Misplaced Pages

:Requests for checkuser/Case/Iantresman: 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:Requests for checkuser | Case Browse history interactively← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 16:13, 20 October 2007 editAkhilleus (talk | contribs)13,976 edits link to ban discussion← Previous edit Latest revision as of 21:34, 10 February 2023 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB 
(23 intermediate revisions by 14 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
<!-- BEGIN ARCHIVE TEMPLATE --><noinclude> <!-- BEGIN ARCHIVE TEMPLATE --><noinclude>
⚫ <!--
⚫ If you are adding a new request for this user please add it above this notice at the top of the page. Only the latest request will appear on the checkuser page. Please don't create a separate page with a different name.
⚫ -->
⚫ {| class="messagebox"
⚫ | style="text-align: center" | If you are creating a new request about this user, please add it to the top of the page, above this notice. Don't forget to add </br><span style="font-size: 125%">'''<nowiki>{{</nowiki>{{FULLPAGENAME}}<nowiki>}}</nowiki>'''</span></br> to the checkuser page . Previous requests (shown below), and this box, will be automatically hidden on ] (but will still appear here).
⚫ |}
⚫ <div style="background: #f5fffa; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px;">
⚫ <div style="text-align:center;">''The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a ]. <span style="color:red;">'''Please do not modify it'''</span>.''</div>
⚫ <!-- END ARCHIVE TEMPLATE -->


⚫ ===]===
⚫ {{rfcu box|case=Iantresman|filed=15:47, 10 April 2008 (UTC)}}
⚫ * {{checkuser|Iantresman}}<!--Please do not edit this line-->
⚫ <!-- Add suspected sock puppets and IP addresses below this line. The above line will list an account matching the pagename. -->
* {{checkip|82.35.165.180‎}}
* ''']:''' ]
* '''Supporting evidence:''' ] ]
It was recommended I file an RFCU here to shed light on the situation by ]. See also ]. ] (]) 15:47, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
:{{Clerk-Note}} Request was previously listed at "/Case/Iantresman (second request)"; now merged. ] 15:59, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

*The IP belongs to {{user|Soupdragon42}}. Ian's IP is {{unrelated}}. ] 16:09, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
**Soupdragon42 has also used the sockpuppet {{user|Ski fan}}. ] 16:16, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
***There is an entire forum of Ian Tresman allies angry at my activity at Misplaced Pages: . Soupdragon, it turns out, is one of the names of one of the members there other than Iantresman. ] (]) 16:10, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
***I am going to block the main account for two weeks to discourage further harassment, and I will indef the other sock puppet account with a soft block. There is no legitimate reason to operate a second account. It only serves to evade scrutiny. ] <sup>]</sup> 16:36, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


=== ] === === ] ===
{{rfcu box|case=Iantresman|filed=19:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)}} {{rfcu box|case=Iantresman|filed=19:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)}}
Line 6: Line 33:
* {{checkuser|Applecola}} * {{checkuser|Applecola}}
* {{checkuser|Leokor}} * {{checkuser|Leokor}}
⚫ * {{checkuser|Tsyko}}


* '''Code letter:''' F * '''Code letter:''' F
Line 12: Line 40:


*The community ban discussion can be found at ]. ] (]) 16:13, 20 October 2007 (UTC) *The community ban discussion can be found at ]. ] (]) 16:13, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

⚫ <!--
**I've added {{user|Tsyko}} - this brand-new account appeared at an arbitration case to file a bunch of evidence against ] - obviously this is not a new user and has a grudge against SA. I strongly suspect it's an Iantresman sock. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 17:08, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
⚫ If you are adding a new request for this user please add it above this notice at the top of the page. Only the latest request will appear on the checkuser page. Please don't create a separate page with a different name.

⚫ -->
{{unnecessary}}. These have all been since blocked by Raul, along with he IP. I think the matter is resolved. ]·] 23:34, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
⚫ {| class="messagebox"

⚫ | style="text-align: center" | If you are creating a new request about this user, please add it to the top of the page, above this notice. Don't forget to add </br><span style="font-size: 125%">'''<nowiki>{{</nowiki>{{FULLPAGENAME}}<nowiki>}}</nowiki>'''</span></br> to the checkuser page . Previous requests (shown below), and this box, will be automatically hidden on ] (but will still appear here).
** Actually, ] has never been blocked. ] 06:56, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
⚫ |}

