Prior SSP or RFCU cases may exist for this user:
User:Alamanth is a new user who suddenly arrived on the scene and almost entirely concentrated on making radical changes to my work. She mixed a few minor intelligent edits with wholly irrational ones such as changing whole articles to redirects without any discussion and for no apparent logical reason.
See Defending yourself against claims. One small problem User:Alamanth had nothing, whatsoever to do with me, and this is the first I have heard of him/her, today, check the actual pathways and I feel sure you will find that out. I have no sockpuppets. I also REALLY think it is time someone put a stop to User:Penbat's more abstract capacity for equal misinformation, he is filling up psyhology articles with left of field nonsense, most of which is, at best, a considerable distortion of any source he cites, and, at worse simply made up off the top of his head. signed - The REAL Zeraeph -- 109.79.193.159 ( talk) 08:51, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
1. In a private email, Zeraeph was quite insistent that Alamanth is a different user. Zeraeph shared information about his or her geographical location and ISP and suggested that a proper checkuser would show how impossible this is.
2. I ran a checkuser on Zeraeph - the claims about geolocation and ISP were confirmed.
3. I ran a checkuser on Alamanth. The ip number appears to me to be a cable modem with a very stable ip, on a different continent.
4. Looking at the ip number in a number of different ways, I saw nothing unusual about it.
5. I leave any unblocking to other admins, as I have not reviewed the non-ip evidence. However, at least based on checkuser data and my own experience level, this is unlikely to be a sockpuppet. (I am probably pretty decent at checkuser due to general technical knowledge, but would be pleased for another checkuser to verify my work.)-- Jimbo Wales ( talk) 16:18, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
Based on his editing history I have unblocked Alamanth ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). The edits for which he was blocked were reasonable. Fred Talk 23:06, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
Administrator note Clear sock. Blocked and tagged.
MuZemike
23:49, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically. |
User Special:Contributions/109.79.193.159 self confesses that she is a sockpuppet of banned User:Zeraeph
See Defending yourself against claims.
I certainly did post from those IPs (and clearly identified myself as Zeraeph). I was under moral obligation to, because a checkuser is urgently required to exonerate User:Alamanth who has been falsely accused and banned for being a sockpuppet of mine, simply on the, questionable, word of User:Penbat because User:Alamanth challenged some of his remarkably left of field editing of his psuedo psychology articles. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Zeraeph/Archive
User:Alamanth certainly is not me, so a simple "checkuser" (that surely should have been done in the first place before applying an indefinate ban) should completely exonerate them. I do not even know WHO User:Alamanth IS...so I really think they deserve that small justice and consideration.
With the greatesat respect, I do not personally give a flying fig what Wikipedia does, or does not, make of me...it would be a refreshing change to be accused of something I have actually DONE for a change...
But User:Alamanth is a totally innocent party caught between the wheels of User:Penbat's vindictive egomania. It is Christmas, and it is easy enough to put that straight with a checkuser...then all is well that ends well.-- 109.79.255.154 ( talk) 20:22, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Incidentally, anyone is welcome to mail me through the Zeraeph account to validate my identity, and I am prepared to give my landline number to ONE admin (that I will choose, I don't trust a lot of you, with cause) to facillitate the exoneration of User:Alamanth by confirming my geolocation. -- 109.79.255.154 ( talk) 20:25, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Administrator note Rangeblocks issued. We do not allow banned editors to come back and vouch for other users. Second, even if this wasn't sock puppetry, per our
banning policy, enlisting another person to edit on behalf of a banned user (i.e. "proxying") is not allowed. Finally, we do not endorse requests for CheckUser to prove one's innocence. –
MuZemike
20:39, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically. |
Prior SSP or RFCU cases may exist for this user:
User:Alamanth is a new user who suddenly arrived on the scene and almost entirely concentrated on making radical changes to my work. She mixed a few minor intelligent edits with wholly irrational ones such as changing whole articles to redirects without any discussion and for no apparent logical reason.
See Defending yourself against claims. One small problem User:Alamanth had nothing, whatsoever to do with me, and this is the first I have heard of him/her, today, check the actual pathways and I feel sure you will find that out. I have no sockpuppets. I also REALLY think it is time someone put a stop to User:Penbat's more abstract capacity for equal misinformation, he is filling up psyhology articles with left of field nonsense, most of which is, at best, a considerable distortion of any source he cites, and, at worse simply made up off the top of his head. signed - The REAL Zeraeph -- 109.79.193.159 ( talk) 08:51, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
1. In a private email, Zeraeph was quite insistent that Alamanth is a different user. Zeraeph shared information about his or her geographical location and ISP and suggested that a proper checkuser would show how impossible this is.
2. I ran a checkuser on Zeraeph - the claims about geolocation and ISP were confirmed.
3. I ran a checkuser on Alamanth. The ip number appears to me to be a cable modem with a very stable ip, on a different continent.
4. Looking at the ip number in a number of different ways, I saw nothing unusual about it.
5. I leave any unblocking to other admins, as I have not reviewed the non-ip evidence. However, at least based on checkuser data and my own experience level, this is unlikely to be a sockpuppet. (I am probably pretty decent at checkuser due to general technical knowledge, but would be pleased for another checkuser to verify my work.)-- Jimbo Wales ( talk) 16:18, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
Based on his editing history I have unblocked Alamanth ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). The edits for which he was blocked were reasonable. Fred Talk 23:06, 25 December 2009 (UTC)
Administrator note Clear sock. Blocked and tagged.
MuZemike
23:49, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically. |
User Special:Contributions/109.79.193.159 self confesses that she is a sockpuppet of banned User:Zeraeph
See Defending yourself against claims.
I certainly did post from those IPs (and clearly identified myself as Zeraeph). I was under moral obligation to, because a checkuser is urgently required to exonerate User:Alamanth who has been falsely accused and banned for being a sockpuppet of mine, simply on the, questionable, word of User:Penbat because User:Alamanth challenged some of his remarkably left of field editing of his psuedo psychology articles. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Zeraeph/Archive
User:Alamanth certainly is not me, so a simple "checkuser" (that surely should have been done in the first place before applying an indefinate ban) should completely exonerate them. I do not even know WHO User:Alamanth IS...so I really think they deserve that small justice and consideration.
With the greatesat respect, I do not personally give a flying fig what Wikipedia does, or does not, make of me...it would be a refreshing change to be accused of something I have actually DONE for a change...
But User:Alamanth is a totally innocent party caught between the wheels of User:Penbat's vindictive egomania. It is Christmas, and it is easy enough to put that straight with a checkuser...then all is well that ends well.-- 109.79.255.154 ( talk) 20:22, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Incidentally, anyone is welcome to mail me through the Zeraeph account to validate my identity, and I am prepared to give my landline number to ONE admin (that I will choose, I don't trust a lot of you, with cause) to facillitate the exoneration of User:Alamanth by confirming my geolocation. -- 109.79.255.154 ( talk) 20:25, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Administrator note Rangeblocks issued. We do not allow banned editors to come back and vouch for other users. Second, even if this wasn't sock puppetry, per our
banning policy, enlisting another person to edit on behalf of a banned user (i.e. "proxying") is not allowed. Finally, we do not endorse requests for CheckUser to prove one's innocence. –
MuZemike
20:39, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically. |