Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 04:39, 16 October 2010

NYyankees51

NYyankees51 (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Populated account categories: confirmed

For archived investigations, see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/NYyankees51/Archive.

– This SPI case is open.

15 October 2010

Suspected sockpuppets

• NYyankees51 (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• BS24 (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Evidence submitted by The Artist AKA Mr Anonymous

Here's a list of articles both wiki accts have edited. The BS24 account was created in January, 2010, right after the NYyankees51 sockpuppet case was closed that same month. After BS24 said " I was involved in a rather heated dispute over the Taxpayer March on Washington crowd size section", I looked for it there but could not find any relevant discussion involving BS24. I asked BS24 what was the user name, BS24 did not recall it to me, and claimed to have quit using it due to a lost password. I have been advised that it is best to let Wiki admins have a look at the record, and I agree. The Artist AKA Mr Anonymous (talk) 20:01, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties   

See Defending yourself against claims.

Yes, I am NYyankees51. NYyankees51, was blocked in December 2009 due to some stupid jokes I was trying to pull on a friend. I put three and a half years (perhaps not always the best editor at first, since I was significantly younger and just learning Misplaced Pages, but three and a half years nonetheless) into that account and blew it for a couple of laughs. I fully recognize that I was in violation of Misplaced Pages rules and I fully accept that block; I deserved it. When the block was made my IP was banned from new account creation as well. However, the ban was lifted soon thereafter. I took that as a way to make a fresh start with a new account, BS24.

As you can see from my edit history, I have never made any more vandalistic edits, or at least edits that are undoubtedly vandalism, and all my edits have been made in good faith. User:BS24 shows a list of articles I have created or contributed significantly to, and you will find no disruption in those articles. I have also taken a lot of time to clean up various articles. Had I not mentioned my previous involvement in an article under NYyankees51 here, you would never know I was NYyankees51 by my lack of vandalism or disruption.

So yes, I guess BS24 is arguably a sockpuppetry violation. However, I hope others will take a hard look at my edit history and decide whether BS24 is a simple vandal or legitimate contributor, and whether I have learned from my mistakes and made up for them. Thank you and God bless. BS24 (talk) 22:20, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Note: for the record, I was mistaken when I told The Artist that I stopped using the account I used for the Taxpayer March on Washington article. I was confusing NYyankees51 with another account I did forget the password to. BS24 (talk) 22:21, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Comments by other users

This submissions appears to be in response to the current Mediation regarding Restoring Honor Rally and nothing to do with any supposed violations of sockpuppetry. This appears to be an attempt by The Artist AKA Mr Anonymous to remove someone whom his disagrees with from the mediation process. It is clear that BS24 is not using multiple accounts in order to manipulate discussion on the Restoring Honor Rally article. This submission should be closed as vindictive. Arzel (talk) 23:49, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect, Arzel. This SPI case was filed at my suggestion, in order to avoid the inevitable war of words that was about to break out, as the two editors were already discussing this issue. Other editors were already warning these two to curb their discussions, so I merely suggested that it should be left in the hands of uninvolved admins here at SPI. No "vindictiveness" and no "attempts to remove" anyone here, and no one has accused BS24 of "using multiple accounts in order to manipulate discussion on the Restoring Honor Rally article". I do, however, find it interesting that BS24 didn't recall the account name he used for over 3.5 years, or didn't recall that it was blocked (and he didn't just lose the password to it) until after this SPI case was filed. If there are any violations here, it is up to the Admins to decide:

• Could an Admin please review the previous SPI case & blocks and confirm that this editor is or is not eligible to make a fresh start as BS24, as well as continue to use 71.178.26.97 (talk · contribs), 70.21.119.84 (talk · contribs), 75.103.237.18 (talk · contribs) and 173.13.237.237 (talk · contribs) — all of which have seen considerable use since he was blocked back in December. Xenophrenic (talk) 01:27, 16 October 2010 (UTC) Added later for record-keeping: 68.50.210.194 (talk · contribs), 69.143.38.77 (talk · contribs) Xenophrenic (talk) 04:39, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Two of those IPs appear to be shared because I don't know what half of the edits are. The other two are my laptop and desktop, and that was just forgetting to log in, as all of us have done before. Might I also note that I have brought up The Artist's SPI in previous discussions, which he took as an attempt to discredit him when I was just wondering about which parties to list in the mediation request, so vindictiveness is at least a possibility. And as I stated above, I was confusing NYyankees51 with another account that I did forget the password to. BS24 (talk) 02:09, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

"Two of those IPs appear to be shared because I don't know what half of the edits are."

Then obviously I was referring to the half that you did make. As for everyone forgetting to log in, I never have in almost 4 years (although I have caught Misplaced Pages logging me out inexplicably once or twice in that time). You, on the other hand, "forgot" to log in at least 39 times (yes, I counted) during the week of March 31 to April 6 for example, while remembering to log in only once during that week -- so you'll forgive my skepticism. As for you claiming to have even more accounts (forgotten passwords or not), you aren't helping your case. BS24, I am not the person with whom you should be arguing; I'm not your enemy here. If you'll accept a bit of advice, I would recommend you cite this edit by the very checkuser that blocked you, and claim you understood it to mean you could start over if you kept your nose clean and didn't "out" yourself. Xenophrenic (talk) 03:27, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

The Artist admits to intentionally not logging in on his SPI, so I don't see your point. Forgetfulness is not a crime. And I was not blocked for sockpuppeting on the articles I edit most, i.e. Bobby Schilling, Susan B. Anthony List, etc. I was blocked for sockpuppeting as a joke on a friend on a completely different article. BS24 (talk) 04:23, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Neato. I'm not an admin. Xenophrenic (talk) 04:39, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

• SPI cases with the masters user talk page redirecting elsewhere
• Open SPI cases
• SPI cases awaiting administration
• SPI cases awaiting review