- The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
- Suspected sockpuppeteer
Angie Y. (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
- Suspected sockpuppets
71.166.78.214 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
75.45.82.203 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
- Report submission by
Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 22:17, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Evidence
Angie Y. is a fan of the series Code Lyoko. Recently, I have nominated the character articles for deletion. Angie's vote called me "an asshole" [1] (although this was changed to "fool" [2]) Then, an IP address with no prior edits voted with similar wording, then changed the vote to call me an asshole [3] as Angie did. Then another IP, starting with "7", and again with no prior edits voted. I had warned her it was against the rules, but with the arrival of a new, suspected puppet, I have made this case.
- Comments
One of them, 71.166.78.214, is likely to be Angie as the wording they used was identical, however the other is unlikely since it was from a different state in America (and with a different ISP). Although I do find it fishy when ip's show up, take part in a deletion dicussion and don't make any other edits. Seraphim Whipp 22:22, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Agreed. The first one was definetely Angie, the second one not so much, but Angie has a history of getting into fiascos. I wouldn't exactly put it behind her to use a sockpuppet to put delete. (Note vote, it is not a majority vote, but a discussion.). Thanks, Codelyoko193 Talk Contributions 22:27, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Personally, I find it more alarming that JunKazamaFan, starts harassing TTN with no reason (having just joined the other day) and is backed up by Angie. I find it odd. Seraphim Whipp 22:38, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't really think JunKazamaFan and Angie Y. are the same, they edit different articles with different edit summaries, and he just changed his vote to delete. Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 22:42, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh I didn't mean that to sound like they were the same person. No, I think it's clear they're separate people. I was implying that it was likely to be canvassing...sometimes when I think of something in my head, I might write it down as if everyone else knows what I'm talking about and forget that there's only me inside my head :)...lol, I hope this makes more sense. Seraphim Whipp 22:53, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- JunKazamaFan is a new editor and says that he was sticking up for his friend (I assume they must know of eachother off-wiki), so personally I'm now sure it wasn't canvassing, just loyalty. Seraphim Whipp 23:43, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not sure if this is enough evidence to accuse one person. It could just be other people that are big fans of Code Lyoko and the characters. Or it could be another user. I'm not denying that it could be Angie, but I don't think it's enough evidence. Maybe they are also friends of Angie and are siding with her. This was the case for me. Plus, Angie tells me that this is not true. Since I don't know of any cases of Angie lying, I believe her. She could be lying, I won't deny this possibility. She tells me that she is not saying anything for fear of getting into more trouble. It is suspicious, I admit. I am not Angie Y. . We are two different people. I was just supporting her. I was informed of these things, so I decided to support her. I have apologized for my unacceptable behavior numerous times. We know each other on places such as Tekkenpedia and AIM. JunKazamaFan 18:01, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Just to make my stance on this clear, even if one of them is a sock and it is Angie, a block would be punitive not preventative. In all, there's not really anything to be gained from this report. If it was Angie, I'm sure she'd never do it again. Seraphim Whipp 14:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- What makes you think she wouldn't do it again? Offenses need to be punished. 71.255.87.220 20:25, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think Angie should be blocked. She has not had a history of using socks, and doubt that she would again. Thanks, Codelyoko193 Talk Contributions 22:50, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Possibly a temporary block? Cheers,JetLover (Report a mistake) 23:42, 16 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not sure what that would prevent. If it is her, then perhaps a stern warning would be better. Seraphim Whipp 11:30, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- A block will show that the rules will be enforced.71.125.86.151 19:59, 17 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Conclusions
I think that Angie's repeated attacks on JetLover warrant a short block (48 hours). Calling a user "asshole" once may be a heat-of-the-moment slip-up, but doing it repeatedly is a mark of incivility and should not be tolerated. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 13:48, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've been on the edge of this issue - paying attention to the Afd page, watching this discussion unfold. I think the first anon probably was her, but not the second, and JunKazamaFan would appear to be a friend. Someone should give her a naughty, naughty — please don't do it again message. If this ever does happen again, she'll get a harsh swat. --Jack Merridew 14:24, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Angie is block 48 hours for meatpupetteering and incivility. Closing case.Rlevse 14:46, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]