⚫ <div style="background: #f5fffa; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px;">
** Blocked since when, and on what grounds? If someone filed a CheckUser request, that does not automatically constitute guilt on our parts. Innocent until proven guilty. The conclusions of the archived discussion ] state that there is no strong reason to think that Applecola and myself are sockpuppet. The CheckUser request was filed on the thinnest of evidence, and I was eagerly anticipating the results. In fact, I find it insulting to suggest, with the full knowledge and proof of me being a real person distinct from Ian Tresman (moreover, residing on, and connecting, traceably, from a different continent), that I would allow anyone to borrow my account--as if I couldn't speak for myself! This blocking is entirely ungrounded. I hope that it's a sincere mistake and does not represent an indirect attempt to use a CheckUser request to decide the matter against us without even doing it, where a true and unbiased check would definitely prove us innocent. --] 02:26, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
⚫ <center>''The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a ]. <font color="red">'''Please do not modify it'''</font>.</center>

⚫ <!-- END ARCHIVE TEMPLATE -->
***I personally have no evidence that you have ever done anything wrong. I was correcting a misstatement by Dmcdevit in which he said that you had been blocked. Right now I am not advocating any action except running the CheckUser, which is apparently what you want too. ] 04:41, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

:Thanks. Leokor is {{unrelated}}. ]·] 05:42, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
::I apologize to Leokor. ] 05:57, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
:::Apology accepted. --] 14:09, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
::Thanks. Still, I have some questions regarding this case. Neither Applecola nor Tsyko had been blocked prior to the request. CheckUser was filed, presumably, in order to find evidence to block them. CheckUser was not performed on them. And they are now blocked. I hope I'm misreading this. --] 14:09, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
::::In my opinion, the objective evidence of such a CheckUser would avoid giving the impression that one side of the plasma cosmology/mainstream vendetta has once again outmuscled the other. ] 20:13, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
:::::Is this how you see it, then? So the matter was somehow already decided, and you wanted to maintain appearance? And here's me thinking that objective evidence is the only kind of evidence there can be, of which you had, and still have, none at all. --] 03:42, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
::::Answered on Leokor's user page. ] 04:13, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

<hr>
=== ] === === ] ===
{{rfcu box|case=Iantresman|filed=19:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)}} {{rfcu box|case=Iantresman|filed=19:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)}}
Line 36: Line 75:
]] 19:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC) ]] 19:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


:{{RFPP|b}}: The contribs make it obvious that this is a throwaway account created to participate in the discussions surrounding Iantresman, and is almost certainly one of Ian's sockpuppets. I've blocked it indefinitely; I don't know that checkuser is necessary in a case like this, though I'll leave that up to the powers that be. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:24, 17 July 2007 (UTC) :] '''User(s) ]'''.<!-- Template:RFPP#bloc -->: The contribs make it obvious that this is a throwaway account created to participate in the discussions surrounding Iantresman, and is almost certainly one of Ian's sockpuppets. I've blocked it indefinitely; I don't know that checkuser is necessary in a case like this, though I'll leave that up to the powers that be. ''']''' <sup>]</sup> 21:24, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
::At the very least, Girls4girls is a meatpuppet of Iantresman--I still believe the checkuser should be run for a definitive answer as to whether it's a sock or just a meatpuppet. ]] 22:18, 17 July 2007 (UTC) ::At the very least, Girls4girls is a meatpuppet of Iantresman--I still believe the checkuser should be run for a definitive answer as to whether it's a sock or just a meatpuppet. ]] 22:18, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
:{{Inconclusive}} -- all edits were on open proxies, which I've blocked, but there's no way to tie them to Iantresman. --]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 22:44, 17 July 2007 (UTC) :{{Inconclusive}} -- all edits were on open proxies, which I've blocked, but there's no way to tie them to Iantresman. --]<sup><small>]</small></sup> 22:44, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
<center>''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the Request for checkuser. <font color=red>'''Please do not modify it.'''</font></br>Subsequent requests related to this user should be made ''above'', in a new section.</center></div> <div style="text-align:center;">''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the Request for checkuser. <span style="color:red;">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span><br />Subsequent requests related to this user should be made ''above'', in a new section.''</div></div>
</br> </br>
</noinclude> </noinclude>

⚫ === ] ===
⚫ {{rfcu box|case=Iantresman|filed=19:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)}}
⚫ * {{checkuser|Iantresman}}
⚫ <!-- Add suspected sock puppets and IP addresses below this line. The above line will list an account matching the pagename. -->
* {{checkuser|Applecola}}
⚫ * {{checkuser|Leokor}}

* '''Code letter:''' F

Iantresman apparently used Applecola as a sockpuppet, and borrowed the account of Leokor (a real person), both to evade his ban. The evidence has been documented at ]. ] 01:43, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 21:34, 10 February 2023

If you are creating a new request about this user, please add it to the top of the page, above this notice. Don't forget to add
{{Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Iantresman}}
to the checkuser page here. Previous requests (shown below), and this box, will be automatically hidden on Requests for checkuser (but will still appear here).
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a Request for checkuser. Please do not modify it.


