| Revision as of 16:11, 6 December 2009 editTanthalas39 (talk | contribs)22,377 edits You have been temporarily blocked from editing.← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:05, 6 December 2009 edit undoJeandré du Toit (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers18,684 edits →Jonathan Byrne libel vandalism.: 71.218.124.178Next edit → | ||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
| *] | *] | ||
| *] | *] | ||
| *] | |||
| *] | *] | ||
| *] | *] | ||
| *] -- ] (]), 2009-12-05t12:03z, -- ] (]), 2009-12-06t15:35z | *] -- ] (]), 2009-12-05t12:03z, -- ] (]), 2009-12-06t15:35z, -- ] (]), 2009-12-06t17:05z | ||
| :Jeandre: I'm not so sure you can tie all of these addresses together into a consipricy. I think you were wrong to just blow away all of the edits you did today. Granted, they were not all correctly sourced but given the very long time spanning each update and the multiple IP addresses, I don't think this can be labeled as normal vandalism. I'm looking a little deeper to see if there is a better explaination. --] (]) 01:33, 6 December 2009 (UTC) | :Jeandre: I'm not so sure you can tie all of these addresses together into a consipricy. I think you were wrong to just blow away all of the edits you did today. Granted, they were not all correctly sourced but given the very long time spanning each update and the multiple IP addresses, I don't think this can be labeled as normal vandalism. I'm looking a little deeper to see if there is a better explaination. --] (]) 01:33, 6 December 2009 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 17:05, 6 December 2009
Jonathan Byrne libel vandalism.
None of the refs given mention Byrne, some refs may never have existed in the first place. Looks like the same vandal using
- 12.238.58.2 (2009-11-13)
- 38.106.143.248
- 66.109.214.15 (2006-06-19)
- 67.105.2.130
- 70.108.248.155 (2009-11-16)
- 71.212.174.130
- 71.212.183.168
- 71.218.118.147
- 71.218.121.119
- 71.218.123.7
- 71.218.124.178
- 71.218.125.196
- 71.218.126.151
- 98.96.155.166 -- Jeandré (talk), 2009-12-05t12:03z, -- Jeandré (talk), 2009-12-06t15:35z, -- Jeandré (talk), 2009-12-06t17:05z
- Jeandre: I'm not so sure you can tie all of these addresses together into a consipricy. I think you were wrong to just blow away all of the edits you did today. Granted, they were not all correctly sourced but given the very long time spanning each update and the multiple IP addresses, I don't think this can be labeled as normal vandalism. I'm looking a little deeper to see if there is a better explaination. --69.132.202.95 (talk) 01:33, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
- See burden of proof. Not one of the refs mentioned Byrne. Some of the early libels from about 2006 didn't put in any refs, but since then non existent refs or refs that never mention Byrne are used - hoping nobody will actually check the refs. The smartest fake ref seems to be the skunk ape one, the rest are very clearly fake. -- Jeandré (talk), 2009-12-06t14:45z
- Ha ha. Well done. I was beginning to wonder if anyone would catch on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.218.124.178 (talk) 16:01, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
December 2009
{{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Tan | 39 16:11, 6 December 2009 (UTC)