Misplaced Pages

:Requests for checkuser/Case/W. Frank: 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 23:00, 27 January 2008 editOrderinchaos (talk | contribs)Administrators70,076 edits →W. Frank: :/← Previous edit Latest revision as of 18:14, 14 March 2023 edit undoMalnadachBot (talk | contribs)11,637,095 editsm Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)Tag: AWB 
(4 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
=== ] === === ] ===
{{checkuser requests to be listed}}
{{rfcu box|case=W. Frank|filed=18:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC)}} {{rfcu box|case=W. Frank|filed=18:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC)}}
* {{checkuser|W. Frank}}<!--Please do not edit this line--> * {{checkuser|W. Frank}}<!--Please do not edit this line-->
Line 38: Line 37:
:* - Alice apparently knows Gibnews, but I can find no interaction between them on-Wiki that would result in them having interacted off-Wiki, however W. Frank and Gibnews did interact on say the ] article. :* - Alice apparently knows Gibnews, but I can find no interaction between them on-Wiki that would result in them having interacted off-Wiki, however W. Frank and Gibnews did interact on say the ] article.


Thanks. <font face="Verdana">]<sub>'']''</sub></font> 18:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC) Thanks. <span style="font-family:Verdana;">]<sub>'']''</sub></span> 18:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC)


:{{take note}} - this is not a simple ] case here. I'm accepting this as 1) I believe it to be ] to avoid scrutiny, 2) one of these editors has been under scrutiny due to a recent ArbCom case 3) there is an arbcom case pending regarding the actions of one of these accounts and 4) both accounts are still active as of now. Also, I'm highly aware that ] editors already work in a sensitive area and there have already been a lot of shenanigans and troublemaking from that department - ] <sup>]</sup> 20:03, 27 January 2008 (UTC) :{{take note}} - this is not a simple ] case here. I'm accepting this as 1) I believe it to be ] to avoid scrutiny, 2) one of these editors has been under scrutiny due to a recent ArbCom case 3) there is an arbcom case pending regarding the actions of one of these accounts and 4) both accounts are still active as of now. Also, I'm highly aware that ] editors already work in a sensitive area and there have already been a lot of shenanigans and troublemaking from that department - ] <sup>]</sup> 20:03, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
::It would be quite odd if true - Alice has been heavily involved in East Asian articles as well (and I must say, has been quite effective in that domain). I hope for otherwise. :/ ] 23:00, 27 January 2008 (UTC) ::It would be quite odd if true - Alice has been heavily involved in East Asian articles as well (and I must say, has been quite effective in that domain). I hope for otherwise. :/ ] 23:00, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

:{{confirmed}} - ] <sup>]</sup> 03:52, 28 January 2008 (UTC)


<!-- BEGIN ARCHIVE TEMPLATE --><noinclude> <!-- BEGIN ARCHIVE TEMPLATE --><noinclude>
Line 51: Line 52:
|} |}
<div style="background: #f5fffa; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px;"> <div style="background: #f5fffa; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px;">
<center>''The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a ]. <font color="red">'''Please do not modify it'''</font>.</center> <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 --> <!-- END ARCHIVE TEMPLATE -->


Line 67: Line 68:




<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>

Latest revision as of 18:14, 14 March 2023

W. Frank

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch
Filed: 18:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

W. Frank was a party in the above case. I'm unaware of when the Alice account was created due to a usurpation, but at the time of the account's first edit at 04:08, 28 September 2007 the ArbCom case was still very much ongoing and the Proposed Decision page looked like this. W. Frank had a large amount of evidence posted about his disruption and a number of remedies proposed against him (see here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here), in addition to the probation which he was being considered for on the already linked Proposed Decision page. I contend that the creation of a brand new account while an editor is potentially facing sanctions in an ongoing Arbitration case is an attempt to evade remedies issued by the Arbitration Committee. This editor has a record of disruption and blocks, and a continuation of the same behaviour using the old account name would have resulted in different treatment (and the probable use of the probation remedy from the Troubles case) than the current account would receive. In addition to the continued harassment of editors of Troubles related articles, disruption is ongoing in other areas see Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration#Alice. The W. Frank account hasn't been abandoned, as it was used to vote in ArbCom elections and an RfA in December, and I contend that the use of a sockpuppet to continue the same disruption as before with a "clean slate" is not a permitted use of sockpuppets. Evidence below, more available but I wanted to keep it relatively concise:

  • Alice recommends that "only users with a committed identity revealed to Arb||Com be enfranchised "
  • W. Frank recommends that "Articles should be edited only by "trusted" editors that have established their bona fides to a member of Arbcom with checkuser privileges"
  • Use of "just revert me":
  • - Alice
  • - W. Frank
  • References to editors of Troubles related articles have an agenda and/or a COI, in particular those who are believed to have sympathies to Irish republicanism
  • - Alice
  • - W. Frank (many, many more available)
  • References to "teams" of editors:
  • - Alice
  • - W. Frank (many, many more available)
  • Moving ToC to left hand side before the lead, against the Manual of Style:
  • - Alice
  • - W. Frank
  • Other miscellaneous evidence:

Thanks. One Night In Hackney303 18:29, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

information Note: - this is not a simple WP:RTV case here. I'm accepting this as 1) I believe it to be the use of an alternative account to avoid scrutiny, 2) one of these editors has been under scrutiny due to a recent ArbCom case 3) there is an arbcom case pending regarding the actions of one of these accounts and 4) both accounts are still active as of now. Also, I'm highly aware that Troubles editors already work in a sensitive area and there have already been a lot of shenanigans and troublemaking from that department - Alison 20:03, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
It would be quite odd if true - Alice has been heavily involved in East Asian articles as well (and I must say, has been quite effective in that domain). I hope for otherwise. :/ Orderinchaos 23:00, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
 Confirmed - Alison 03:52, 28 January 2008 (UTC)


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/W. Frank}}
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.

W. Frank

request links: main • edit • links • history • watch
Filed: 23:27, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
  • Code letter: G

IP has made two edits identical in nature to ones User:W. Frank made earlier in the day - . The IP editor has made it clear he is not a new editor - . User:W. Frank has a history of previous interaction with User:Vintagekits who the IP has been harassing and abusing on both User talk:Vintagekits and User talk:84.13.156.208, and User:W. Frank has previously edited from an IP registered to the same ISP - . Brixton Busters 23:27, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

no Declined. We will not 'out' IP addresses save in exceptional cases. Mackensen (talk) 00:04, 10 August 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.