These accounts have been disrupting the Knanaya article lately, and are clearly the same person, or closely connected. They've reverted essentially the same material back into the article, [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] or else advocated for that material on the talk page or edit summaries. [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] However, sometimes they claim to be different people who happen to agree. [11] They are clearly using these various IPs and accounts to game the system; the Psthomas account was registered some time ago, but only came into this current debate when the article was semi-protected for the second time, prohibiting the IPs from edit warring. I'm requesting a CU check in the likelihood of other sleeper accounts.-- Cúchullain t/ c 20:32, 25 August 2015 (UTC) Cúchullain t/ c 20:32, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
These IPs have started editing the common target Knanaya with edits basically the same as the last several times. [12] [13] Same pattern of surreptitiously removing or downplaying cited material they don't like, especially Richard M. Swiderski; same broken English. I'm tagging SpacemanSpiff, who has experience with this. Cúchullain t/ c 15:45, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
Not much to say here. Same IP ranges and same exact edits at Knanaya ( [14] vs. [15]). Cúchullain t/ c 13:03, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
New account edits Knanaya and related articles in the same pattern as the master and previous socks. A few edits evince Psthomas' dislike of scholar Richard Swiderski and attempts to excise material cited to him from the article. [16] [17] This edit removes many of the same passages removed by Psthomas socks, for instance here.-- Cúchullain t/ c 13:58, 25 October 2017 (UTC) Cúchullain t/ c 13:58, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
This case is being reviewed by Sir Sputnik as part of the clerk training process. Please allow them to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on their Talk page or on this page if more appropriate.
These accounts have been disrupting the Knanaya article lately, and are clearly the same person, or closely connected. They've reverted essentially the same material back into the article, [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] or else advocated for that material on the talk page or edit summaries. [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] However, sometimes they claim to be different people who happen to agree. [11] They are clearly using these various IPs and accounts to game the system; the Psthomas account was registered some time ago, but only came into this current debate when the article was semi-protected for the second time, prohibiting the IPs from edit warring. I'm requesting a CU check in the likelihood of other sleeper accounts.-- Cúchullain t/ c 20:32, 25 August 2015 (UTC) Cúchullain t/ c 20:32, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
These IPs have started editing the common target Knanaya with edits basically the same as the last several times. [12] [13] Same pattern of surreptitiously removing or downplaying cited material they don't like, especially Richard M. Swiderski; same broken English. I'm tagging SpacemanSpiff, who has experience with this. Cúchullain t/ c 15:45, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
Not much to say here. Same IP ranges and same exact edits at Knanaya ( [14] vs. [15]). Cúchullain t/ c 13:03, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
New account edits Knanaya and related articles in the same pattern as the master and previous socks. A few edits evince Psthomas' dislike of scholar Richard Swiderski and attempts to excise material cited to him from the article. [16] [17] This edit removes many of the same passages removed by Psthomas socks, for instance here.-- Cúchullain t/ c 13:58, 25 October 2017 (UTC) Cúchullain t/ c 13:58, 25 October 2017 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
This case is being reviewed by Sir Sputnik as part of the clerk training process. Please allow them to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on their Talk page or on this page if more appropriate.