Home • Search • Translate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Lauriacts

Lauriacts ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
17 May 2013
Suspected sockpuppets


Before his recent block, Lauriacts' only contributions in Wikipedia (other than posting a personal attack on someone's talk page) was to be involved at the thread Talk:Jews#Judaism is a religion not an ethinic group. At that thread, he made personal attacks against User:Lexlex, accusing him of being antisemitic. This was after he made similar attacks against other editors. He was blocked as a result. He continued making the same personal attacka against Lexlex on his talk page and his block appeals, eventually leading him to have his talk page access revoked (this is all documented on Lauriacts' talk page).

A day after Lauriacts' talk page access was revoked, the Judea29jd9 account was created. The only contributions of this account was to post at the same thread at Talk:Jews#Judaism is a religion not an ethinic group, and accused Lexlex of antisemitism, in the same manner as before (see [1]). Given the timing of the creation of this account, the nature of the only contributions of this account, etc., I believe there is very strong evidence that Judea29jd9 is a block-evading sock of Lauriacts. A checkuser could confirm, as well as confirm if Lauriacts' recent creation and trolling is part of a larger sock problem. Singularity42 ( talk) 23:44, 17 May 2013 (UTC) reply

Excuse me, but accusing Jews of posting propaganda is anti-Semitism. Lexlex also said that calling Jews an ethnicity is "religious nonsense." Judea29jd9 ( talk) 00:09, 18 May 2013 (UTC) reply

Of course I am the same person as Lauriacts, and it makes me extremely angry that you are saying I am trolling. Whenever Jews protest their ill treatment at Wikipedia, they are always dismissed as "trolls." In contrast, Muslims are always very well treated at Wikipedia. They even removed pictures of Muhammad because it offended them. Judea29jd9 ( talk) 00:19, 18 May 2013 (UTC) reply

I do not understand why some people are allowed to make so-called "personal attacks" and others are not. If you have made so many contributions to Wikipedia, you are allowed to get away with personal attacks? Judea29jd9 ( talk) 00:32, 18 May 2013 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

Blocked as an obvious sock and per admission above. A checkuser should still take a look for sleepers and potential underlying IP measures, as the first account had a history of racist abuse. Acroterion (talk) 01:03, 18 May 2013 (UTC) reply

Understood: my main concern is that they might be a comparatively good-hand account of a much more prolific troller on the subject. Acroterion (talk) 02:13, 18 May 2013 (UTC) reply
20 June 2013
Suspected sockpuppets


Pawedease is a WP:DUCK case. Lauriacts was blocked for his (incorrect) accusations of antisemitism against a certain editor on Talk:Jews. Once blocked, he or she self-admitted (at the previous SPI) to creating a sock to continue such attacks. Pawedease appears to have been created to coninue off what Lauriacts started.

Yan Eggerland is more complex case. It again comes down to the edits made at Talk:Jews (with comments about "obsession with DNA" and how that is racism, similar to Lauriacts and his or her socks. The edits seem to be a month ago, and all edits ended after being warned (which may have led to the more recent sock being created). On the arguments against Yan Eggerland being a sock is that the account was already in existence at the time of the last Checkuser and did not come up as a sleeper. On the otherhand, at the time of the last Checkuser, there were issues about proxies, so I think it is worth a Checkuser now considering there are now more recent edits. Singularity42 ( talk) 00:57, 20 June 2013 (UTC) reply

In response to the request for more information, I have included diffs below (since all of these accounts have so few edits, I would have thought it was obvious...):
  • Edits by the sockmaster making racist accusations (in relation to another editor's comments about DNA and ethnicity), which led to the block and the denial of an unblock request: [2], [3], [4], [5], [6] (i.e. almost all of the master's contributions).
  • Edits by known sock: [7] (note the repeated incorrect claim of another editor posting propeganda, and quoting the other editor's earlier post), [8]
  • Admission to using socks: [9]
  • WP:DUCK edit of Pawedease: [10] (this is identical to the previous sock's edit to the talk page).
  • Edit by Yan Eggerland to the article talk page with a similar (but not identical) edit: [11].
I think the above is enough for Checkuser. Singularity42 ( talk) 11:51, 20 June 2013 (UTC) reply
Comments by other users

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
  •  Additional information needed -  Clerk declined. In order to facilitate and expedite your request, please provide diffs to support your case. Please give two or more diffs meeting the following format:
  1. At least one diff is from the sockmaster (or an account already blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet of the sockmaster), showing the behaviour characteristic of the sockmaster.
  2. At least one diff per suspected sockpuppet, showing the suspected sockpuppet emulating the behaviour of the sockmaster given in the first diff.
  3. In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided. Around one sentence is enough for this. Rs chen 7754 07:06, 20 June 2013 (UTC) reply
The following are  Confirmed with Yan Eggerland:
A connection between these two groups to Lauriacts seems  Possible, and strikes me as  Likely. WilliamH ( talk) 15:37, 21 June 2013 (UTC) reply
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Lauriacts/Archive&oldid=1079421592"
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Lauriacts

Lauriacts ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
17 May 2013
Suspected sockpuppets


Before his recent block, Lauriacts' only contributions in Wikipedia (other than posting a personal attack on someone's talk page) was to be involved at the thread Talk:Jews#Judaism is a religion not an ethinic group. At that thread, he made personal attacks against User:Lexlex, accusing him of being antisemitic. This was after he made similar attacks against other editors. He was blocked as a result. He continued making the same personal attacka against Lexlex on his talk page and his block appeals, eventually leading him to have his talk page access revoked (this is all documented on Lauriacts' talk page).

A day after Lauriacts' talk page access was revoked, the Judea29jd9 account was created. The only contributions of this account was to post at the same thread at Talk:Jews#Judaism is a religion not an ethinic group, and accused Lexlex of antisemitism, in the same manner as before (see [1]). Given the timing of the creation of this account, the nature of the only contributions of this account, etc., I believe there is very strong evidence that Judea29jd9 is a block-evading sock of Lauriacts. A checkuser could confirm, as well as confirm if Lauriacts' recent creation and trolling is part of a larger sock problem. Singularity42 ( talk) 23:44, 17 May 2013 (UTC) reply

Excuse me, but accusing Jews of posting propaganda is anti-Semitism. Lexlex also said that calling Jews an ethnicity is "religious nonsense." Judea29jd9 ( talk) 00:09, 18 May 2013 (UTC) reply

Of course I am the same person as Lauriacts, and it makes me extremely angry that you are saying I am trolling. Whenever Jews protest their ill treatment at Wikipedia, they are always dismissed as "trolls." In contrast, Muslims are always very well treated at Wikipedia. They even removed pictures of Muhammad because it offended them. Judea29jd9 ( talk) 00:19, 18 May 2013 (UTC) reply

I do not understand why some people are allowed to make so-called "personal attacks" and others are not. If you have made so many contributions to Wikipedia, you are allowed to get away with personal attacks? Judea29jd9 ( talk) 00:32, 18 May 2013 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

Blocked as an obvious sock and per admission above. A checkuser should still take a look for sleepers and potential underlying IP measures, as the first account had a history of racist abuse. Acroterion (talk) 01:03, 18 May 2013 (UTC) reply

Understood: my main concern is that they might be a comparatively good-hand account of a much more prolific troller on the subject. Acroterion (talk) 02:13, 18 May 2013 (UTC) reply
20 June 2013
Suspected sockpuppets


Pawedease is a WP:DUCK case. Lauriacts was blocked for his (incorrect) accusations of antisemitism against a certain editor on Talk:Jews. Once blocked, he or she self-admitted (at the previous SPI) to creating a sock to continue such attacks. Pawedease appears to have been created to coninue off what Lauriacts started.

Yan Eggerland is more complex case. It again comes down to the edits made at Talk:Jews (with comments about "obsession with DNA" and how that is racism, similar to Lauriacts and his or her socks. The edits seem to be a month ago, and all edits ended after being warned (which may have led to the more recent sock being created). On the arguments against Yan Eggerland being a sock is that the account was already in existence at the time of the last Checkuser and did not come up as a sleeper. On the otherhand, at the time of the last Checkuser, there were issues about proxies, so I think it is worth a Checkuser now considering there are now more recent edits. Singularity42 ( talk) 00:57, 20 June 2013 (UTC) reply

In response to the request for more information, I have included diffs below (since all of these accounts have so few edits, I would have thought it was obvious...):
  • Edits by the sockmaster making racist accusations (in relation to another editor's comments about DNA and ethnicity), which led to the block and the denial of an unblock request: [2], [3], [4], [5], [6] (i.e. almost all of the master's contributions).
  • Edits by known sock: [7] (note the repeated incorrect claim of another editor posting propeganda, and quoting the other editor's earlier post), [8]
  • Admission to using socks: [9]
  • WP:DUCK edit of Pawedease: [10] (this is identical to the previous sock's edit to the talk page).
  • Edit by Yan Eggerland to the article talk page with a similar (but not identical) edit: [11].
I think the above is enough for Checkuser. Singularity42 ( talk) 11:51, 20 June 2013 (UTC) reply
Comments by other users

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
  •  Additional information needed -  Clerk declined. In order to facilitate and expedite your request, please provide diffs to support your case. Please give two or more diffs meeting the following format:
  1. At least one diff is from the sockmaster (or an account already blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet of the sockmaster), showing the behaviour characteristic of the sockmaster.
  2. At least one diff per suspected sockpuppet, showing the suspected sockpuppet emulating the behaviour of the sockmaster given in the first diff.
  3. In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided. Around one sentence is enough for this. Rs chen 7754 07:06, 20 June 2013 (UTC) reply
The following are  Confirmed with Yan Eggerland:
A connection between these two groups to Lauriacts seems  Possible, and strikes me as  Likely. WilliamH ( talk) 15:37, 21 June 2013 (UTC) reply
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Lauriacts/Archive&oldid=1079421592"

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook




Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE