From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Bsharvy

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

Prior SSP or RFCU cases may exist for this user:

17 June 2010
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by The Four Deuces

User:Bsharvy and sockpuppets, like User:Life.temp, edited disruptively on the article Anti-Americanism, presenting the view that it is POV to call anyone anti-American and challenging the use of sources, and asking for deletion of the article. "Disagreement over...whether it is an interpretation to call something anti-American..." [1] "The majority of the term's usage is an interpretation." [2] Noloop provided the same argument when he posted a POV tag on the article: "Saying the Nazis were anti-American is, in fact, a point of view. Calling anything anti-American is an interpretation, a POV." [3]

TFD ( talk) 10:58, 17 June 2010 (UTC) reply

The template I placed on Noloop's talk page [4] was not frivolous. It was for 3rr, after Noloop had changed the lead to an article three times in 8 hours, and been reversed by two other editors both of whom challenged his edits on the talk page. TFD ( talk) 21:21, 17 June 2010 (UTC) reply
I add User:660gd4qo who had a similar editing style on the article but stopped editing in April, following a one week block. TFD ( talk) 21:49, 17 June 2010 (UTC) reply

Reply to Noloop: In the evidence presented against User:Rachel63, it says, "I have looked at their contributions log and they both contribute to Anti-Americanism and Korean culture articles with specificity to the consumption of dog meat. The likelihood of two otherwise unrelated editors having a synchronicity of obscure interests seems to me improbable." [5] Pantherskin btw had minimal involvement with Anti-Americanism. Basically he looked for sockpuppets and added Noloop to the list of two suspected sockpuppets because of identical edits. (The other two were blocked. [6]) The other articles both Pantherskin and I edited, "Mass killings", "Lia Loover" and "Richard Tylman" (the subject that brought us to MOS), are in fact related articles, if you look at the editors who contributed to them. TFD ( talk) 00:14, 21 June 2010 (UTC) reply

Comments by accused parties

See Defending yourself against claims.

Yes, calling something "anti-American" is a personal opinion, an interpretation, a point of view. This is obvious, and one would hope that many editors share it. Even Slatersteven, not one with whom I'm inclined to agree with on many things, agrees on that. Why not accuse him of sockpuppetry too? TFD has been extremely aggressive and argumentative with me since our very first contact. The idea that two people are sockpuppets because they have the same idea about something is pretty silly. I'm starting to view TFD's threats as harassment (he previously slapped a frivolous warning template on my Talk page, because of something at left-wing politics.

After my last, unpleasant, experience with the admin side of things, I decided to return to Wikipedia with a strict eye on the drama/substance ratio. Sorry to say, I don't trust admins to be fair. I don't expect to spend much more time on this. Noloop ( talk) 20:13, 17 June 2010 (UTC) reply

Those links to the deletion and mediation discussions are more than two years old. Also, I don't believe I've said the article should be deleted. Noloop ( talk) 20:22, 17 June 2010 (UTC) reply
OK, so now I'm accused of eating dogs. Is there a Noticeboard for that? Noloop ( talk) 03:57, 22 June 2010 (UTC) reply
This has been "awaiting initial clerk review" for over a week. Are all the clerks vacationing in Tahiti? If so, how does one become a clerk? Noloop ( talk) 16:36, 25 June 2010 (UTC) reply
Comments by other users

I have to say that these are all very old cases, there seems to be no activity from these Socks (assuming they are socks) for two years in one case the other since April this year (and that on a page Nollop does not appear to have been active on at the same time). Whilst I believe that nollop may have some civility issues I can't see any reason to assume sock puppetry over this latest spat on anti-Americanism. Slatersteven ( talk) 22:44, 17 June 2010 (UTC). reply

Actually, there are some interesting overlaps. 660gd4qo didn't just edit AA, he edited Korean stuff, which is what bsharvy edited, and right now I'm trying to edit material about Korea. And I followed bsharvy edits to articles on Hiroshima and Rasheed Wallace, and we both put the POV template on the page. The overlaps that really interest me tho, are those between Pantherskin and TFD (The Four Deuces)...
I don't really think they're sockpuppets. More likely, after you make hundreds of edits, the surprising thing would be a lack of coincidences. The real problem with the anti-Americanism article is that the lack of neutrality is so blatant, I can't believe it's so hard to get it edited. Noloop ( talk) 05:39, 18 June 2010 (UTC) reply
Maybe I do think they're sockpuppets:yet another discussion they shared, unrelated to the others: Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(biographies)#Non-English_language_university_degrees Noloop ( talk) 16:31, 19 June 2010 (UTC) reply

I would advise letting go now. Slatersteven ( talk) 17:07, 19 June 2010 (UTC) reply

Do you think I give a shit if I'm blocked? I'm on the verge of blocking myself, my only reluctance is that I've put a shitload of work into Women's rights in Saudi Arabia and would like to see it get GA status some day. I hate this community. The only way I've been able to be productive is to find an article nobody else is working on. Admins are reckless, unfair, and motivated by ego. They are competent with obvious vandalism and edit-warring, and useless often abusive on anything complicated. The rampant Anglo-bias in the articles is met with a shrug and a "fuck it." The principles intended to prevent cultural bias are unenforced by anything except "consensus" which defeats the whole point of having principles against cultural bias. These problems probably aren't so bad in non-political articles, but I like politics and I like removing bias, which makes my time on this site a year of misery. Wikipedia is a great idea and resource, but trying to edit anything political and Anglo-centric is like the Lord of the Flies revisited. I fucking hate this place. Noloop ( talk) 04:19, 20 June 2010 (UTC) reply
I would ask for an admin to close this now. Slatersteven ( talk) 18:49, 20 June 2010 (UTC) reply
It wouold seem that this is actualy about the belife that Nollop is a user trying to avoid a ban by creating a new account. That I would argue should be taken to ANI. Slatersteven ( talk) 10:25, 25 June 2010 (UTC) reply
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Checkuser request – code letter: E (Community ban/sanction evasion )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by TFD ( talk) 10:58, 17 June 2010 (UTC) reply

 Clerk endorsed – MuZemike 00:54, 26 June 2010 (UTC) reply

  • Life.temp is stale, Noloop and 660gd4qo are Red X Unrelated. Brandon ( talk) 01:35, 26 June 2010 (UTC) reply
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Bsharvy/Archive&oldid=370186133"