Wiki143:Suspected sock puppets/Bason0

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:Bason0

Suspected sockpuppeteer

Template:User-multi

Suspected sockpuppets

Template:User-multi
Template:User-multi

Report submission by

Nightshadow28 (talk) 05:05, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Evidence

• Identical editing - In Yeongeunmun Gate.[1] This is the idencial edit with [2] and .[3]
• Identical editing - In Independence Gate.[4] This is the idencial edit with .[5]
• Similar interests - In Kia Sorento, he/she is interested to edit the car as "not compact (or not)".[6][7] This is the same behavior of Dutyterms[8][9] which is a sockpuppet of Bason0. He/she has appeared in Comfort women, but has liked also the article.

Comments

As per above mentioned evidence, I request to block him/her as a new sockpuppet of Bason0.

See also: Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Bason0

• Template:User-multi also has an editing pattern and broken English usage that resemble those of Cause5stage and Bason0.

1. A comment left by 774townsclear on an admin's user talk page: [10].
2. Use of the peculiar expression "is not/no relation with." Bason0: [11]. Cause5stage: [12]. 774townsclear: [13], [14].
3. Use of the peculiar expression "citation/souce contents different." 774townsclear: [15]. Cause5stage: [16].
4. Edits on Ban Ki-moon (almost identical reverts). Cause5stage: [17]. 774townsclea: [18].
5. Use of the peculiar term "socket puppet." Nightshadow28 pointed out the common usage of the term among Bason0 sockpuppets at [19]. 774townsclear's use of the term: [20].
6. Bason0 wrote at [21]: "i'm not socket puppet. bcz, i do not act like other guy. also, i did not discussion like other people. or protect my second ID i do not violation any rule. do you understand Sock puppetry mean? i already explain this.... your claim no relation with this. bcz i point a distruptive edit war. and my previous no relation. also, if you find my previous edit of Bason1, i edited a Neutral point of edit. but, he is non-neutral point of edit. he delete dokdo in some page...." This rambling resembles 74townsclear's below.--Saintjust 21:37, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

No, I'm not. I'm not sock puppets. I just found your POV, correct it.

Saintjust is push POV troll. mainly pick the criticism contents from source. and omitting other side of view.(POV) i found his POV edit. 774townsclear

"Socket puppet" is a favorite word of Bason0. --Saintjust 00:45, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

funny. lol. you believe or not. I'm not sock puppets. you just push me as sock puppets. is that all?

type in Google. 'socket puppet' is not typographical errors. i googled, and it's OK. so i use it. 774townsclear

I'm not sock puppets. I didn't acting like multiple player.

Saintjust continue to Push me as sock puppets. I'm asia foreign who english poor. funny. it's just typo miss.

even if i'm a sock puppets, it does not matter of your edit. It caused by your POV edit. not user matter. first of all, Bason0 and Me edited different article. different edited.

I didn't mimic like 2 Players. and I didn't mimic like 2 Players in 1 article. I didn't attack 1 user by multiple accounts. i didn't disruptive edit war by 2 players.

I searched Bason0 and his accounts. sock puppets Bason0's accounts are all indefinite blocked by admin. as i think, He can't do sock puppets. because, He can't use other accounts. He can edit Only one account.(pevious accounts are all dead) in my think, it's some type of personal harassment. continuously block him when he entering new participation. He already punished by blocked period.

Again, I'm not sock puppets. I didn't acting like multiple player. 774townsclear 02:28, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Please, administrator. must check reported user and me. He think he is me. lol. I'm really not. i want show evidence from administrator. 774townsclear 02:50, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

As a matter in fact, 774townsclear seems to be a new sockpuppet of Bason0, too. In addition to the comment by Saintjust, I show the following evidence.

Bason0 and a series of his/her sockpuppets have filed bogus WP:3RR reports repeatedly. Please see 774townsclear's[22], Yearwaves3's[23], Panelequal3's[24], Rockgoals3's[25] and Bason0's[26].

P.S. I explain a little (and important) thing because it is a good chance. Wikipedia is not a videogame. Please do not create a new account after "killed" one. And please see also a message in my talk page. --Nightshadow28 09:09, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, my engish is poor. please undestand my slightly abnormal expression.

Again, I'm not sock puppets. I didn't acting like multiple player. ok?

Did I WP:3RR reports repeatedly? don't tell a lie. I did report only 1 time 3rr warning.

just check time, bro. 3rr rule must within 24 hour period. IF i am a sock puppets, i use multiple accounts and 1 article and attack 1 user, pretend to different user, within 24 hour.

1. i am not a sock puppets. (Japanese POV agent user, make me as sock puppets, and want revert all my edits) you make me as sock puppets.

2. I did not pretending other users, so i did not abuse 3rr rule. i revenrt Japanese POV's edit. originally, previous edit is not made by me. My english skill is not good. so, i can't change whole article. When i find POV edit, i only revert it from previous edit.(little modified) you do not mistake that other user and i are same person.

3. IF i pretending other users, nevertheless It is still not within 24 hours report. did not misuse 3rr rule, too. Yearwaves3, Panelequal3, Rockgoals3 and Bason0's accounts are all dead. right? can't be a multiple user. and Yearwaves3, Panelequal3, Rockgoals3 and Bason0's edit are very old.(not 24 hour)

4. i did not use multiple and attack 1 user. I did not pretend to different user in 1 article, within 24 hour.

5. Nobody think Wikipedia is a videogame. it's your think. Wikipedia is not POV agent's video game. I did not create a new account after "killed" one.

change the channel, for user Bason0. maybe He and I are same country person. and want participation in Korea relation topic. but, It does not means i am a same person with him.

When he entering a participation, You(Nightshadow28) guy want block him repeatedly. If he judged by sock puppets from admin. His all previous ID are indefinite blocked. It's impossible he use other accounts. If he want participating edit, making new account is only way. but, you report him as sock puppets(even his edit are not violation). Just check Cause5stage's edit.(you report him as Bason0) What is problem of his edit? His edit is fine. you just want block him forever. (other accounts are all dead. so he can't pretending multiple user) It's unfair to him. according to cocker, He can't be a sock puppets. and in my think, his edit are not fabricated edit, really. I think your action is personal harrasment. He already punished by blocked period. Please be civil. WP:CIVIL.

Return to channel, Just do not push and make me as sock puppets. I didn't violation any wikipedia rule or vandalism. you must make discussion before report other user as sock puppets, try to make consensused edit. Why you can't do like that? You did not talk with him. You did not try to make consensused edit. report as sock puppets is your only response. you guy want block me, too? by same way? you want opposition user make as sock puppets and repel him, revert article. why? you can not make sincerely discussion. you didn't prove fabrication edit by trust citation. like your fabricated edit.[27](I checked your edit. this edit is totally fiction. just see discussion page. nobody prove cite and any source. vandalsim)

Whatever you say, i have right for correct the wrong edit. anyone can edit wikipedia. It is wikipedia. and It is GNU. you do not have right for repel other user who opposition edit to you. 774townsclear 11:05, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Pleas, adminstrator. check my IP and compare edit or whatever. check reported user and me. I am not sock puppets, really. I really annoying this. i want show evidence from administrator. 774townsclear 11:05, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

i) (1) It is completely free that you assert it. (2) I have only pointed out the identity between Bason0 and other users. And the behavior which repeats edit of sockpuppet, just serves as proof of socks. (3) I can not understand your saying. (4) It is the same as 3. (5) Because Bason0 was editing articles of the video game at the beginning, I have used the word. It is very glad if you understand truly that Wikipedia is not a video game. Wikipedia is a reference work.

ii) For Bason0 — By taking a proper procedure, Bason0 can return to edit of Wikipedia. Using an unblock request tag ({{Unblock}}) with rational statement in his/her talkpage, administrator will decide to unblock (or not). Repeating reincarnation without this procedure, will be worsening the image of Administrator. In fact, Bason0 has created and used many new account after blocked indefinitely, Administrator will do a severe judgment. However, to follow directions of administrator sincerely, is the method most advantageous to Bason0. Or Bason0 may have to join into local language project, like kowp. It will surely have many discovery and experiences there. Bason0 will understand why enwp obstructed participation of Bason0.

iii) Following the rules of Wikipedia, I thought enough, collected evidences, and filed this report. It seems that Saintjust have done so, too. I never raised doubt of a sockpuppet without the reason. Of course, I do not hesitate arguing based on reliable sources. If it is a general user, or this report is rejected. I only have been waiting to decide by reliable administrator, because sockpuppets of Bason0 can not edit at enwp. --Nightshadow28 14:30, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

I have added 774townsclear as a suspected sockpuppet of Bason0, into this report. Evidences are comments by Saintjust and me. --Nightshadow28 15:01, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

RFCU has been declined by administrator Deskana. And respectively, they have been blocked by administrator Future Perfect at Sunrise.[28][29] Please close this issue. --Nightshadow28 16:10, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Quack. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:21, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Conclusions

I've filed and RFCU on this. — Rlevse • Talk • 12:55, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

Already blocked as a result of RFCU> — Rlevse • Talk • 22:28, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

---