Content deleted Content added
ScottyBerg (talk | contribs) |
216.57.39.35 (talk) |
||
Line 39: | Line 39: | ||
<small>''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Guidance#Defending yourself against claims|Defending yourself against claims]].''</small> |
<small>''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Guidance#Defending yourself against claims|Defending yourself against claims]].''</small> |
||
*'''Response from 69.203.119.66''': There is an ever-widening set of charges, all stemming from the '''correction of one typo,''' which was a constructive edit. As stated before, there is no account or IP abuse here. There is however, a certain amount of Wiki lawyering here, since after '''one edit''' which merely corrected a mis-spelled word, I did not suddenly turn into a sock puppet. |
|||
There is no attempt to thwart consensus, no destructive editing, no real evidence to suddenly declare me as a sock puppet. |
|||
======<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 20:52, 15 December 2010
Nelsondenis248
- Nelsondenis248 (talk · · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Populated account categories: suspected
For archived investigations, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nelsondenis248/Archive.
15 December 2010
- Suspected sockpuppets
- C.P.Taft (talk · · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- SRabassa (talk · · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Caguas28 (talk · · 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 "~~~~"
- 216.57.39.35: Editing pattern, talk page rhetoric and aggressive POV editing in Nelson Antonio Denis are similar to User:MBernal615, previously identified sock of Nelsondenis248. See recent canvassing and personal attacks [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] instantaneously after major edits to Nelson Antonio Denis, followed by wholesale reversion of the puffery-laden article [6], reinstating unsubstantiated and dubious claims concerning Denis. This article was created and extensively edited by User:MBernal615, an indef blocked meat/sockpuppet of the subject of the article, who also created an attack article on a political opponent. See WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Nelsondenis248/Archive. This IP is obviously a sockpuppet, or at the very least a meatpuppet, of this same indef banned editor, again seeking to evade the block and thwart necessary editing to rectify multiple article problems delineated on the talk page.
- 69.203.119.66: In March 2010, subsequent to the previous blocks imposed in this case, this IP was blocked for six months on checkuser evidence, apparently in relation to this case based on this[7]. This IP resumed editing the article immediately after 216.57.39.35 commenced its edits today. Previous edit pattern was similar to the other socks.
ScottyBerg (talk) 01:25, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
- Response from 69.203.119.66: As far as I know, an editor may edit on Wikipedia without being called a sockpuppet. The article(s) which I choose to edit do not make me or any other editor a sockpuppet. There is no creation or abuse of multiple accounts on my part. There is no evidence here, of sockpuppetry. The fact that I contribute to an article (with no account or IP abuse) does not make me a sockpuppet. Finally, the "editing" which triggered this report was my correction of a typo, the correction of a mis-spelled word. I don't believe that warrants a sockpuppetry charge, and being banned from Wikipedia.— Preceding unsigned comment added by C.P.Taft (talk • contribs)
- - If you are blocked under another name, for example User:MBernal615 then it is block evasion. Off2riorob (talk) 13:04, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
- Note: User:69.203.119.66 is the same as User:C.P.Taft [8] and both are obviously the same person editing as User:216.57.39.35, based on contributions. Contribution history shows that the "Taft" account is User:SRabassa and User:Caguas28. This person mistakenly was logged onto the Taft account when creating the two user pages. See [9] and [10] The editing patterns of these two IPs and the other user accounts are similar. (Editing of Klingenstein article, for instance, in addition to Denis-related edits, such as[11]). User:SRabassa and User:Caguas28 both are editing the same articles, posing as separate users.ScottyBerg (talk) 14:30, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
- User talk page of User:172.129.26.25 was created by User:216.57.39.35 [12] and the contribution history is Denis-oriented. ScottyBerg (talk) 20:40, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
Comments by other users
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
- Response from 69.203.119.66: There is an ever-widening set of charges, all stemming from the correction of one typo, which was a constructive edit. As stated before, there is no account or IP abuse here. There is however, a certain amount of Wiki lawyering here, since after one edit which merely corrected a mis-spelled word, I did not suddenly turn into a sock puppet.
There is no attempt to thwart consensus, no destructive editing, no real evidence to suddenly declare me as a sock puppet.