35, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
- Sorry Ryan, enough is enough. I'll add that additional allegation to the list of accounts to be audited by checkuser. Perhaps you would like to support me in my application - unless, of course, you are frightened that procedure might reveal further undisclosed accounts connected to this user account? in case I've not made myself clear enough I'd better state clearly my reaction to the allegation that I am either Frank or Tony or Neotarf: TOTAL BOLLOCKS!--118.93nzp (talk) 23:59, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
- SpendrupsForAll, your first edit, at least under this account, was on November 7, 2013 - 6 days ago. I'm not sure how you have such deep knowledge about the personalities currently and formerly on this site, but it seems like you've come here with an agenda, and so far, it seems to me that - undoubtedly out of concern for this site, but nevertheless - your great concern with Frank and sockpuppetry has been disruptive. I would suggest that you please concentrate on editing the guide and stop worrying so much about sockpuppetry.
- All the best,
Just to say, sorry if I was a tad quick to revert your removal of registered users from Wikivoyage:Wikivoyage and Wikitravel. I'm just a bit (over?)protective of that page as it seems to have been quite useful for people who aren't intimately acquainted with our project and it took quite a lot of collaborative effort to put it together.
Sorry for my excess zeal!
Have a good evening (or whatever time of day it is where you are!) :)
- I am traveling and have little concept of time at the moment. I thank you for your comment. But I believe you have a serious issue with authority and consensus here. Perhaps I'll return in the future. For now, I need no further outlets for banging my head against the bricks, so I leave your site to you, red tape and all. SpendrupsForAll (talk) 22:56, 31 January 2014 (UTC)
- Please don't be discourage by my pettifogging - this is a community that values the contributions of newcomers and I broadly agree with most aspects of your initial post. I just felt that, on a page of that importance, it needed greater input. With a consensus now formed, I've made the change you suggested. Please do persevere and, if you'd like, join in our discussion on consensus.
- Yes, it would be nice if you followed through on your original stated intention to "Just here to help, will dive in on Sweden & Stockholm in particular!" rather than not contributing at all to article mainspace. --118.93nzp (talk) 01:20, 1 February 2014 (UTC)