| Revision as of 02:40, 10 December 2010 editDemiurge1000 (talk | contribs)26,944 edits →Comments by other users: note about the behaviour of MB - it's not clear to me that he denied using multiple accounts← Previous edit | Revision as of 03:14, 10 December 2010 edit undoWhitewater111 (talk | contribs)170 edits →Comments by other usersNext edit → | ||
| Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
| *It is not 100% clear that MB was denying the use of multiple accounts; he said he found "the accusation of noting that I've created several accounts" to be offensive, but that could as easily be taken to mean that he admits using several accounts but merely finds ''mentioning'' that to be offensive (for whatever reason). --] (]) 02:40, 10 December 2010 (UTC) | *It is not 100% clear that MB was denying the use of multiple accounts; he said he found "the accusation of noting that I've created several accounts" to be offensive, but that could as easily be taken to mean that he admits using several accounts but merely finds ''mentioning'' that to be offensive (for whatever reason). --] (]) 02:40, 10 December 2010 (UTC) | ||
| :::Hi all, I would like to state my case in relation to making multiple accounts. First I declare that the MBoerebach, Whitewater111, and the IP 122.104.213.53 accounts are mine. I did make three accounts as noted, as I originally received harassment messages under my original accounts, which was just my IP address. As I have asperger's syndrome and a vision impairement, I found the multilayered page structure of[REDACTED] confusing, and this coupled with the intimidating messages I received, rather humiliating. I thought AussieLegend and Kww were also doing the same, and trying to outdo me. I mistakenly retaliated. Suddenly finding three articles about me attacked, and proposed for deletion within the space of one week, seemed to be more of a personal attack, rather then following[REDACTED] policy. I thought an invitation to rescue would of been more appropriate, but it seemed I was to be outdone here to. In the end, I found it rather bizarre that the WSFM article has no "third party" references, yet it sits unchallenged. There seems to be a strong bias from the[REDACTED] community here for commercial FM stations, over internet stations, hardly a[REDACTED] I call being neutral. I know[REDACTED] is not a place to promote my station, but this also sits for WSFM, as well as 2PR FM.. ] (]) 03:14, 10 December 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ======<span style="font-size:150%">Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments</span>====== | ======<span style="font-size:150%">Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments</span>====== | ||
Revision as of 03:14, 10 December 2010
– A checkuser has completed a check on relevant users in this case, and it is now awaiting administration and close.
Whitewater111
Whitewater111 (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
For archived investigations, see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Whitewater111/Archive.
10 December 2010
- Suspected sockpuppets
- MBoerebach (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Lukepowner (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- User compare report Auto-generated every six hours.
Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"
Although these users do not share similar editing times, they do share similar editing habits. First, to the editing times, I would not use that to determine yay or nay if this user is a sock of the master, as they have so few edits it cannot be used to accurately determine such. As to their behavior, Whitewater's very first edit is to argue in favor of the article that Mboer has stated are both about him and his station. White's first edit aside, they again demonstrate knowledge of[REDACTED] markup, such as indentations.
We also have similar styles:
In case it was not noticed in the above two diffs, both White and the suspected sock use variants of noting several times in both of their posts, not to mention they have a similar style for posting their arguments. They have also both been attached to the fact that a certain radio station was not deleted as theirs was.
As MB is denying that they are a sock, or have a sock in regards to the Whitewater user, this would violate WP:SOCK#SCRUTINY, and I do believe CU is required to determine if this user is indeed a sock, or master, given the lack of any other information aside from behavioral evidence. — Dædαlus 01:51, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Added Lukepowner (talk · contribs) as it was created today, also, going to G4 the article.— Dædαlus 02:25, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
- Well, seems it was already deleted.— Dædαlus 02:28, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Comments by other users
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
I recommend the MBoerebach sock and leave the main account, Whitewater111, unblocked....if it is shown to by the CU to have only the one sock. I recommend this because the user is (I believe) new and does have Aspergers with limited eyesight. This should be taken into account when deciding what to do. I know this won't be the most popular recommendation and I am probably stepping on some rules, but I feel leeway is needed. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:55, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
- I recommend we encourage him to admit that he's used 2 accounts and offer him the choice of which one to use from now on, and not block either of them. And I recommend to MBoerebach to tell us now if there are any other accounts not yet turned up (Special:Contributions/Lukepowner is a possible, but it could very easily be someone who just happened to see the article before it was deleted). After all, declared alternate accounts aren't forbidden, as long as they are not used to try to "cheat" on policies such as WP:3RR. —Soap— 02:07, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
- It is not 100% clear that MB was denying the use of multiple accounts; he said he found "the accusation of noting that I've created several accounts" to be offensive, but that could as easily be taken to mean that he admits using several accounts but merely finds mentioning that to be offensive (for whatever reason). --Demiurge1000 (talk) 02:40, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
- Hi all, I would like to state my case in relation to making multiple accounts. First I declare that the MBoerebach, Whitewater111, and the IP 122.104.213.53 accounts are mine. I did make three accounts as noted, as I originally received harassment messages under my original accounts, which was just my IP address. As I have asperger's syndrome and a vision impairement, I found the multilayered page structure of[REDACTED] confusing, and this coupled with the intimidating messages I received, rather humiliating. I thought AussieLegend and Kww were also doing the same, and trying to outdo me. I mistakenly retaliated. Suddenly finding three articles about me attacked, and proposed for deletion within the space of one week, seemed to be more of a personal attack, rather then following[REDACTED] policy. I thought an invitation to rescue would of been more appropriate, but it seemed I was to be outdone here to. In the end, I found it rather bizarre that the WSFM article has no "third party" references, yet it sits unchallenged. There seems to be a strong bias from the[REDACTED] community here for commercial FM stations, over internet stations, hardly a[REDACTED] I call being neutral. I know[REDACTED] is not a place to promote my station, but this also sits for WSFM, as well as 2PR FM.. Whitewater111 (talk) 03:14, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Clerk endorsed - T. Canens (talk) 02:29, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
- Just as a procedural note, I've notified all the accounts about this case. — HelloAnnyong 02:31, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
- All three are
Confirmed as being the same. TNXMan 02:32, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
- All three are
Categories: