Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cavalryman

Cavalryman

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

For archived investigations, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cavalryman/Archive.

07 March 2022

– This SPI case is open.

Suspected sockpuppets

• 182.239.146.186 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 182.239.144.134 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 14.2.195.135 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• Tools: Editor interaction utility · Interaction Timeline · SPI Tools

All 3 IPs Geolocate to the same area. Their interest is the Staffordshire Bull Terrier debate. Cavalryman has been relentless in wanting to include a fringe theory as a statement of fact in Wikivoice. He has failed to get consensus for his proposed merge which was proposed last year, he failed to gain consensus for his NPOV tag, he tried forum-shopping and failed, and then came Talk:Staffordshire Bull Terrier#GA Reassessment for all the wrong reasons. One of the IPs is supporting a 3rd Opinion. Never in my years as an editor have I seen such TE behavior, and refusal to let it go. And it's all about him wanting to include a flat-earth theory in Wikivoice, despite the theories already being included. It makes no sense. He has been beating this dead horse since 2019, which is what motivated this SPI. Aside from his PAs against me, I'm concerned as to what lengths he will go to get his way - like making it appear he has more support than what he does - and will it escalate? I asked Cavalryman if he forgot to log in to give him the benefit of the doubt, but he didn't reply. Even so, he should have made it known instead of leaving the impression that more editors support his position. The pushy, repetitive it's time to close this discussion approach while typically supporting his position as the obvious consensus. The comments made by the IPs sound exactly like Cavalryman;

• demanding an answer
• summarizing the RSN discussion that was posted right after Cavalryman posted
• again moving for the close.
• demands that either the RS is resolved or the GA needs review.

They're all the same - the inline tagging of articles, the demands/POV pushing - and they IPs all geolocate to the exact same area. Cavalryman is Australian, and served in the Australian Army according to his UP. He did mention in a comment that he was traveling this past week, I think. Atsme 💬 📧 04:31, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Comments by other users

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

• Comment, I request a CU put this matter to bed, 700 km (430 mi) separates me from these IPs. Cavalryman (talk) 05:50, 7 March 2022 (UTC).
  • Cavalryman, Atsme says that you posted recently that you had been traveling, something that might make the CU data inconclusive (or that would need to be confirmed by CU data showing travel of the registered account address). Is it true that you posted that? --Tryptofish (talk) 20:57, 7 March 2022 (UTC)
    • He is not travelling now, is he? Check our locations both again. This IP supported a WP:THIRDOPINION after it was proposed by a Wikipedia Administrator, and has always sought the implementation of WP:POL to resolve differences - is that a bad thing? 14.2.195.135 (talk) 21:35, 7 March 2022 (UTC)

---