| Revision as of 08:32, 1 July 2011 editSteven Crossin (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users39,753 edits →Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments: Let's keep comments to a minimum till we know more.,← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 18:28, 11 May 2015 edit undoBerean Hunter (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users72,802 edits Archiving case to Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Mattisse/Archive | ||
| (155 intermediate revisions by 46 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{SPI case status|hold}} | |||
| <noinclude>__TOC__</noinclude> | <noinclude>__TOC__</noinclude> | ||
| {{SPIarchive notice|Mattisse}}<br />{{SPIpriorcases}} | {{SPIarchive notice|Mattisse}}<br />{{SPIpriorcases}} | ||
| =====<big>29 June 2011</big>===== | |||
| ;Suspected sockpuppets | |||
| * {{checkuser|1=BarkingMoon}} | |||
| * {{checkuser|1=Vanished_6551232}} | |||
| <!-- You may duplicate the templates above ({{checkuser}} and {{checkIP}}) to list more accounts--> | |||
| * <small>''Auto-generated every hour.''</small> | |||
| It is alleged that user BarkingMoon is actually blocked user Mattisse. User SandyGeorgia has posted the following diffs that she believes makes it clear that BarkingMoon is Mattisse. , , , , , , , . Another user has posted his belief that BarkingMoon is Rlevse, retired under dubious circumstances. As past experience shows that any unresolved allegations of socking will be trotted out when Mattisse asks for reinstatement, but by then matters will be stale, it seems most fair to have this resolved up front. ] (]) 08:45, 29 June 2011 (UTC) | |||
| *I am the user that suspected ] was the vanished ] - this suspicion was based on a similar edit history and a strong resemblance in edit summary style. Edit summaries identical between the two accounts of '''disappr''' and '''prep''' and '''avoid redir''' and other similarities - lots of focus on DYK and a out of the blue attack on User Giano when user Rlevse left he was in dispute with Giano. BarkingMoon is clearly a very experienced wikipedian. - returning user. ] (]) 10:05, 29 June 2011 (UTC) | |||
| @Steven Zhang. I am asking for a CU to be run regarding Mattisse and BarkingMoon. Checkusers may also wish to inquire regarding Rlevse, but that is not my principal concern. If I filled out the form wrong, please advise me as to what to change.--] (]) 10:32, 29 June 2011 (UTC) | |||
| :@Wehwalt - CU data is only available for around 90 days I think. After the 90 days; it is no longer available to checkusers. So the checkuser tool will not help here; only the behavioral evidence will help. --]]] <sup>]</sup> 10:36, 29 June 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::It's magic to me, either way. I trust also that behavioral evidence will be checked to see if Rlevse is BarkingMoon?--] (]) 10:45, 29 June 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ======<span style="font-size:150%">Comments by other users</span>====== | |||
| <small>''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See ].''</small> | |||
| *Mattisse does edit on other wiki's principally WikiSource there may be a chance to check cross wiki IP information.--] (]): 12:22, 29 June 2011 (UTC) | |||
| *BarkingMoon seemed to have a special interest in Birds , , , , etc. The level of detail of these edits points to someone well versed in ornithology and taxonomy which don't occur in Mattisses edit history.--] (]): 12:21, 29 June 2011 (UTC) | |||
| *I don't see a connection to Mattisse. However I do see a lot of similarities between BarkingMoon and Vanished_6551232. I suggest that this be split off from the Mattisse SPI. <b>] ] </b> 23:51, 29 June 2011 (UTC) | |||
| : Well; personally. Rlevse had an interest in scouting; if you look at the images he has uploaded etc. - wouldn't it make sense that Rlevse was a scout at one time as well? Today he could be the local school's scout leader. Usually scout leaders would be knowledgeable in birds and animals. Then again; it's a far-fetched theory. --]]] <sup>]</sup> 01:25, 30 June 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::Evidence is being compiled at ]. <b>] ] </b> 01:39, 30 June 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::In case there is a consensus that this editor is the same as Vanished_6551232, functionaries should be aware that there were serious issues about his editing and participation which were discovered after his departure that were not discussed publicly out of respect for a vanished user. It would not be appropriate for him to return under a new name without addressing those issues. Doing so would be a violation of ] (avoiding scrutiny), and of ]. <b>] ] </b> 03:50, 30 June 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::: Well in the case that it is him; he should've just let us know and we could've worked through the issues; rather than creating more. If it is you Rlevse; just let us know instead of forcing us to find out the hard way. We could work it through. It'd be better for both parties involved - you and I both know it. --]]] <sup>]</sup> 06:58, 30 June 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::::Based on the evidence I'd be inclined to block the account as a sock violation. If there's other evidence to show something different it should be added here. <b>] ] </b> 02:22, 1 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::::: I'd say wait until the hold on the case is removed. --]]] <sup>]</sup> 02:23, 1 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::No rush. I'm just saying that's my conclusion unless there's some other evidence of explanation. The user says he's shared information with an unidentified admin. If so, that admin should speak up. <b>] ] </b> 02:29, 1 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ::::::: Maybe that admin doesn't want to speak up because he might lose the trust of BarkingMoon. --]]] <sup>]</sup> 02:50, 1 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
| *I'm the admin. As I said on the BM talk page. What is it you want to know? I won't betray any confidentiality or privacy information, but I'll answer any questions I can. I'll say this much. It appears to me that much of this "information" is circumstantial. My understanding is that CU info goes stale after 90 days, Rlevse has been gone much longer than that. As far as I know, he wasn't "banned" (although I do understand the advice in the ] guideline. I repeat: ''guideline''. First some people try to get this editor blocked claiming they were "Mattisse". When that failed, some folks switched to "Rlevse". Please see: ]. Since when did WP become some sort of Spanish Inquisition? Unless or until you have some rock solid proof that this editor is violating some policy, block, or ban. Then let the editor edit in peace please. Thank you. — <small><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding:1px;"><b>]</b> : ]</span></small> 03:43, 1 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
| **Ched, I'm not fishing. I never said it was Mattisse and I don't know why this hasn't been moved out of the Mattisse archive. The behavioral evidence is pretty clear for the Vanished_6551232 connection. You say that you have been in off-Wiki contact with the editor. I assume he shared with you his previous account name. I have just two questions. 1) Did the user give any evidence to show he is who he claims to have been, or did he just make an assertion? 2) Did the user say he is the same person as Vanished_6551232? (That user may not have been banned as of the time of his retirement, but he would have faced some hard questioning about his activities if he hadn't vanished when he did. The user would be violating some important policies and guidelines if he returned under a new unidentified account.) <b>] ] </b> 08:12, 1 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ======<span style="font-size:150%">Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments</span>====== | |||
| *{{clerknote}} Who is the checkuser actually being run against. We need an account to run the checkuser against. Also, what makes you think BarkingMoon is Rlevse? Given the nature of this allegation, we will need more evidence than use of edit summaries. That's speaking for myself, but other clerks are free to chip in. <font face="Forte">] <sup>]</sup></font> 10:12, 29 June 2011 (UTC) | |||
| *{{clerknote}} This is a tough one. It's pretty evident that they're either a returning user or a new user that has long edited as an anon and made an account. I've not looked through contribs enough to say any more at this time, but this will need some more looking into. Both previous accounts listed here are obviously stale, so {{decline}} as no checkuser can be done here. <font face="Forte">] <sup>]</sup></font> 10:30, 29 June 2011 (UTC) | |||
| *{{clerknote}} Updated case per notes above. <font face="Forte">] <sup>]</sup></font> 10:35, 29 June 2011 (UTC) | |||
| *{{Decline}} - as too {{IPstale}} for checkuser to be of any use here. Behavioural evidence will have to be looked into here, but I assume it will take a while to look into. Still looking over contribs to see any possible connections. <font face="Forte">] <sup>]</sup></font> 11:40, 29 June 2011 (UTC) | |||
| *So the bottom line here is that a couple people went ] and caught NOTHING. Good job. And ya wonder why we have trouble keeping new users? — <small><span style="border:1px solid #000000;padding:1px;"><b>]</b> : ]</span></small> 13:20, 29 June 2011 (UTC) | |||
| **Not entirely. Some more information has surfaced that verifies the identity of these accounts, however I'm awaiting instruction on how to proceed with this. Until then, this case is on hold. ] <sup>(]/]/])</sup> 00:51, 30 June 2011 (UTC) | |||
| **@Will- Based on developments that have occured recently, we feel we have enough evidence to verify the original identity of the BarkingMoon account. As the course of action to take is still under discussion, I'll say no more on the matter apart from the fact that more info will be posted here in due course. <font face="Forte">] <sup>]</sup></font> 01:54, 30 June 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ***my final statement on the matter is on my talk page] (]) 09:54, 30 June 2011 (UTC) | |||
| **@Will- As this is being internally discussed at present, I'd ask that all discussion here is put on hold until further developments result from the internal discussion. Thanks. <font face="Forte">] <sup>]</sup></font> 08:32, 1 July 2011 (UTC) | |||
| ---- | |||
| <!--- All comments go ABOVE this line, please. --> | |||
Latest revision as of 18:28, 11 May 2015
Mattisse
Mattisse (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Populated account categories: confirmed · suspected
For archived investigations, see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Mattisse/Archive.
A long-term abuse case exists at Misplaced Pages:Long-term abuse/Mattisse.
Prior SSP or RFCU cases may exist for this user: