Misplaced Pages

:Suspected sock puppets/Ideogram: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 03:07, 7 August 2007 editJehochman (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Page movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers46,281 edits →[]: add diff confirming Wang C-H← Previous edit Revision as of 03:14, 7 August 2007 edit undoIdeogram (talk | contribs)11,726 edits →[]: shrugNext edit →
Line 39: Line 39:
Yes, it's my sockpuppet. My understanding was that sockpuppets are tolerated as long as no policy is violated, and I don't see any policy violation cited here. --] 02:20, 7 August 2007 (UTC) Yes, it's my sockpuppet. My understanding was that sockpuppets are tolerated as long as no policy is violated, and I don't see any policy violation cited here. --] 02:20, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
: Thank you for that, and yes, there are legitimate reasons to operate socks, especially if they are openly declared which Wang C-H was not. We have to decide if there are violations of site policy. The most obvious would be operating multiple accounts to avoid scrutiny or for block evasion. Given your block history and excessive number of disputes, this is worth a bit more due diligence. ] <sup>]</sup> 02:51, 7 August 2007 (UTC) : Thank you for that, and yes, there are legitimate reasons to operate socks, especially if they are openly declared which Wang C-H was not. We have to decide if there are violations of site policy. The most obvious would be operating multiple accounts to avoid scrutiny or for block evasion. Given your block history and excessive number of disputes, this is worth a bit more due diligence. ] <sup>]</sup> 02:51, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

::Let's save some time. They are all my socks. It is up to others to determine if there are policy violations worth acting on here. --] 03:14, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

;Conclusions ;Conclusions


Revision as of 03:14, 7 August 2007

User:Ideogram

Suspected sockpuppeteer

Ideogram (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets


Report submission by

Jehochman 18:05, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Evidence

Wang C-H

  1. Ideogram is making odd edits to the User:Wang C-H page . Ideogram has also blanked warnings from User talk: Wang C-H. There's no talk between the two at all.
  2. Wang C-H created User:Wang C-H/navigation templates. . Ideogram later created the exact same thing in his own user space, User:Ideogram/navigation templates.
  3. In Wang C-H's seventh edit to Misplaced Pages, he copies a chunk of User:Ideogram/common article practices I dislike to his own user page.
  4. Ideogram has a history of disruption. (See block log.) We see the same sort of disruption from Wang C-H, including improper AfD nomination and then improper removal of AfD tags
  5. Both users seem to employ a "strike and run" tactic. Abusive motions are filed, and then retracted. Compare these AfD nominations by Wang C-H, and with this arbitration request by Ideogram:
  6. Both users focus extensively on China and seem to be pushing a pro-People's Republic of China POV by deleting, or reducing the visibility of any negative information or any mention of Taiwan/Republic of China:
    Ideogram:
    Wang C-H: with deceptive edit summary, removing mention of Republic of China and deceptive edit summary,
  7. These two users have not corresponded on wiki. The above pattern of editing strongly suggests sock puppetry or meat puppetry, in my opinion. Jehochman 19:47, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
  8. Editing sessions fit together neatly without overlapping. Editing sequences by Wang on Aug 5 - 6 do not overlap editing sequences by Ideogram.

Others

  1. "R1es has 113 different edits, of which nearly half were on the 19th and 20th of April, a period for which Ideogram was banned." See .
Comments

Yes, it's my sockpuppet. My understanding was that sockpuppets are tolerated as long as no policy is violated, and I don't see any policy violation cited here. --Ideogram 02:20, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for that, and yes, there are legitimate reasons to operate socks, especially if they are openly declared which Wang C-H was not. We have to decide if there are violations of site policy. The most obvious would be operating multiple accounts to avoid scrutiny or for block evasion. Given your block history and excessive number of disputes, this is worth a bit more due diligence. Jehochman 02:51, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Let's save some time. They are all my socks. It is up to others to determine if there are policy violations worth acting on here. --Ideogram 03:14, 7 August 2007 (UTC)
Conclusions