Misplaced Pages

:Sockpuppet investigations/FergusM1970: 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 14:21, 4 August 2012 view sourceFergusM1970 (talk | contribs)4,665 edits →Comments by other users← Previous edit Revision as of 14:22, 4 August 2012 view source Flexdream (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users1,276 edits →Comments by other usersNext edit →
Line 34: Line 34:
Oh, and there's massive other similarities between you and a couple of others I can think of (one now apparently retired). I can't believe no one has spotted this yet!!!!! ] (]) 13:48, 4 August 2012 (UTC) Oh, and there's massive other similarities between you and a couple of others I can think of (one now apparently retired). I can't believe no one has spotted this yet!!!!! ] (]) 13:48, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
{{hab}} {{hab}}
:This seems a flimsy allegation as part of a dispute. I also am stopped by 1RR from reverting the term "summarily executed". Why not accuse me of being a sockpuppet? This seems more like an attack on another editor and Fergus has shown no inclination to hide his many edits on this from what I can see.--] (]) 14:22, 4 August 2012 (UTC)


======<span style="font-size:150%">Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments</span>====== ======<span style="font-size:150%">Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments</span>======

Revision as of 14:22, 4 August 2012

– This SPI case is open.

FergusM1970

FergusM1970 (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Populated account categories: confirmed

For archived investigations, see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/FergusM1970/Archive.


04 August 2012
Suspected sockpuppets


FergusM1970 is using an IP sock to evade a 1RR restriction on a Troubles related article. As FergusM1970 is unable to revert using his account, we have a first then a second edit to remove a sourced term FergusM1970 objects to and has repeatedly edit warred to remove, then minutes later FergusM1970 makes his first edit of the day to the talk page. Highly convenient timing, especially considering the IPs edits to revert in exactly the same way as FergusM1970. 2 lines of K303 13:42, 4 August 2012 (UTC)


Comments by other users

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

Bring it on. Someone run Checkuser on my IP address so we can put this to bed.--FergusM1970 (talk) 13:45, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

In the interests of fairness, of course, I think Checkuser should also be run on User:One_Night_In_Hackney. I'm sure he won't object to that.--FergusM1970 (talk) 13:58, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
If you want to open an SPI case, go right ahead. 2 lines of K303 14:00, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Checkuser doesn't work that way. And checkuser won't be used here regardless, and it will not link IPs to addresses. If you think Hackney is a sock, then you need to stick your neck out by filing an SPI, providing diffs and naming a master, just like any other editor is expected to. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 14:06, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
I have no idea if Hackney is a sock or not, but I'm very sure that I'm not using any. Is there anything I can do to help the admins get this frivolous complaint dealt with and closed as quickly as possible?--FergusM1970 (talk) 14:21, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
blah blah blah
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Well if you'd care to stop blocking me? 86.29.118.119 (talk) 14:10, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
The accounts which are almost certainly you are now all stale. But of course there may be others, so bring it on. On the stale accounts, behavioural evidence is overwhelming. Intersted editors should spend a bit of time researching this. It's bloody galling that this guy Hackney spends his wp time doing nothing but reverting other users and making sock accusations, when beyond a shadow of a doubt he's one of the biggest sockers around. 86.29.147.215 (talk) 14:04, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

LOL! Wrong! And just who are you a sock of Hackney? Your style is identical to at least two editors I could mention. You know, those editors that never add content, but just revert other editors all the time. You know who I'm talking about. 86.31.165.112 (talk) 13:46, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

Oh, and there's massive other similarities between you and a couple of others I can think of (one now apparently retired). I can't believe no one has spotted this yet!!!!! 86.31.165.112 (talk) 13:48, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

This seems a flimsy allegation as part of a dispute. I also am stopped by 1RR from reverting the term "summarily executed". Why not accuse me of being a sockpuppet? This seems more like an attack on another editor and Fergus has shown no inclination to hide his many edits on this from what I can see.--Flexdream (talk) 14:22, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Categories: