– This SPI case is closed and will be archived shortly by an SPI clerk or checkuser.
ItsLassieTime
- ItsLassieTime (talk · · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
For archived investigations, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ItsLassieTime/Archive.
A long-term abuse case exists at Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/ItsLassieTime.
19 June 2011
- Suspected sockpuppets
- Piano non troppo (talk · · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
- Sockmaster account = Piano non troppo
- Caused disruption at Featured Article Review process [1] [2] [3] [4] [5]
- Engaged in, somewhat animated, discussion with FAC delegate, Dana boomer [6] [7]
- Appeared to be angry at me for warning the user about disruption at the FAR process [8] [9]
- June 2010 - Posts treatise about the FA process to account's userpage [10] [11]
- May 2011 - After no edits for one year - posts "retired" to account's userpage [12]
- Sock account = 56tyvfg88yju
- December 2010 - Very 1st edit is to turn userpage from redlink to bluelink with one-line-post [13]
- And same for user talk page [14]
- Navigates to FAC in 3rd edit ever to Wikipedia [15]
- Note: This is to an FAC candidate of Tbhotch - a user previously in conflict with the sock's master account, Piano non troppo (talk · contribs)
- January 2011 - Warned by FAC coordinator, Laser brain, about disruptive behavior at FACs [16]
- January 2011 - Comment by NYMFan69-86 at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Painted turtle/archive1 [17] = "The user account User:56tyvfg88yju was created less than three weeks ago (December 19th), his (or her) contributions consists merely of creating his (or her) user page and talk page, and opposing the promotion of four FA candidates, one of them being Painted turtle. Just throwing that out there."
- January 2011 - Comment by Legolas2186 at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Painted turtle/archive1 [18] = "Just for the delegates, User:56tyvfg88yju is an alternate account of disruptive user Piano non troppo."
- Note: The sock account made zero edits for four months, from the period between 1 February 2011 and 8 June 2011. [19] [20]
- June 2011 - First comment by the sock account after inactivity of four months, is "oppose" at a FAC I nominated, compare with "oppose" at FAC nominated by Tbhotch, above. [21]
- Comment: The sock account appears to have been created mainly for the purpose of vindictive retaliation through the manipulation of the FAC process = at multiple editors where the main sockmaster account had prior disputes over one year ago.
Thank you for your time. -- Cirt (talk) 03:14, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- Pattern with sock account, warnings from FAC coordinators
- June 2010 - Piano non troppo (talk · contribs) = warned by Dana boomer [22]
- January 2011 - 56tyvfg88yju (talk · contribs) = warned by Laser brain [23]
- Likely due to the socking, Laser brain did not realize this was the user's second warning for disruption of the FA process.
-- Cirt (talk) 03:30, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- Relevant points from Sock Policy
- "the use of multiple accounts to deceive other editors, disrupt discussions, distort consensus, avoid sanctions, or otherwise violate community standards – sock puppetry – is forbidden."
- Inappropriate uses of alternative accounts = "Posing as a neutral commentator: Using an alternative account in a discussion about another account operated by the same person."
- "Editors who want to use more than one account for some valid reason should provide links between them on the respective user pages, with an explanation of the purpose of each account or of the relationship between them. If so desired, the user and user talk pages from one account can be redirected to the other. Editors who use unlinked alternative accounts, or who edit as an IP separate from their account, should carefully avoid any crossover on articles or topics"
- "it is a violation of this policy to create alternative accounts to confuse or deceive editors who may have a legitimate interest in reviewing your contributions."
-- Cirt (talk) 03:54, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
Comments by other users
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
- Comment by Legolas2186 — I knew clearly that 56*** was a sockpuppet of Piano non troppo the moment he started commenting at the FAC of Halo (Beyonce Knowles song) that the article cannot pass unless it has recording info, also cited "Hey Jude" as a model article. These are exactly the same comments that Piano non troppo made at the GA discussion of Paparazzi (Lady Gaga song), for which he was reprimanded as he was going on calling other editor's contributions as "unprofessional" and basically "shit". Yes, he is disruptive, trying to emulate the air of someone with strong professional knowledge, but is basically throwing straw in the air by modelling one article and expecting others to follow suit (And in these cases, articles which have vast range of information for the subject matter being old). He was warned time and again not to disrupt the FAC process by abusing editors, commenting nonsense and opposing unrationally. But here he is back again. — Legolas (talk2me) 05:43, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- Comments by Truthkeeper88 - Regarding the results, I'm just getting caught up here, but based on the names and a quick look at the contribs, I'm thinking ItsLassieTime. I'll go through the contribs and post back. I'm fairly familiar with their work. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 13:19, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- I've had a look at the contributions, and I'm fairly certain it's ItsLassieTime, so maybe run a CU against that account, or add this to those reports. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 15:02, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
- Clerk endorsed - It's possible; let's find out. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 03:45, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- Possible use of open proxy(s) ? -- Cirt (talk) 04:24, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- Also, does it geolocate to the same area? Possibly using a friend's computer? -- Cirt (talk) 04:28, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- Total stab in the dark, but based on behavior my guess is Ecoleetage (talk · contribs). As far as I can see, though, that guy and all of his socks are stale. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 10:15, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
Confirmed that
- GetSetGo (talk · · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- DaffyDillyDaze (talk · · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- WhereWeAre (talk · · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- 56tyvfg88yju (talk · · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
are the same person. I can't guarantee that that's it. Cirt, not an open proxy, and geoloc can't help here either. Amalthea 11:59, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- Administrator note I've moved this case to reflect 56tyvfg88yju as the master. And Amalthea has blocked and tagged everyone. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 12:08, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- To be sure I'd be very surprised if 56tyvfg88yju was actually "the master", but as far as the available CU data goes it's the best I can say. I would suggest that someone has a look at the actual contributions of the accounts and the articles created by them, maybe this could allow for further conclusions. The articles created appear to be of high quality. A candidate I have in mind in that league is Ottava Rima (another wild guess). Amalthea 12:30, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- Yeah, definitely. I mostly just went with 56ty as the master for now, but that can change. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 12:48, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- To be sure I'd be very surprised if 56tyvfg88yju was actually "the master", but as far as the available CU data goes it's the best I can say. I would suggest that someone has a look at the actual contributions of the accounts and the articles created by them, maybe this could allow for further conclusions. The articles created appear to be of high quality. A candidate I have in mind in that league is Ottava Rima (another wild guess). Amalthea 12:30, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- Truthkeeper88 seems to have the right of it, technical data from HomeComingQueenl1942 (talk · contribs) and GlasgowGuyScotland (talk · contribs), confirmed socks of banned ItsLassieTime (talk · contribs), matches 56tyvfg88yju et al. Best I can tell, that's the actual master. Amalthea 15:37, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
- Can this case page then be moved to be merged with ItsLassieTime (talk · contribs) ? -- Cirt (talk) 16:46, 19 June 2011 (UTC)