Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Drork: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
HarQayam (talk | contribs)
HarQayam (talk | contribs)
Line 33: Line 33:


There are at least three people who object his edits and gave very good explanations to their objection. I suppose they are all "sockpuppets" (whatever that means). [[User:HarQayam|HarQayam]] ([[User talk:HarQayam|talk]]) 22:12, 3 May 2010 (UTC)
There are at least three people who object his edits and gave very good explanations to their objection. I suppose they are all "sockpuppets" (whatever that means). [[User:HarQayam|HarQayam]] ([[User talk:HarQayam|talk]]) 22:12, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Here are some more interesting evidence about Wilkerson. This is his list of contributions [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=Harlan+wilkerson]. Almost all of them are on the same subject, and in almost all of them he repeats his controversial claims and insist they should be adopted despite strong legitimate objection. Here [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:No_More_Mr_Nice_Guy&diff=prev&oldid=359665110] he tries to intimidate another user who objects to his edits. [[User:HarQayam|HarQayam]] ([[User talk:HarQayam|talk]]) 22:19, 3 May 2010 (UTC)


======<span style="font-size:150%"> Comments by other users </span>======
======<span style="font-size:150%"> Comments by other users </span>======

Revision as of 22:19, 3 May 2010

Drork

Drork (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log· investigate · cuwiki)
Populated account categories: confirmed · suspected
For archived investigations, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Drork/Archive.



Report date May 3 2010, 10:01 (UTC)


Suspected sockpuppets


Evidence submitted by Harlan wilkerson

Drork has been using sockpuppets to avoid an ARBCOM ban. HarQayam's account was created on 2 May 2010 and he immediately began posting at the British Mandate of Palestine article talk page repeating the same arguments in the style employed by Drork and his socks.

Diffs: [1] and [2]

harlan (talk) 10:01, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties

Wilkerson is unhappy with the fact I bring sources that refute his unacceptable edits, so he makes strange accusations against me. That's the best way to win a debate isn't it? Call security and ask them to expel your opponent from the room. I hope the gentlemen here will send Wilkerson to do some homework and be careful about his edits instead of trying to silence his opponents. HarQayam (talk) 22:05, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And here are some of Wilkerson's edits in the past few days:

  • Forcing his version once - [3]
  • Twice - [4]
  • Third time - [5]

There are at least three people who object his edits and gave very good explanations to their objection. I suppose they are all "sockpuppets" (whatever that means). HarQayam (talk) 22:12, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some more interesting evidence about Wilkerson. This is his list of contributions [6]. Almost all of them are on the same subject, and in almost all of them he repeats his controversial claims and insist they should be adopted despite strong legitimate objection. Here [7] he tries to intimidate another user who objects to his edits. HarQayam (talk) 22:19, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments