The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Ehinger222[edit]

Suspected sockpuppeteer

Ehinger222 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

147.10.112.157 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Okay that does not make sense (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Tenuous_walker (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Caesar34 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Rugby 666 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Dibo | Talk | Contribs 22:59, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence

This editor's contribs bear remarkable similarities to a series of edits made by user:Ehinger222 around the end of August, in particular POV pushing over the naming of rugby league and football (soccer) - see [[1]] and [[2]]; slandering of Alan Oakley for the supposed crime of being anti-rugby league - see [[3]] and [[4]].

Was also personally abusive to me in an edit summary [[5]], where her/his use of the word 'obsessive' (also [[6]] to me seems indicative that the editor knows of me from my tagging of her/his sockpuppets last time.

I opened a mediation cabal page abour the Alan Oakley stuff, and 147.10.112.157 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) got him/herself blocked for vandalism, and Tenuous_walker (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) has waded straight into one of the edit wars (contribs [7] and [8]) that precipitated the ban. Seems a fairly straightforward case of a ban-evading sockpuppet. Dibo T | C 04:55, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
User:Rugby 666 has now shown up, and has shown here[[9]] that he's got implausibly deep knowledge of what happened when user:Licinius was doing her/his thing on here, especially given that he/she commented on the welcoming admin's page: "Hi, I just got your message. I notice Australian articles calling soccer football. How do I go about changing this?" [[10]].
Jumped into the same edit wars that other SP's have got into [[11]], has gone on a spree of redirects, reverts and so on.
I firmly believe that this is the same user as user:Licinius, there are too many similarities in style and habits for me to shake the feeling.
user:147.10.112.157 and User:Caesar34 have both been blocked for a week - the former for npov warring and the latter for block evasion. the rest are the same. user:Rugby 666 is now the "current" account for this sockpuppeteer - he/she hops from account to account as others are blocked, and jumps into the same old wars. Dibo T | C 00:06, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
"What war" have I jumped into beside your stupid accusations which are sidetracking me from actual wiki stuff. If you wish to help the encyclopedia, you ahould edit something instead of launching your own POV 3rvt edit wars and than accusing that person of being a sockpuppetter of both user:Licinius and user:NSWelshman and using a soccer admin to block them. I am not going to comment further on this or any other case except to say that I have wasted literally hours looking into the accusations, and they are hoursof my life that I want back and cannot get. --Rugby 666 00:54, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OH you are fecking kiddin me[12], this was to stop a stupid edit that had taken place while I was workingon footy stuff all day. See my contributions list. The bloke reckons that tehy have a point so they have been given a place to make it on [13] to stop the edit warring. Maybe you should put a sockpuppet notice on user:mattlore as well.
Apparently user:Rugby 666 didn't much like me alleging that he/she is a sockpuppet, and removed his/her username from this page [[14]], removed the warning from his/her userpage [[15]], and accused me of vandalism [[16]] (misusing the template vandal template in the process). This is consistent with the behaviour of sockpuppets of User:Licinius and User:NSWelshman- to wit, see User:J is me's history: [[17]], and User:Factoid Killer's as well: [[18]]. Dibo T | C 01:00, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I object to YOU putting a sockpuppet claim on my page because YOU do not even edit anything but placing sockpuppet notices and starting edit wars! Your contributions say it all, from August 15 [19] you have done almost nothing. I have worked with administratErs in regards to the fallacious user: Licinius case that seems created entirely by your aggressive edit warring. Leave me out of this and PLEASE do not send me any messages, touch my userpage, or even edit the same pages as me if it can possibly be avoided and we should get along fine. Wikipedia:Ignore_all_rules- I inoke this because I know the rule is tha you keep it for ten days but I am ignoring it because it is bloody depressing to see one's user page tagged as a sockpuppet after being accused of 50 000 things last night. --Rugby 666 05:51, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Checkuser was inconclusive for Ehinger222, but confirmed all the rest are the same, as well as Freddie 34 (talk · contribs), Raezar34 (talk · contribs), and Chuq Hater (talk · contribs).
Comments
So you are claiming that I am a sockpuppet. You are so full of shit that you should be used as fertiliser. I have made a series of edits related to topics that I am interested in, nothing more. If they agree with ehinger or not, THAT is because they were good edits. I called you an obsessive cocksucker because you had stalked the edits that I had made. How would you like it if I did the same to all of your edits and called you POV etc.? No doubt you would be pissed off too. I am not that user, and I challenge you to provide any real evidence that I am that user, oh, and it is football, whether you like it or not, that is not POV, that is a fact that you just have to accept. --Okay that does not make sense 02:33, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
the above user hopped on and simply reverted a number of edits i made to articles that user:147.10.112.157 had contributed to beforehand - see contribs for 147.10.112.157 and Okay that does not make sense. Clearly (IMO) the same person. Dibo | Talk | Contribs 03:11, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I am not ehinger222 and I find the insinuation annoying, as well as the fact that I was not notified about this. Could you please look into Dibo and Tancred. They make the same edits, start the same fights and push the same POV that football is apparently not football because people in England have different references to us. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.10.112.157 (talk • contribs) 03.30 27th November 2006
Conclusions

See Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Ehinger222. All accounts blocked. MER-C 03:14, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More