Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dreaded hall monitor
Oneshotofwhiskey
- Oneshotofwhiskey (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Populated account categories: confirmed
27 November 2016
– A user has requested CheckUser. An SPI clerk will shortly look at the case and endorse or decline the request.
Suspected sockpuppets
- User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
- Editor interaction utility
Sockpuppeteer Oneshotofwhiskey was indeffed as a result of his previous attempt to frame me, and it looks like he's at it again. IPs 71.218.129.181 and 174.16.214.83—purporting to be an impartial observer—reported IP 2604:3400:DC1:43:216:3EFF:FE6B:497F to an admin, claiming to be concerned that I was using the latter for "socking ... AND trying to use an anon IP to get around ... ARBAP2 Sanctions." The IPs proceeded to make a number of revealing comments about yours truly, including "TTAC ... is a long-time disruptive cunning member who will edit war when possible and exploit his experience on wikipedia to advance his POV"; "After closely reading the account summary on TTAC's page, it seems like that user views wikipedia in terms of opponents and gaming"; and "He's been getting away with edits on articles suggesting Obama is the 'founder of ISIS' and is politically jailing conservatives (all lies)" (that's for sure!). On his talk page, Oneshot engaged in strikingly similar rhetoric, referring to me as a "disruptive editor" with a penchant for "cunning but clearly transparent editwar tactic(s)." Moreover:
- The IPs misrepresent the following message from my userpage as a POV battle cry: "I take my responsibility to edit in a neutral manner seriously, and believe I do a better job of it than many of my opponents. But where did they even get the idea to do such a thing? Apparently, from Oneshot's close collaborator SPECIFICO, who left the following message on Oneshot's talk page: "At the very top of Times' user page he reveals his approach to editing Wikipedia: 'I do a better job of it than many of my opponents.' Having seen him in action recently, that attitude pretty well sums up his behavior. It's as if he views WP as another online video game, similar to the many games he lists having edited."
- I've never suggested Obama "is politically jailing conservatives," but the IPs's assertions to the contrary constitute solid WP:DUCK evidence regarding their master. (This requires a bit of explanation, so bear with me.) During a recent edit war at Dinesh D'Souza, Oneshot replaced the previously accepted photo of D'Souza with his mugshot and mass deleted over 2,000 bytes of previously accepted material from reliable sources like Alan Dershowitz eight separate times ([1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]), alleging it was "WP:SYNTH" to include Dershowitz's attributed opinion because "he was not involved in this trial of D'Souza," and adding: "Dershowitz himself is a shoddy source considering his own actions in helping murderer O.J. Simpson get away with his crimes." Dershowitz's sin? He had argued that D'Souza's conviction for campaign finance violations "smacks of selective prosecution"; Onehot and his sockpuppets conflated Dershowitz's assessment with "claiming ... Obama and the government imprisoned D'Souza which suggests Obama broke the law and that the government engaged in unconstitutional behavior," and sought to label D'Souza a "conspiracy theorist" in violation of WP:BLP, citing "his conspiracy theory that the government through Obama directly or indirectly imprisoned him unfair as part of some retributive plot against him." (As another user noted: "Most people who have been prosecuted believe that they have been unfairly treated and lawyers routinely say that. We do not label all convicted criminals and defense lawyers conspiracy theorists.")
- Like the IPs, Oneshot repeatedly accused me of "gaming the system."
- Finally, the IPs mention that their goal is to ensure "a fair hearing for everyone else involved, most important of all for his victims." In this context, I think it's obvious that the "victim" in question is none other than Oneshot himself, as he maintained that the previous SPI was somehow "fraudulent."
While I think the evidence above more than satisfies WP:DUCK, it would be interesting to confirm that the IP being "reported" is a likely match for the other two, and thus that I was in fact being framed from the beginning. (On the admin's talk page, the IPs hint at this possibility: "That would aid him in some attempt to game the system if he tried to boomerang a response into a charge of trying to frame him.")TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 00:47, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
Comments by other users
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.