This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Chaser(talk | contribs) at 20:32, 25 December 2006(add another). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.Revision as of 20:32, 25 December 2006 by Chaser(talk | contribs)(add another)
Based on tagging by User:HitTheRoad, another sock. All match existing naming patterns as well and have no contributions aside *from more conspiracy idiocy:
I'm not sure on this one. It appears to more match the pattern for Rootology, rather than Cplot. Should probably go in with the next CheckUser request. --StuffOfInterest23:44, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
All of these IP's edit the same articles as "support" for CPlot after his block and all have edited "Federal Authorities are now blocking" sections in various articles. They are all Sprint IPs from the Chicago, Illinois area. They also attack MONGO (the blocking admin). Some of these have been blocked for trolling. --Tbeatty04:20, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to better understand this situation. Can you please elaborate by specifically linking to the alleged attacks and what you consider to be "an attack"? Thank you. --CyclePat04:59, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I still don't see the link. Is there something I'm missing here. Please explain. All I see up above is a bunch of IP's that are mostly from the same area. (I think 1 or 2 are from different locations). Then I see the allegations that it is cplot that is running them all. What is the link? (I've studied for example John Rutter's Requiem and been able to make links with Benjamin Britten's thematic material. Usually it helps if I deconstruct the thematic material, place a small extract of that music and comparativelly analyse it with the primary subject) Given the circumstances of cplots 1 week block, and that this alleged sockpuppetteering could make that 1 week block be indefinate, I think it is very important to demonstrate the relationships. (not only that, but given the circumstances he was blocked under it is all the more important!). I vito the current block and ask the accuser to step up to the plate and explain yourself, otherwise I believe you are disrupting wikipedia and will not hesitate to do everthing possible to have this issue clarified higher up! --CyclePat05:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The evidence can be found here: [9]. Each one of the IP sockpuppets made an edit to [Wikipedia:Village pump (news)] within 1-2 minutes of their prior vandalism being removed. The edits were each substantilly the same in content and tone. Whether this is one person using some IP-drifting technique to avoid blocks, or is a series of friends each editing from a different location to do the same is moot. The entire enterprise needs to be stopped. I hope this helps. I could post the difs, but look at the list of edit summaries, and compare to Cplots edits, especially this one: [10]. Hope this clarifies the issue. This issue is being handled at multiple venues, including WP:ANI and WP:ABUSE --Jayron3206:40, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I did have a message on my user page that was a little suspicious. It could have been cplot but at the same time it indicated it was his friend. This was removed from my page by Zoe, I think because he believes its sock-puppet material. Seeing my off on use and, usually, my good faith and would not have said that was sock-puppet... but boy nose was in fact twitching thinking this could be my client (I am cplot's advocate). But why wouldn't he just email me! I dunno... these are all assumptions. And given the circumstances I would like to assume good faith more towards my client and that there is a smeer campaign based on some bad communications all based on the september 11, 2001 article dispute. --CyclePat05:15, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
Please be warry of the block that was placed on cplot. My observations, after being asked to be his advocate, indicate that he was blocked in a revengeful maner and possibly in violation of WP:Block. (I am trying to hold a discussion at User:MONGO talk page, however I may be required to send this to the official WP:AMA board for further assistance and, as everyone seems to be suggesting mediation). All this to say, that cplot is blocked and there are some pretty suspicious things happening (even to the point where my user talk page has been vandalized to suppress a message in support of cplot.) Though this does not denny the fact that sockpuppets may exist, it does show the hostility was appears to have been escallated by a team of carefully crafted users "ganged-up!" Hence, I put you to the strictess of proof and that any allegations of vandalism be properly demonstrated. --CyclePat04:59, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Block looks appropriate to me. I posted an invitation for evidence and volunteered to perform an independent investigation of the claims. The sockmaster and sockfarm continued posting unsupported allegations to Village Pump without ever taking evidence to my userpage or e-mailing me (unless the NSA, the space aliens, or Barney the Dinosaur ate the e-mail). DurovaCharge!06:02, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The block was reviewed and supported at AN/I and a number of the sock puppets have been blcoked for simple disruption. --Tbeatty05:20, 30 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