Iantresman (second request)

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch
Filed: 15:47, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

It was recommended I file an RFCU here to shed light on the situation by User:Jehochman. See also Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Iantresman. ScienceApologist (talk) 15:47, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

 Clerk note: Request was previously listed at "/Case/Iantresman (second request)"; now merged. Anthøny 15:59, 10 April 2008 (UTC)


Iantresman

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch
Filed: 19:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Code letter: F

Iantresman apparently used Applecola as a sockpuppet, and borrowed the account of Leokor (a real person), both to evade his ban. The evidence has been documented at Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/Iantresman. Art LaPella 01:43, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

no Unnecessary. These have all been since blocked by Raul, along with he IP. I think the matter is resolved. Dmcdevit·t 23:34, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

    • Blocked since when, and on what grounds? If someone filed a CheckUser request, that does not automatically constitute guilt on our parts. Innocent until proven guilty. The conclusions of the archived discussion Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/Iantresman state that there is no strong reason to think that Applecola and myself are sockpuppet. The CheckUser request was filed on the thinnest of evidence, and I was eagerly anticipating the results. In fact, I find it insulting to suggest, with the full knowledge and proof of me being a real person distinct from Ian Tresman (moreover, residing on, and connecting, traceably, from a different continent), that I would allow anyone to borrow my account--as if I couldn't speak for myself! This blocking is entirely ungrounded. I hope that it's a sincere mistake and does not represent an indirect attempt to use a CheckUser request to decide the matter against us without even doing it, where a true and unbiased check would definitely prove us innocent. --Leokor 02:26, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
      • I personally have no evidence that you have ever done anything wrong. I was correcting a misstatement by Dmcdevit in which he said that you had been blocked. Right now I am not advocating any action except running the CheckUser, which is apparently what you want too. Cardamon 04:41, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. Leokor is Red X Unrelated. Dmcdevit·t 05:42, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
I apologize to Leokor. Art LaPella 05:57, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Apology accepted. --Leokor 14:09, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. Still, I have some questions regarding this case. Neither Applecola nor Tsyko had been blocked prior to the request. CheckUser was filed, presumably, in order to find evidence to block them. CheckUser was not performed on them. And they are now blocked. I hope I'm misreading this. --Leokor 14:09, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
In my opinion, the objective evidence of such a CheckUser would avoid giving the impression that one side of the plasma cosmology/mainstream vendetta has once again outmuscled the other. Art LaPella 20:13, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
Is this how you see it, then? So the matter was somehow already decided, and you wanted to maintain appearance? And here's me thinking that objective evidence is the only kind of evidence there can be, of which you had, and still have, none at all. --Leokor 03:42, 4 November 2007 (UTC)
Answered on Leokor's user page. Art LaPella 04:13, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Iantresman

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch
Filed: 19:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Code letter: G

Iantresman was indefblocked by Tom harrison based on mounting evidence at a community ban discussion. Iantresman weighed in twice at this discussion (, ) before being blocked.

Girls4girls' only edits since his/her account was created were:

  1. A comment on an RfAR Iantresman opened against FeloniousMonk ()
  2. Comment on the community ban discussion ()

Blueboy96 19:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

User(s) blocked.: The contribs make it obvious that this is a throwaway account created to participate in the discussions surrounding Iantresman, and is almost certainly one of Ian's sockpuppets. I've blocked it indefinitely; I don't know that checkuser is necessary in a case like this, though I'll leave that up to the powers that be. MastCell 21:24, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
At the very least, Girls4girls is a meatpuppet of Iantresman--I still believe the checkuser should be run for a definitive answer as to whether it's a sock or just a meatpuppet. Blueboy96 22:18, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 Inconclusive -- all edits were on open proxies, which I've blocked, but there's no way to tie them to Iantresman. --jpgordon 22:44, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the Request for checkuser. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent requests related to this user should be made above, in a new section.