69.118.129.76 (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
131.96.170.135 (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
12.160.192.2 (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
65.211.81.2 (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
At List of people from Ridgefield, Connecticut, 69 has engaged in an edit war, with numerous editors changing back his reverts. See history here, from this edit to this edit. It was finally ended with a page block here.
In order to come up with a consensus and end the edit war, a very, very long discussion took place in which 69 rudely and stubbornly stuck to his points (starting here and continuing to this part of the discussion), long after his objections had been met.
In order to broaden the discussion and see whether there was a consensus, a straw poll was started ( here). At this point, three anonymous editors showed up ("131" here, "12" here, and "65" here). Two of these ( 12 and 65) had no prior edits on Wikipedia; a third 131 had one prior edit (in Wikipedia Sandbox). These four accounts (so far) are the only !votes for deleting (there was one other, whose mind I then changed).
Wikipedia makes dispute resolution extremely difficult, including this long, complex process for reporting sockpuppets/meatpuppets. It is pretty damned obvious that there's abuse of various types going on here. I have been extremely patient in dealing with someone who is obviously not acting in good faith. Whether these accounts are meat puppets or sock puppets (and I've done the WHOIS search and found they are from different Internet accounts from widely divergent geographical locations) the pattern is obvious.
I strongly urge administrators to look into whether any non-anonymous Wikipedia editors use any of the same Internet accounts referenced at the top of this complaint and examine what that possible editor has been editing. Perhaps a motive can be found in a past dispute with me or another editor.
69.118.129.76 (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
131.96.170.135 (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
12.160.192.2 (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
65.211.81.2 (
talk ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
page moves ·
block user ·
block log)
At List of people from Ridgefield, Connecticut, 69 has engaged in an edit war, with numerous editors changing back his reverts. See history here, from this edit to this edit. It was finally ended with a page block here.
In order to come up with a consensus and end the edit war, a very, very long discussion took place in which 69 rudely and stubbornly stuck to his points (starting here and continuing to this part of the discussion), long after his objections had been met.
In order to broaden the discussion and see whether there was a consensus, a straw poll was started ( here). At this point, three anonymous editors showed up ("131" here, "12" here, and "65" here). Two of these ( 12 and 65) had no prior edits on Wikipedia; a third 131 had one prior edit (in Wikipedia Sandbox). These four accounts (so far) are the only !votes for deleting (there was one other, whose mind I then changed).
Wikipedia makes dispute resolution extremely difficult, including this long, complex process for reporting sockpuppets/meatpuppets. It is pretty damned obvious that there's abuse of various types going on here. I have been extremely patient in dealing with someone who is obviously not acting in good faith. Whether these accounts are meat puppets or sock puppets (and I've done the WHOIS search and found they are from different Internet accounts from widely divergent geographical locations) the pattern is obvious.
I strongly urge administrators to look into whether any non-anonymous Wikipedia editors use any of the same Internet accounts referenced at the top of this complaint and examine what that possible editor has been editing. Perhaps a motive can be found in a past dispute with me or another editor.