User talk:Tony Sidaway: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 23:29, 8 March 2011

Picking up something interesting

Tony, I think OKIsItJustMe might be a Scibaby sock, and Deekatherine might be spamming under WP:ELNO. --CaC (started using my real name Tony, as in Tony C) 155.99.230.168 (talk) 01:40, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tony C, I respectfully disagree. I've been watching OkItsJustMe and so far haven't seen any of the concerning edits that are Scibaby's hallmark. This other new user which I just reverted [1] is more scibaby's style. Okitsjustme actually seems to be making constructive edits as far as I can tell. Can you identify which edit makes you think it's scibaby? Sailsbystars (talk) 06:25, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm uncertain, but my two reasons are:

He's human, he's adapting. Based on the discussion Red-linked "users" and after his last attempt: I don't think he'll attack the discussion, but focus more on editing the article.
I agree that he's made constructive edits, but that's also how you get auto-confirmed to be able to edit semi-protected articles.
1. This is where it gets strange. He's only been registered for a month, but he knows how to edit his vector.js file to add a feature that allows him to monitor the file size of articles.[2] This is very advanced for just a new user and I don't see any indication that he's learned WP:SIZE, guideline governing article size.
2. Lastly he's makes a several edits to CC and GW, and it was originally the graph that lead me ask questions.

My main point is that I think there's a possibility that he may be Scibaby. This leap in intelligence and subtly would be disturbing. Now, what doesn't support the theory is he's not following the usual pattern. Moving human influence to the top seems at odds with Scibaby's agenda. Also some of the publications he's added to GW, seems at odds as well.

My conclusion is that I'm uncertain, but I believe we should at least ask a few questions and introduce ourselves. This short of leap seems unusual. I agree with you Sailsbystars, and the reason why I asked is perhaps that I'm just curious. Thanks. --Tony 155.99.230.246 (talk) 07:33, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All of your points are true. However, we should, as much as we can and in the face of multiple sockmasters, still try to assume good faith. Scibaby inevitably gives himself away by blatant POV-pushing. Until such time as that happens we should be thankful we have a new editor contributing constructively in the CC area. As someone who faced baseless accusations of sockpuppetry upon entering the CC area (check out the archives of my user talk page) for showing competence, I tend not to worry so much about these things. Except..... I have suspicion I might need to investigate.....unrelated to scibaby. Sailsbystars (talk) 14:01, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh right, I forgot about your case. Anyways, I think this is resolved then. Thanks. --Tony 155.98.108.115 (talk) 16:02, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{/Notices}}
 ----
-== A new CC sockmaster? ==
-Hi Tony,
-There's been a new IP editing in the CC area.  Hoping it was just a one off, I ignored it at first, but the IP has continued to push long-debunked cc denialist talking points.  I strongly suspect the ip, {{ipuser|85.211.230.148}}, is actually indef blocked and topic banned {{user|Marknutley}}.  He has previously editted under an IP from the same ISP [https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_on_open_proxies/Archives/Open/2011/February#78.159.105.106], and the tone of his first post reminded me a lot of Mark.  Do you agree with my assessment?  If so, should I take this to AE or SPI?  [[User:Sailsbystars|Sailsbystars]] ([[User talk:Sailsbystars|talk]]) 15:45, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
-: I'm probably not the right one to say.  I recall that Mark's postings were marked by a cheerful display of ignorance and naivety, and these attributes seem to be present here. Taking it to SPI is the correct thing to do. I've removed this IP's latest comment on BLP grounds. --[[User talk:Tony Sidaway|TS]] 18:53, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
-:: If it's MN, I'll be extremely disappointed in him.  Not totally surprised, but very disappointed.  Alas, between Scibaby and Grundle-socks, editors see that if they get banned, it's easy to just keep using IP's and who cares if you get blocked?  Dang it, and I thought (and still think) MN had a chance of becoming a good, solid editor.  <b><font color="darkred">[[User:Ravensfire|Ravensfire]]</font></b> <font color="black">([[User talk:Ravensfire|talk]])</font> 21:18, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
-It doesn't matter how many times they try to come back. Once detected their edits are reversed and the ban is reset. Revert, block, ignore. [[User talk:Tasty monster|Tasty monster]] (=[[User talk:Tony Sidaway|TS]] ) 06:43, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
-::Without going into detail - since i'm voluntary out of the picture here. My 2 cents: The IP isn't MN - i'm rather certain that the anon is [[User:Isonomia]] (send me an email if you want the details as to why i come to this conclusion) who (afaik) isn't banned. If he is, then of course someone could do something about it. --[[User:KimDabelsteinPetersen|Kim D. Petersen]] ([[User talk:KimDabelsteinPetersen|talk]]) 09:55, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
-:::I've changed my mind as well, as the IP is a lot more technical (this didn't show up until some of the later comments), whereas Mark tended towards the political.  I guess we'll just twiddle our thumbs for now and see what happens.  [[User:Sailsbystars|Sailsbystars]] ([[User talk:Sailsbystars|talk]]) 15:19, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
-::: Kim, thanks for noting that.  Looks like the IP is from a similar range that apparently was used by Isonomia, and the tone matches.  Unless he was banned or restricted, it's not really a sockpuppet.  Isonomia is notified of the arbcom restrictions, but doesn't seem to be under any of them.  <b><font color="darkred">[[User:Ravensfire|Ravensfire]]</font></b> <font color="black">([[User talk:Ravensfire|talk]])</font> 15:43, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
-Ah, of course! Isonomia! See particularly [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AIsonomia&action=historysubmit&diff=412213285&oldid=412120927 this] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Isonomia&diff=next&oldid=412368287 this reply] from [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/85.211.135.213 85.211.135.213]. Both IPs are part of a 16-bit dynamic ADSL pool belonging to [[Carphone Warehouse]] and associated with their Tiscali UK and [[Talktalk]] brands in Britain. This was last month but I'd forgotten all about it. It's plausible that this could be Isonomia. --[[User talk:Tony Sidaway|TS]] 18:47, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
 == Picking up something interesting ==