| Revision as of 14:49, 31 August 2012 editStark House (talk | contribs)120 edits →Comments by other users← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:52, 31 August 2012 edit undoOne Night In Hackney (talk | contribs)Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers32,879 edits →Comments by other users: rNext edit → | ||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
| <small>''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See ].''</small> | <small>''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See ].''</small> | ||
| * I have been adding relevant information to various articles, as no-one else seems to do it, I have actively participated in making these articles more accessible to the public to read. One Night in Hackney complains about my editing yet if it was not for me the articles would stay factual incorrect or lacking up to date information. I am helping wikipedia, whilst One Night in Hackney seems content to let articles slip into the unknown, by reverting legit edits that improve the article. Surely if someone is going out of their way to improve an article that is a good thing, regardless of who they are, but even with references and sources One Night in Hackney seems intent on reverting, which could be seen as a deliberate act of vandalism, since he is removing valuable and often crucial content from the article. ] (]) 14:49, 31 August 2012 (UTC) | * I have been adding relevant information to various articles, as no-one else seems to do it, I have actively participated in making these articles more accessible to the public to read. One Night in Hackney complains about my editing yet if it was not for me the articles would stay factual incorrect or lacking up to date information. I am helping wikipedia, whilst One Night in Hackney seems content to let articles slip into the unknown, by reverting legit edits that improve the article. Surely if someone is going out of their way to improve an article that is a good thing, regardless of who they are, but even with references and sources One Night in Hackney seems intent on reverting, which could be seen as a deliberate act of vandalism, since he is removing valuable and often crucial content from the article. ] (]) 14:49, 31 August 2012 (UTC) | ||
| :You may as well hold up a big sign saying "I am a sock". You , and I've made three edits to articles so far today, and none of them happen to be editing articles that you have. Hopefully one day you'll get the message that the Misplaced Pages community has banned you and therefore you aren't welcome to edit here. <font face="Celtic">]<sub>'']''</sub></font> 14:52, 31 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 14:52, 31 August 2012
Marquis de la Eirron
Marquis de la Eirron (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Populated account categories: confirmed · suspected
Older archives were moved to an archive of the archive because of the page size and are listed below:
For archived investigations, see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Marquis de la Eirron/Archive.
A long-term abuse case exists at Misplaced Pages:Long-term abuse/Marquis de la Eirron.
31 August 2012
– A user has requested CheckUser. An SPI clerk will shortly look at the case and endorse or decline the request.
- Suspected sockpuppets
- English Picturio (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Stark House (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- 80.2.37.65 (talk · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
- User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
For English Picturio the usual style of edits in the usual areas of interest, with one dead giveaway. This edit by English Picturio just happens to pretty much replicate this edit by previous sock Where Did You Walk. The additions for Virginia Wheeler, Duncan Larcombe, an unnamed 50-year-old man and an unnamed 43-year-old woman, Clodagh Hartley, Neil Millard (and so on throughout the events added) are all word for word the same and using the same Wiki markup.
Stark House appears to be another sock used to split the contributions between English politicians and American Republican ones, since it's documented in previous cases for this sockmaster that both are his editing areas and one account doing both is a dead giveaway. William Enyart, Bill Johnson (Ohio politician) and Kay Granger are frequent targets of his. The image uploads of File:Kay Granger.jpg, File:Chris Gibson 2.jpg and more are identical to the behaviour of a recent sock, where he links to the main page of a Congressperson's website where the image doesn't even appear, done here at User_talk:Slytherining Around32#File copyright problem with File:Mary Fallin2.jpg, User_talk:Slytherining Around32#File copyright problem with File:Lynn Jenkins2.jpg, User_talk:Slytherining Around32#File copyright problem with File:Elijah Cummings23.jpg and so on. His socks almost always upload to Commons now, since his images get deleted a lot easier here due to him being community banned. Plus he's also back at frequent target African Americans in the United States Congress. 2 lines of K303 14:02, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
IP listed as well, obviously checkuser won't be commenting on that. Sole purpose of the IP is to reinstate the edits of a previous Marquis sock, so WP:DUCK is enough for that.
Comments by other users
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
- I have been adding relevant information to various articles, as no-one else seems to do it, I have actively participated in making these articles more accessible to the public to read. One Night in Hackney complains about my editing yet if it was not for me the articles would stay factual incorrect or lacking up to date information. I am helping wikipedia, whilst One Night in Hackney seems content to let articles slip into the unknown, by reverting legit edits that improve the article. Surely if someone is going out of their way to improve an article that is a good thing, regardless of who they are, but even with references and sources One Night in Hackney seems intent on reverting, which could be seen as a deliberate act of vandalism, since he is removing valuable and often crucial content from the article. Stark House (talk) 14:49, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
- You may as well hold up a big sign saying "I am a sock". You weren't notified of this report, and I've made three edits to articles so far today, and none of them happen to be editing articles that you have. Hopefully one day you'll get the message that the Misplaced Pages community has banned you and therefore you aren't welcome to edit here. 2 lines of K303 14:52, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Categories: