Misplaced Pages

:Sockpuppet investigations/Loosmark: 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 17:22, 15 September 2011 editVolunteer Marek (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers94,080 edits →Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments: I didn't cross the border, the border crossed me← Previous edit Revision as of 17:50, 15 September 2011 edit undoPiotrus (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Event coordinators, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers285,738 edits →Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin commentsNext edit →
Line 51: Line 51:
::::How narrow exactly is this range? They could just live in the same area, especially if it happens to be a metropolitan area with a large ex-pat/immigrant population.<small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 17:13, 15 September 2011 (UTC) ::::How narrow exactly is this range? They could just live in the same area, especially if it happens to be a metropolitan area with a large ex-pat/immigrant population.<small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 17:13, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
::: Personally, I'm inclined to think Loosmark is indeed unrelated; however, Poeticbent admits the other accounts here are his. ] ] 16:50, 15 September 2011 (UTC) ::: Personally, I'm inclined to think Loosmark is indeed unrelated; however, Poeticbent admits the other accounts here are his. ] ] 16:50, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
:::: Accounts, hmmm. Well, the big question is - where they used disruptively? A quick rereading of ] suggests it is the key factor here. As VM notes, Pb. left because of heavy harassment, and ] is a valid reason to create a new account. At the same time, accounts, that is a bit puzzling. If no malicious activity has occurred, I'd suggest strongly that Poeticbent agrees to edit under one account, which he does not have to disclose to anybody, perhaps save the admins/clerks involved in this investigation. Then we can move on. --<sub style="border:1px solid #228B22;padding:1px;">]&#124;]</sub> 17:50, 15 September 2011 (UTC)


:::: Worth remember here why Poeticbent left Misplaced Pages - some very odious harassment. So I can completely understand if he wanted to comeback under a new anonymous account, which I believe he is perfectly within his rights to do. Also, AFAICR he was not under any kind of sanction at the time, so the only reason I can see for him to use a new account would be exactly to avoid what happened to him last time - this is a legitimate reason.<small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 17:21, 15 September 2011 (UTC) :::: Worth remember here why Poeticbent left Misplaced Pages - some very odious harassment. So I can completely understand if he wanted to comeback under a new anonymous account, which I believe he is perfectly within his rights to do. Also, AFAICR he was not under any kind of sanction at the time, so the only reason I can see for him to use a new account would be exactly to avoid what happened to him last time - this is a legitimate reason.<small><span style="border:1px solid black;padding:1px;">]</span></small> 17:21, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Revision as of 17:50, 15 September 2011

Loosmark

Loosmark (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/Loosmark/Archive.

– A checkuser has completed a check on relevant users in this case, and it is now awaiting administration and close.

14 September 2011
Suspected sockpuppets


Loosmark has created dozens of sockpuppets (partial list is here:). They tend to get involved in issues concerning Polish nationalism and in disrupting pages involving Polish history. Typically they feign naivety and pretend to not understand wiki procedures while referring to them with knowledge that is atypical for a novice. Here is an example of one of the previous, proven sockpuppets deleting referenced info and referring to its original addition as "shocking manipulation": and similar wording and behavior on the talk pages of this article: where the seemingly naive FoliesTrévise knows to emntion the importance of content rather than person and using the term "gaming the system.". Given the huge number of sockpuppets it would make sense to check this out (similarly, another banned Polish nationalist edit-warrior, User:Jacurek, engages ins uch behavior and an investigation concerning that possibility ought to be explored as well). Faustian (talk) 13:29, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

On hold for the time being. TNXMan 19:46, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Wow. I thought this was just Loosmark as usual, and was through blocking more than half of them, before I saw Poeticbent (talk · contribs) in that list. Is this one certain? Because then Poeticbent is the sockmaster, distinct from Loosmark; he's an old and established account. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:35, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Uh, I have to second that. How certain is the claim that Poeticbent is related to Loosmark? They had very distinct edit patterns; and edited relatively consecutively for years, without triggering any kind of flag. Poeticbent never shown interested in naval issues (loosmark's primary area of specialization), Loosmark never thouched subjects dear to Poeticbent (such as Polish literature or Kraków). Poeticbent was a very estabilished account, yet after Loosmark was blocked, it did not return to being active. This just doesn't make much sense. This is a very serious claim and it requires very serious proof. Likely is good enough for SPP accounts and such, but not when connecting two established editors with very different editing history. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 16:27, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
The connection is pretty solid- they are operating on the same range that Loosmark used previously. TNXMan 16:40, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
How narrow exactly is this range? They could just live in the same area, especially if it happens to be a metropolitan area with a large ex-pat/immigrant population. Volunteer Marek  17:13, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
Personally, I'm inclined to think Loosmark is indeed unrelated; however, Poeticbent admits the other accounts here are his. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:50, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
Accounts, hmmm. Well, the big question is - where they used disruptively? A quick rereading of Misplaced Pages:Sock puppetry suggests it is the key factor here. As VM notes, Pb. left because of heavy harassment, and WP:CLEANSTART is a valid reason to create a new account. At the same time, accounts, that is a bit puzzling. If no malicious activity has occurred, I'd suggest strongly that Poeticbent agrees to edit under one account, which he does not have to disclose to anybody, perhaps save the admins/clerks involved in this investigation. Then we can move on. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 17:50, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
Worth remember here why Poeticbent left Misplaced Pages - some very odious harassment. So I can completely understand if he wanted to comeback under a new anonymous account, which I believe he is perfectly within his rights to do. Also, AFAICR he was not under any kind of sanction at the time, so the only reason I can see for him to use a new account would be exactly to avoid what happened to him last time - this is a legitimate reason. Volunteer Marek  17:21, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
Categories: