Revision as of 21:17, 18 November 2006 editXiliquiern (talk | contribs)1,181 edits Explanation (fix)← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:03, 18 November 2006 edit undoJesup (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,116 edits →[]: commentsNext edit → | ||
Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
I can't say that you are or that you aren't. However, your edits began right after the previous sockpuppetteer was blocked from further editing. Similarly, your edits have focused only on the same article his were on, specifically, the same exact revision of the same exact text. This revision contains text that has been found unfit for the article by consensus on the talk page of the article, but was reverted continuously by the previous puppet/teer.So you see, the situation appears that the old sockpuppet was blocked from editing, and now someone else is fulfilling exactly the same actions as him with no appearance of other intent. That is enough to get more than one person to ''suspect'' (see: "suscpected" sock puppets) that the old puppetteer may be using a new puppet.- ]] 21:16, 18 November 2006 (UTC) | I can't say that you are or that you aren't. However, your edits began right after the previous sockpuppetteer was blocked from further editing. Similarly, your edits have focused only on the same article his were on, specifically, the same exact revision of the same exact text. This revision contains text that has been found unfit for the article by consensus on the talk page of the article, but was reverted continuously by the previous puppet/teer.So you see, the situation appears that the old sockpuppet was blocked from editing, and now someone else is fulfilling exactly the same actions as him with no appearance of other intent. That is enough to get more than one person to ''suspect'' (see: "suscpected" sock puppets) that the old puppetteer may be using a new puppet.- ]] 21:16, 18 November 2006 (UTC) | ||
I should also note that ] started re-inserting this text exactly 4 days after the previous inserter (]) was reported, and 4 days is the minimum age of a newuser before they can edit sprotected pages. Note also the deceptive summary for Marshalbannana's last re-insertion before this case was opened: "m (sourced, looks better)" - marked as a minor edit. ] 23:03, 18 November 2006 (UTC) | |||
;Conclusions | ;Conclusions | ||
Revision as of 23:03, 18 November 2006
User:Jacknicholson
- Suspected sockpuppeteer
Jacknicholson (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
- Suspected sockpuppets
Marshalbannana (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
- Report submission by
jesup 19:18, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
- Evidence
Repeated identical edits (now with misleading summaries, including "minor edit" to hide it from some) on Katana.
Examples:
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Katana&diff=88449160&oldid=88300373
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Katana&diff=88298322&oldid=88296556
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Katana&diff=88292391&oldid=87346989
and compare to
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Katana&diff=87346728&oldid=87272508
by User:Jacknicholson and many, many other identical edits by him (and before page was semi-protected by anon-IP's identified as sockpuppets of him). jesup 19:23, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
- Comments
I ain't no sockpupet, run a check user if you will, i've just reveted your nonsencical removals.Marshalbannana 19:10, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
I can't say that you are or that you aren't. However, your edits began right after the previous sockpuppetteer was blocked from further editing. Similarly, your edits have focused only on the same article his were on, specifically, the same exact revision of the same exact text. This revision contains text that has been found unfit for the article by consensus on the talk page of the article, but was reverted continuously by the previous puppet/teer.So you see, the situation appears that the old sockpuppet was blocked from editing, and now someone else is fulfilling exactly the same actions as him with no appearance of other intent. That is enough to get more than one person to suspect (see: "suscpected" sock puppets) that the old puppetteer may be using a new puppet.- xiliquiern 21:16, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
I should also note that Marshalbannana started re-inserting this text exactly 4 days after the previous inserter (User:Jacknicholson) was reported, and 4 days is the minimum age of a newuser before they can edit sprotected pages. Note also the deceptive summary for Marshalbannana's last re-insertion before this case was opened: "m (sourced, looks better)" - marked as a minor edit. jesup 23:03, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
- Conclusions