Misplaced Pages

:Sockpuppet investigations/Rangoon11: 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:Sockpuppet investigations Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 00:31, 10 October 2010 editHersfold (talk | contribs)33,142 edits Comments by other users: reply. really obvious (and rather stupid) duck← Previous edit Revision as of 00:44, 10 October 2010 edit undoHersfold (talk | contribs)33,142 edits Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments: blockingNext edit →
Line 57: Line 57:
======<span style="font-size:150%"> Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments </span>====== ======<span style="font-size:150%"> Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments </span>======
Declining - checkuser will not publicly link IPs with named accounts. <font color="darkorange">]</font><b><font color="midnightblue"><big>]</big></font></b><font color="red">]</font> 13:28, 6 October 2010 (UTC) Declining - checkuser will not publicly link IPs with named accounts. <font color="darkorange">]</font><b><font color="midnightblue"><big>]</big></font></b><font color="red">]</font> 13:28, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

:Based on behavioral evidence, I am blocking all accounts and IPs named above; the IPs each for one week, {{user|Rangoon11}} for three months, and {{user|TinaMH}} indefinitely. I was considering only a month for Rangoon, but given the questionable wisdom of creating a sock during an open investigation, attempting to out others while logged out, AND the recent block for legal threats, the longer duration seemed more appropriate. ] <sup>(]/]/])</sup> 00:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
---- ----
<!--- All comments go ABOVE this line, please. --> <!--- All comments go ABOVE this line, please. -->

Revision as of 00:44, 10 October 2010

– A checkuser has declined a request for CheckUser, and the case is now awaiting a behavioural investigation.

Rangoon11

Rangoon11 (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log· investigate · cuwiki)

Populated account categories: suspected

For archived investigations, see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Rangoon11/Archive.


06 October 2010
Suspected sockpuppets


Evidence submitted by Codf1977

I think that Rangoon11 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has been using IP's to avoid blocks on the grounds of WP:3RR and to be disruptive. All the IP addresses first edits in 2010 are to articles that Rangoon11 has edited first. Two of them 92.29.114.41 and 92.24.190.146 have been blocked for disruptive edits.

I first came across UCL Institute of Neurology on 20 Sept 2010 while new page patrolling, as it seemed not to meet Misplaced Pages:College and university article guidelines I tagged it {{notability}} with this edit. Then the IP (92.29.114.41) came along and wared over the tag (no other editors other than the IP, Rangoon11 and myself have edited this article), later getting blocked for disruptive editing after making edits on Talk:Matthew Yusuf Smith. Then 92.15.3.97 made similar edits to Talk:UCL Institute of Neurology both were also a violation of WP:OUTING. Then there is this edit where Rangoon11 says "and since you posted a message on Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Universities accusing me (wrongly) of edit warring" - the post in question clearly show I said "IP editor is waring off the tag" further lends support to the fact Rangoon11 is editing using the above IP's

Then comes edits to University College London and King's College London made on 5 October, both 92.24.190.146 and Rangoon11 editing from the same point of view with almost very similar edit summaries such as "deletion of cited facts"

These IP's have been used to avoid blocks relating to WP:3RR and, if they are related, then Rangoon11 evaded a block on 92.29.114.41 (see Rangoon11 contributions on 21 Sept) for that reason I believe a CheckUser is appropriate.

I need to disclose the fact that I was the reason for Rangoon11's block for Legal threats he made here, which he did retract less than an hour later and was subsequently unblocked for. Codf1977 (talk) 11:57, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Further to the above, I believe 92.15.15.190 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and 92.24.190.36 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) are also Rangoon11 given the edit style and articles edited and the fact they are the same ISP's as the other IP's, however in the case of these there are no disruptive edits. Codf1977 (talk) 12:21, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Comments by accused parties   

See Defending yourself against claims.

Codf1977 has been consistently harrassing me and this is yet a futher episode. They have been attacking pages which they have seen that I have edited, have been trying to provoke, have posted numerous warnings and other messages on my talk page, have posted messages accusing me of edit warring here: Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Universities#UCL Institute of Neurology, been agressive and unconstructive here: Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Universities#Academic dress of the University of London and have generally been stalking me.

On UCL Institute of Neurology they engaged in a protracted and non-constructive effort to redirect the article on grounds on non-notability despite the weight of evidence to the contrary.

They have made edits to the following pages after looking at my edit history and following me there:

I believe that all of these edits have been of a hostile nature intended either to provoke or to waste my time or both. Yesterday Codf1977 posted a maintanence tag on University College London having made no prior edits to the article and having made no attempt to engage in discussion purely in an attempt to provoke.

I did not make a legal threat to Codf1977, I merely attempted to make them aware that their behaviour amounted to harrassment. Even despite that their behaviour continues! I am really not sure what to do apart from leave this account, which is grossly unfair but in the end life is too short to waste time fighting unpleasant individuals like this on Misplaced Pages!Rangoon11 (talk) 12:28, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

I make no apology for viewing the contributions of an editor whose edits I have concern over, it is common practice on WP. However you did not address the issue that this relates to - that the IP's have been engaged in disruptive actions on WP (two of them have been blocked as such) and that I believe there is a link between their actions and the actions of your account. My mention of the Legal Threats block was to ensure that transparency existed as far as I am concerned that mater was over yesterday when you withdrew the threat. Codf1977 (talk) 12:50, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
Comments by other users

There's been developments since the case was opened, namely TinaMH (talk · contribs) has started editing (I've added them to the suspected list), and I think a checkuser here is warranted. Christopher Connor (talk) 00:23, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Again, no. There's no need for checkuser, because  Looks like a duck to me. It's a remarkably stupid duck, given that this SPI was still open, but there's no need to go through technical data when the connection is obvious and there is no evidence that sleepers would be around. Hersfold 00:31, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

Declining - checkuser will not publicly link IPs with named accounts. TNXMan 13:28, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Based on behavioral evidence, I am blocking all accounts and IPs named above; the IPs each for one week, Rangoon11 (talk · contribs) for three months, and TinaMH (talk · contribs) indefinitely. I was considering only a month for Rangoon, but given the questionable wisdom of creating a sock during an open investigation, attempting to out others while logged out, AND the recent block for legal threats, the longer duration seemed more appropriate. Hersfold 00:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Categories: