| Revision as of 16:36, 14 June 2013 editDieSwartzPunkt (talk | contribs)3,096 edits →14 June 2013: more.← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 03:51, 20 August 2014 edit undoRschen7754 (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users123,236 edits Archiving case to Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Wtshymanski/Archive | ||
| (43 intermediate revisions by 13 users not shown) | |||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| {{SPIarchive notice|Wtshymanski}} | {{SPIarchive notice|Wtshymanski}} | ||
| {{SPIpriorcases}} | {{SPIpriorcases}} | ||
| =====<big>14 June 2013</big>===== | |||
| {{SPI case status|}} | |||
| ;Suspected sockpuppets | |||
| * {{checkuser|1=Wtshymanski}} | |||
| * {{checkuser|1=174.118.142.187}} | |||
| <!-- You may duplicate the templates above ({{checkuser}} and {{checkIP}}) to list more accounts--> | |||
| * <small>''Auto-generated every hour.''</small> | |||
| * | |||
| '''Background'''] has had a history of tendentious editing (and has recently returned from block for same. In particular, Wtshymanski also has a history of attempting to hammer into articles his view on what article should contain regardles of anyone else's point of view or even article talk page concensus. The subject in question is Wtshymanski's attempts to force into the article at ] the view that power factor can never be negative. This in spite of an extended discussion at ] where everyone else put forward the view that it can be negative. The article in question even acquiring no less than 12 references supporting the view. However, Wtshymanski would not accept this view and decided that his unreferenced lone opinion was enough to edit war in the article and kept reverting any attempt to make the article conform to the provided references. Wtshymanski did attempt to rely on an IEEE document that proved to be contradictory (and one of the authors, also an unrelated Misplaced Pages editor, stated that the document was in error. | |||
| Enter a relatively new editor ]. 174.118.142.187 has not been around that long but almost from the start exhibited tendentious editing behaviour. Although somewhat different, the same 'I am right, everyone else wrong' attitude was present (and some admins have expressed concern). His technique has been a bit different, mainly making frivolous ANI complaints against any editor who opposes his viewpoint on article talk pages (none have been upheld). The different approach may be to hide the sock - Wtshymanski is known to be adept at manipulating the system to his advantage. | |||
| For various reasons, I had begun to suspect that 174.118.142.187 and Wtshymanski were the same editor. This was reinforced today when 174.118.142.187 made a contribution to the ] supporting Wtshymanski's view that negative power factor was not possible, but also supporting Wtshymanski's view that the 12 references were bogus (which they are not - they are perfectly acceptable with the Misplaced Pages guidelines). | |||
| Another user, ] observed that he 'smelt a sock' somewhat confirming my suspicions. . | |||
| This must have touched a nerve because 174.118.142.187 almost immediately deleted the comment (contrary to ]) attempting to pass it off as a 'personal attack'. | |||
| There are too many similarities between 174.118.142.187 and Wtshymanski for it to be a coincidence. | |||
| Wtshymanski's geographical location is well known as he uses his own name for his account (W.T.Shymanski - revealed in an image upload). He has a considerable internet presence. 174.118.142.187 geolocates to the same location. (My thanks to 212.183.140.50 for that one) | |||
| Wtshymanski removes embarasing material from his talk page very quickly. So does 174.118.142.187. . Relatively few Misplaced Pages editors clean up their talk page. | |||
| Wtshymanski can never resist making a non sensical (and often sarcastic) edit summary when he cleans his talk page. The edit summary for the above reveals the same characteristic to make a non sensical edit summary. ] (]) 16:20, 14 June 2013 (UTC) | |||
| 174.118.142.187 is also compiling so called 'evidence' at ] where he appears to be compiling evidence against those editors that have opposed Wtshymanski. | |||
| 174.118.142.187 has also raised an ANI (clearly as 'tit for tat') where he once again ralies to the defence of Wtshymanski in spite of the fact that is an established tendentios editor (recently blocked for this) and I am not aware of anyone else who sides with him. | |||
| They are clearly the same editor. | |||
| ======<span style="font-size:150%">Comments by other users</span>====== | |||
| <small>''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See ].''</small> | |||
| ======<span style="font-size:150%">Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments</span>====== | |||
| ----<!--- All comments go ABOVE this line, please. --> | |||
Latest revision as of 03:51, 20 August 2014
Wtshymanski
Wtshymanski (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
For archived investigations, see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Wtshymanski/Archive.