Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Fossett&Elvis

Fossett&Elvis

• Fossett&Elvis (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Oprahwasontv (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Seattlehawk94 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

• Code letter: F

• Supporting evidence: These 3 users are accused of being the same person. However, none of their edits are to the same article so there is no violation of the multiple accounts rule. Oprahwasontv says she was editing from Maryland on 12.176.20.xxx according to a checkuser. Seattlehawk94 is a male TV reporter from Washington state. Based on public information, it looks like these are 3 separate people. Therefore, they cannot be socks of each other. I understand that checkusers have an inherent interest to say that they are socks because they have already been blocked as socks of each other, but honesty is the best policy to confirm what I have uncovered. Also, we should realize that these are human beings we are dealing with, not scraps of garbage that are blocked and thrown away. The reason for this RFCU is to check and correct conflicting checkuser information since they can't all be the sock of the same person.

The reason I am writing this is because I have seen another misidentification of socks. XXXX was checkuser proven to be in Atlanta while his sock XXXX was checkuser proven to be in Chicago. Some may say that there is some theoretical way to tap into far away computers but other XXXX socks are all in Chicago so they obviously are not capable of hijacking computers from other cities or they would have done so. (Names can be provided but are not shown so as not to confuse the issue).

Alison should refrain from doing this repeat checkuser becauses of a conflict of interest as she did the original one. SherlockHol (talk) 03:53, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

While we're on this subject, the submitting user is a pretty  Likely match for BBC5 (talk · contribs) and UN111 (talk · contribs), aside from obviously being a throwaway account. Seems worth noting that both of those accounts took a particular interest in a thread on the admin noticeboards. Beyond that, I've had a quick poke around but otherwise feel this request should be  Declined absent some pressing, specific, and most importantly provided reason to doubt the previous findings. – Luna Santin (talk) 12:37, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

• Fossett&Elvis is  Confirmed as Dereks1x. The only edits by Oprahwasontv that are in the checkuser database were made over a 3 day span of time from a Baltimore hotel. Here, the case for socking can only be made based on behavior, but if you think editing from a hotel is proof that one is not a sock, you haven't been around sockpuppets very long. I know that Alison confirmed Seattlehawk94 but I would only say possible, final determination would have to be made on behavior. Seattlehawk94's project-space edits are quite limited and there is something peculiar about making your first ever RFCU post about an alleged sockpuppet who hasn't edited in 5 months and who coincidentally lives quite nearby. Thatcher 04:01, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
• Also  Confirmed that SherlockHol (talk · contribs), BBC5 (talk · contribs), UN111 (talk · contribs), BeNiceToAll (talk · contribs), and Marlinette (talk · contribs) are the same person, and  Likely they are all also Dereks1x/Archtransit. Thatcher 04:17, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

Uh, this is Seattlehawk94. My edits are limited to places I know and have lived as well as sports teams for the most part. I'm not a sock. Look up IP, I was never given PROOF besides this ficticius "Checkuser" thing and that was run by Alison someone who I dispise and have made an enemy of with her going so far as to HACK MY LAPTOP. Look at her Encyoplipdia Dramatica page. We've been at war over there for awhile.

You throw out the "sock" term too easily..Got to Seahawkshuddle.com, SeahawksCentral/Nation.com, HornetsReport.com and ask about me. I've had this screenname for years, it's my only screenname I've ever used. Not a sock, didn't know what a sock was until I heard about it when that Presumtive person was banned, didn't like that person from the begining read up on this sock phenominomom after he trolled the Butte page I worked on.

Seriously, look up my accounts ask about me...I've pissed alot of people off on the internet using the same screen name. Hell, google "Seattlehawk94 asshole" and you'll find pages on pages of material. I don't use a sock..I don't need a sock...Don't get to be an internet celebrity that way.

If you look at my edits, I've done work on: The Seahawks, Butte, Montana (my hometown), and local Seattle things where I live.

From what I understand about "socks" is they take mulitple topics and throw stuff in. Most of my work is like I said...In stuff I like. I have no need or no time to mess around with mulitiple accounts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seattlehawk94 (talk • contribs)

Hi all. I followed up on this case off-wiki and have contacted Seattlehawk94 (talk · contribs) by email. It looks like I was wrong in my original checkuser determination that his account was a sock of Dereks1x. I was wrong on that and he's not. I'd like to apologize for calling it wrong and for having had his account blocked. I'm going to unblock now - Alison ^❤ 05:56, 1 December 2008 (UTC)