Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:40, 2 January 2015

• WT:SPI
• WP:CU/N

Archives (Index)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 s/Archive1 s/Archive2 s/Archive3 s/Archive4 s/Archive5 s/Archive6 s/Archive7 s/Archive8 s/Archive9 s/Archive10 s/Archive11 s/Archive12 s/Archive13 s/Archive14 s/Archive15 s/Archive16 s/Archive17 s/Archive18 s/Archive19 s/Archive20 s/Archive21 s/Archive22 s/Archive23 s/Archive24 25

This page is archived by ClueBot III.

SPI evidence subpages

There have been a few examples in recent days of editors creating "secret evidence" subpages attached to current or archived SPI cases. The checkuser team has discussed these subpages, and believes that the information contained in the subpages is more appropriately posted within the SPI request itself. Under no circumstances should a subpage be created for an archived SPI. There are limited situations where the sockpuppetry evidence involves private or non-public personal information, and in those circumstances direct communication with an active checkuser or email to the Functionaries mailing list would be appropriate. Otherwise, all evidence should be posted on an open SPI request. Risker (talk) 06:53, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

HRW in the 1900

Anyone recognise any similarity between this name and that of any known socks? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougweller (talk • contribs) 11:54, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

@Dougweller: why do you want to know that about User:HRW in the 1900? Grewia (talk) 22:21, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Warned off for notifying suspects

Does the panel here think that this warning (and this followup) I received from Bbb23 was reasonable and policy compliant? My main interest is rationales here. Grewia (talk) 22:27, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

your only purpose here appears to be to tell possible sock puppets that they are being investigated. You do realise, I hope, that such behaviour makes one wonder if you are a sock? Are you under the impression that sock puppetry is not a problem? The warning was deserved. Dougweller (talk) 22:37, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

@Dougweller: do you have the ability to explain why you think suspects should not be given the opportunity to see what they are being accused of and putting their side? Grewia (talk) 22:42, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

I just read the warning. So people accused of sockpuppetry are not allowed to be notified and defend themselves? I am confused by this policy, Bbb23. - erisrenee (talk) 23:04, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

• You absolutely are; the issue is that the Grewia account has only been used to alert editors to SPIs, and if I'm correct, LGBT-related SPIs at that. Grewia has made no attempt to actually contribute to Misplaced Pages as of right now. The other issue is that undeclared alternate accounts are not allowed to edit Misplaced Pages namespace (as per WP:ILLEGIT), which means that they shouldn't be editing SPIs directly when they have no relevance to them. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 23:09, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

@Lukeno94: do you have anything constructive and on topic to say about the instruction not to notify suspected socks? If you want to discuss my interests and intentions wrt the articles I plan to work on here, than perhaps we can take that discussion somewhere more appropriate, even offline perhaps? Grewia (talk) 23:15, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

• Nice cherry-picking of my comment there Einstein. If you read my comment, you'll see I was explaining to Erisrenee exactly what had happened... *palm to face* Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 23:16, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

• I've blocked Grewia indefinitely per NOTHERE and because they're very likely a sockpuppet. A lurking CU might be kind enough to appease our curiosity, but it's academic really. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:21, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

I believe that's an inappropriate block and an inappropriate cause to block. Notifying someone of an SPI against them is not against the rules nor is the unsubstantiated claim that a user is a sockpuppet appreciated. Tutelary (talk) 23:59, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

• However, trolling in an SPI that has nothing to do with them is a pretty clear sign of NOTHERE. If they're not a sock, then they're violating ILLEGIT as an undisclosed alt account. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 00:32, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Tutelary, the first time we met you were accusing me of making an inappropriate block. Since then, you have accused me on multiple occasions of making inappropriate or abusive blocks. And here you are again, accusing me of making and inappropriate block. It's becoming an irritating habit. Perhaps you'd like to tell the good folks following along at home just how many times one of those blocks has been reversed as out of process by another admin? Or just how many times I've been censured by the community or ArbCom for inappropriate blocks? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:40, 2 January 2015 (UTC)