AlbinoFerret (talk | contribs) |
|||
Line 97: | Line 97: | ||
::::A wikipedia admin has not said that I am Kilz. If they did, they were going against established practices for deciding these types of cases. The lies you and your buddies spread were pathetic. [[User:AlbinoFerret|AlbinoFerret]] ([[User talk:AlbinoFerret|talk]]) 12:18, 2 August 2008 (UTC) |
::::A wikipedia admin has not said that I am Kilz. If they did, they were going against established practices for deciding these types of cases. The lies you and your buddies spread were pathetic. [[User:AlbinoFerret|AlbinoFerret]] ([[User talk:AlbinoFerret|talk]]) 12:18, 2 August 2008 (UTC) |
||
::::: the exact wording was: '''The evidence presented here makes a compelling case that User:AlbinoFerret is a sockpuppet of User:Kilz. ... If AlbinoFerret is blocked in the future, previous blocks under the name of User:Kilz should be factored into the block length'''. I find that the conclusion was clealry reached. Also I have no interest in discussing this further with you. Go away sockpuppeteer. You effert to slander [[Office open XML]] are already anoying enough to deal with. [[User:HAl|hAl]] ([[User talk:HAl#top|talk]]) 12:23, 2 August 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 12:23, 2 August 2008
Multipe reverts at Office Open XML
I ask you to stop reverting content on the Office Open XML article. Reverting an article is an extreme measure that should only be used in cases of vandalism or libel. The article reverts you have made don't come into either or those categories. You have reverted the article to remove referenced information which was added by other editors. You have reverted the article to add your own contentious material with references that multiple other editors have disputed. You have reverted the article to remove hatnote tags, such as the "peacock terms" tag that you reverted soon after it was added. The endless multiple fast reverts at the Office Open XML article cannot be permitted to continue. I ask that you refrain from reverting, otherwise I will ask for administrator/community assistance to force the reverting to stop. --Lester 23:46, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
- someone describing wikified wording as peacock words stating the words are not defined is rightly removed as the wikilinks provide ample information about what the wordss in the context mean. hAl (talk) 05:39, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
- Please, user:HAl, I again ask you to stop reverting others' content on the Office Open XML article. You may not agree with others' content, but the aim should be to reach a consensus on the article talk page. Immediately reverting others' recently added content is not the way to solve a content dispute. Regards, --Lester 03:04, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
- You have been reverting the edits of other editors for some time now. I agree with Lester that this has got to stop. You need to have guidelines to back up your actions and discuss problems before replacing or removing things you don't agree with. Looking at the history of this page, it looks like this has been brought to your attention a lot of times. AlbinoFerret (talk) 12:17, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
- That is incorrect. You placed more original research, not references by 3rd parties that state the claim. The request was 2 months old when the section was removed. I have Wikipedia guidelines to back up my actions. In fact the guidelines suggest that it should have been removed sooner. I gave a lot of time for it to be fixed.
- Never the less. You have a habit of undoing other editors work. When I removed the section, you replaced it, with no changes or guidelines to back up your actions. This is not an isolated incident, but is part of a provable pattern of behavior. AlbinoFerret (talk) 16:04, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
The proper venue for discussing suspected sockpuppets...
..is WP:Suspected sock puppets. Funny how that works. Please do not make implications/accusations about someone being a sock unless you are willing to take it to WP:SSP. Thanks. --Jaysweet (talk) 15:24, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
- I am not accusing anybody as such. I was reacting on the message that user:AlbinoFerret might be a reincarnation of Kilz. Something which is very relevant to me because this person was reponsible for me getting banned after to many edits against his sockpuppets. hAl (talk) 15:31, 22 July 2008 (UTC)~
It seems an anonymous user has made the effort of proving that AlbinoFerret is indeed the same person as Kilz.
Copied from Wikiquette_alerts
- Proven.
- In his user page, AlbinoFerret says, "I own 2 ferrets. One is an albino named JB." (Link.)
- A person who goes by the name SticKK / SticK is listed as the developer of the Swiftweasel project.
- Kilz created the Swiftweasel page and has edited it many times.
- Kilz mentions that he is active in the Ubuntu Forums.
- A search on the Ubuntu Forums brings up Kilz's user page.
- Kilz's user page indicates that tghc.org is his website.
- Via archive.org, we discover on tghc.org that StickK and Kilz are the same person. (It's at the bottom of the page.)
- In this Switfweasel Forum posting, SticKK says, "I have an albino ferret named JB."
- So given that SticK and Kilz are the same person, that means Kilz and AlbinoFerret both own albino ferrets named JB and are both staunch critics of Office Open XML. It's unlikely that's just a lucky coincidence. 75.45.104.89 (talk) 10:07, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
- Proven.
Furthermore is is evident that the particular user has almost no contributions to wikipedia except spelling corrections and edits on the deleted articles page. 90+% of AlbinoFerrets real edits were on Office Open XML related items which was one of the places user:Kilz and his sockpuppets were editting. There is no doubt these are the same person. Something that makes me doubt a lot of the anonymous edits made to the Office Open XML article lately as well... hAl (talk) 15:47, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
- HAl, You have added this without checking it out. You are seeing only what you hope or want to see. I suggest you remove any discussion of me from your talk page unless you have some concrete proof. I am going to copy in my reply from the Wikiquette_alerts page so that your accusation does not go unchallenged and someone looking through the histories believes it to be the truth.
- I had a feeling your proof was going to be a multiple step theory. But I found a few problems with this theory.
- It may prove that Kilz at one time on tghc.org used the name Stick. But the developer of Swiftweasel is SticKK and not Stick. There is no proof that they are the same person or even that the Stick on the one site, is the SticKK on the other
- After looking at the Swiftweasel site it appears that it is a browser created/packaged for Ubuntu. It should not be a surprise that Ubuntu users are active in its forums. Kilz is an active member of the Ubuntu forums by his post count, he is probably a Ubuntu user.
- In the Switfweasel Forum posting, SticKK says, "I have an albino ferret named JP." He said JP, not JB.
- I expect you will try to come up with some other coincidence filled theory in an attempt to prove something that isn't.
- I had a feeling your proof was going to be a multiple step theory. But I found a few problems with this theory.
- We should all do our best to help Wikipedia. Those of us that try to help by correcting spelling, or discuss policy are not second class editors. But I have created and edited articles outside of that scope. Let me also remind you that there are consequences for some actions. You can't blame your actions on others. AlbinoFerret (talk) 18:14, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
- The thread on Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts has been closed, so allow me to copy here my closing remarks:
- "In the Switfweasel Forum posting, SticKK says, "I have an albino ferret named JP." He said JP, not JB."
- Nice try. As of last night, when I made a local copy of that web page, it said JB. (In other words, my local copy still says JB, but you changed the online version to say JP.) And you can also check out the Google Cache of the page to see that you changed it. 75.45.104.89 (talk) 18:15, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
- The thread on Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts has been closed, so allow me to copy here my closing remarks:
- Wow, the google cache also complety shows how far you are taking this AlbinoFerret/Kilz changing your own forum posts to try and disprove this by alteringthe evidence. It is totally ridiculous behaviour. Never seen anyone so fanatic before. And that all to edit few articles on wikipedia. Shocking man, shocking. Before on editting the Swiftweasel article and now the Office Open XML article. hAl (talk) 22:36, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
- Shocking that an anonymous editor would go to all the trouble of stirring up problems by spreading lies. All someone has to do is look at your link to see that its not real. There is nothing stopping me from editing any article on Wikipedia. Your unprovable accusations the real problem. That post you pointed to on the Swiftweasel forum, the one you say has been changed, one problem that I see is it doesn't have a Last Edited by time stamp like in this post from the same forum. But in any event, I don't think you have proven anything. If you think there is something being done against Wikipedia policy, by all means file a report on the correct notice board. If not, drop this attack on me. AlbinoFerret (talk) 14:31, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- Are you now seriously suggesting that Google is altering their cached pages to accomodate you and fake your identity ? hAl (talk) 18:48, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- What page on Google are you referring to? All I have ever seen is a dead link. AlbinoFerret (talk) 20:33, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- Amusing how much effort you are putting in this. However several people have seen it already and have a local copy. I have made a screen print as well to be sure and keep it. Your hasty effort of cleaning up behind you have little effect on reality. However it makes me wonder why you are doing this. You could just have admitted. That you are removing evidence is only confirming that it is you but also showing us bad faith in what you are doing with your new account. hAl (talk) 21:05, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- What page on Google are you referring to? All I have ever seen is a dead link. AlbinoFerret (talk) 20:33, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- Are you now seriously suggesting that Google is altering their cached pages to accomodate you and fake your identity ? hAl (talk) 18:48, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- Shocking that an anonymous editor would go to all the trouble of stirring up problems by spreading lies. All someone has to do is look at your link to see that its not real. There is nothing stopping me from editing any article on Wikipedia. Your unprovable accusations the real problem. That post you pointed to on the Swiftweasel forum, the one you say has been changed, one problem that I see is it doesn't have a Last Edited by time stamp like in this post from the same forum. But in any event, I don't think you have proven anything. If you think there is something being done against Wikipedia policy, by all means file a report on the correct notice board. If not, drop this attack on me. AlbinoFerret (talk) 14:31, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
After reading through all this, I came to the personal conclusion that all this is both hilarious and very very sad at the same time. It seems to me that this guy suffers from severe schizophrenia. Anyhow, I had a ripping good time... Now, can someone please go ahead block this annoying sockpuppet? Ghettoblaster (talk) 21:06, 22 July 2008 (UTC)
You have been warned already. User talk pages are not the place for Sockpuppet suspicions. Use WP:SSP. Further continuation may lead to escalation. --Saint-Louis (talk) 00:02, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- Ah yes, I know where this is going... Try to be a little bit more creative. Ghettoblaster (talk) 00:24, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- If you had read the info Saint-Louis you should have noticed that this is evidence that a former sockpuppeteer has harrassed me a lot on wikipedia has returned under a different name and is editting the same article that he was doing before with the help of sockpuppets. That alone is useless info to report on WP:SSP. It is not so much proof of sockpuppeteering (which is difficult to get and leads to little of no punishment anyways) but a way of preventing that this person repeats his malicious editing styles of the past. hAl (talk) 06:11, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- Evidence of What exactly? All I see are unprovable theories and accusations that lead no place. What this is , is an attack on me. This isn't a discussion of a rule or guideline on Wikipedia being broken. Saint-Louis is warning you that continued discussion of other editors can have consequences. You need to be able to prove wrongdoing.
- Malicious editing styles? I think you need to |take a look in the mirror HAl. This is a Ad_hominem attack to draw away attention from your provable pattern of behavior.AlbinoFerret (talk) 06:53, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- I find the fact that a few month ago you used multiple wikipedia account to edit certain articles that I am interrested in a malicious editing style. That is not ad hominem but a charaterisation of a forbidden practice on wikipedia that was employed by you in the past. Looking at your new account most of the real article edits were done on the same article which your previous edits with multiple accounts were done on, and that scares me. You got me a ban on wikipedia for edittwarring against you and your other sockpuppet accounts. That is not forgotten lightly ! hAl (talk) 07:58, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- That is a lie. Again, I suggest you remove this section because it is nothing more than a personal attack. I have never used multiple wikipedia accounts to edit any page. You criticism of my editing is unfounded. I think the last two lines of your statement speak for themselves as the reason for this whole section. You need to stop blaming others for your actions. AlbinoFerret (talk) 14:01, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- So if you're really not User:Kilz, how do you explain those implausible coincidences that User:HAl mentioned above? What about the mysterious change from JB to JP just after it was mentioned here? I've seen the evidence. Also, your site has surprisingly been removed from the archive.org mirror just around the same time... In my opinion, disposing the evidence and continuing to deny what User:HAl found out about you is just ludicrous. Ghettoblaster (talk) 19:55, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- We are not interested by your arguments here. This is not the proper place to do it. Use WP:SSP. Hervegirod (talk) 20:04, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- By all means, feel free to file a report on any noticeboard for a Wikipedia guideline. The fact that none has been filed speaks volumes about the reality of any accusations. I will say it again, file a report, or remove this section on me. AlbinoFerret (talk) 20:37, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- We are not interested by your arguments here. This is not the proper place to do it. Use WP:SSP. Hervegirod (talk) 20:04, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- Point is there is nothing for us to file. You could have just owned up to the truth but now you haven't and are maniacally cleaning up behind you by getting your sites removed from archive.org and google cache your behaviour becomes more suspicious every second. I really wonder what drives you doing this.... hAl (talk) 21:05, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
- hAl, if you don't want to put it on WP:SSP, stop accusing this user. This has gone way too far now. Wikipedia is not the place for that. Hervegirod (talk) 21:49, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
The suspected sockpuppeting has been reported at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Kilz (3rd). WalterGR (talk | contributions) 11:13, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
3 revert rule notice
You have reverted the Office Open XML page 3 times in 24 hours. Doing so again will break the 3 revert rule. AlbinoFerret (talk) 22:25, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
- No I have not.
- Actually I have made an original edit on 28/7 because Micrsoft has amended the Open Specifcation Licensing FAQ to clearly state that OSP licensing can be used in GPL licensing implementations. This protect any Office Open XML implementations which is relevant for the Office Open XML article. This edit removed the suggestions by the SFLC that OSP licensing would not be compatible with GPL and added a newer reference of the altered OSP FAQ.
You have removed my edit 3 times and I restored it twice yesterday. We all know you have made an account specifically for made an account for abusing the Office Open article [Kilz]/ AlbinoFerret and you are showing your reverting ways again by trying to editwar on my correctly sourced change the article content whis was originally put in the article by your alter ego [Kilz]. hAl (talk) 05:44, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
- That is a lie, I am not Kilz, no matter how many times you or your buddies say it , it does not make it the truth. Your use of this lie as an excuse also does not remove from you the responsibilities for following the rules. AlbinoFerret (talk) 00:56, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
- A wikipedia admin has not said that I am Kilz. If they did, they were going against established practices for deciding these types of cases. The lies you and your buddies spread were pathetic. AlbinoFerret (talk) 12:18, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
- the exact wording was: The evidence presented here makes a compelling case that User:AlbinoFerret is a sockpuppet of User:Kilz. ... If AlbinoFerret is blocked in the future, previous blocks under the name of User:Kilz should be factored into the block length. I find that the conclusion was clealry reached. Also I have no interest in discussing this further with you. Go away sockpuppeteer. You effert to slander Office open XML are already anoying enough to deal with. hAl (talk) 12:23, 2 August 2008 (UTC)