GoldenDragonHorn
- GoldenDragonHorn ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
07 November 2020
Suspected sockpuppets
- WanderingGeeljire ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
1. Both accounts are heavily vested in Mogadishu, Geledi or Ajuran related articles.
2. Their interaction on the Talk page of GoldenDragonHorn seems very suspicious.
3. As I was in a dispute with WanderingGeeljire and undid his edit, since we have not reached consensus on the talk page of Mogadishu, the GoldenDragonHorn instantly arrived and undid my edit, which to me seems like some form of collaboration. Which seems like the individuals are promoting the same cause and one was invited?
4. WanderingGeeljire using same arguments as GoldenDragonHorn even using the word 'outdated' and even Ragnimo spouting the same colonial argument. -- AlaskaLava ( talk) 01:31, 7 November 2020 (UTC) AlaskaLava ( talk) 01:31, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
Comments by other users
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
This seems to be a common pattern when it comes to Somali editors, if they dare to have an opinion on their own history, culture and society, and if that opinion is similar to that of another Somali editor (even do its actually the general consensus view of the sources used), then an investigation is immediately launched in a knee-jerk reaction. I hope that you're aware that there are millions of Somalis with an internet connection, many of which peruse Wikipedia for information on their country, and many will sign up as the country is enjoying a reconstruction boom and seeing an influx of expats, hence ancient cities, heritage sites, libraries, national parks have all become accessible again and like every country and city in the world, Mogadishu and Somalia will be adequately represented on Wikipedia as a result.
I signed up because a lot of the articles were suffering from blatant systematic bias, and from looking at the list of Somali editors on the WikiProject Somalia that stopped contributing, I have noticed that one tactic to scare away new Somali editors seems to be launching these type of investigations, which is why these articles about Somalia remained for such a long time in a desolate state. That doesn't make me a single-purpose account or a sock-puppet because consensus is not going your way, it just mean my attention is currently on improving these articles, but my interests are far greater.
To keep it short and sweet, I won't leave, so get used to my presence.
I do find it highly ironic that the starter of the investigation is accusing others of sock-puppeting when he has two accounts on Wikipedia, both of which he uses to problematically edit the same articles, with fringe undue weight theories, which to someone new might be confused as a false consensus. Here we have User:Ozan33Ankara editing the Mogadishu article [1] and here we have User:AlaskaLava engaging in an edit war, pushing for the inclusion of many of the same type of problematic POVs he inserted earlier as Ozan33Ankara [2], which makes his use of two accounts - despite declaring it - a form of sock-puppeting.
More importantly, from looking at Ozan33Ankara's first edit and the time that he finally declared that he has two accounts on Wikipedia is a whopping 2 years difference. Those two years he was editing with two different accounts and didn't declare it in his user page [3]. So unless he has a legimitate reason for an alternative account or contacted a checkuser/ arbitration committee beforehand, how is this even allowed? -- GoldenDragonHorn ( talk) 03:42, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
- GoldenDragonHorn, what you are mentioning has already been resolved months ago with an admin as you can see by my profile. - Cheers -- AlaskaLava ( talk) 19:58, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
- Its not resolved at all, in my opinion, and I'm gathering updated information on your sock-puppet habits. Stay tuned. -- GoldenDragonHorn ( talk) 13:43, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
- These users appear
Unrelated when it comes to technical data.
~Oshwah~
(talk)
(contribs) 02:28, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
-
Clerk note: Closing with no action taken. The
interaction tool shows me two people who are both interested in Somilia-related topics. Their
timecards show me two people who appear to operate in GMT+3, where Somalia is. None of this adds up to socking. --
RoySmith
(talk) 17:06, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
GoldenDragonHorn
- GoldenDragonHorn ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
07 November 2020
Suspected sockpuppets
- WanderingGeeljire ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
1. Both accounts are heavily vested in Mogadishu, Geledi or Ajuran related articles.
2. Their interaction on the Talk page of GoldenDragonHorn seems very suspicious.
3. As I was in a dispute with WanderingGeeljire and undid his edit, since we have not reached consensus on the talk page of Mogadishu, the GoldenDragonHorn instantly arrived and undid my edit, which to me seems like some form of collaboration. Which seems like the individuals are promoting the same cause and one was invited?
4. WanderingGeeljire using same arguments as GoldenDragonHorn even using the word 'outdated' and even Ragnimo spouting the same colonial argument. -- AlaskaLava ( talk) 01:31, 7 November 2020 (UTC) AlaskaLava ( talk) 01:31, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
Comments by other users
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
This seems to be a common pattern when it comes to Somali editors, if they dare to have an opinion on their own history, culture and society, and if that opinion is similar to that of another Somali editor (even do its actually the general consensus view of the sources used), then an investigation is immediately launched in a knee-jerk reaction. I hope that you're aware that there are millions of Somalis with an internet connection, many of which peruse Wikipedia for information on their country, and many will sign up as the country is enjoying a reconstruction boom and seeing an influx of expats, hence ancient cities, heritage sites, libraries, national parks have all become accessible again and like every country and city in the world, Mogadishu and Somalia will be adequately represented on Wikipedia as a result.
I signed up because a lot of the articles were suffering from blatant systematic bias, and from looking at the list of Somali editors on the WikiProject Somalia that stopped contributing, I have noticed that one tactic to scare away new Somali editors seems to be launching these type of investigations, which is why these articles about Somalia remained for such a long time in a desolate state. That doesn't make me a single-purpose account or a sock-puppet because consensus is not going your way, it just mean my attention is currently on improving these articles, but my interests are far greater.
To keep it short and sweet, I won't leave, so get used to my presence.
I do find it highly ironic that the starter of the investigation is accusing others of sock-puppeting when he has two accounts on Wikipedia, both of which he uses to problematically edit the same articles, with fringe undue weight theories, which to someone new might be confused as a false consensus. Here we have User:Ozan33Ankara editing the Mogadishu article [1] and here we have User:AlaskaLava engaging in an edit war, pushing for the inclusion of many of the same type of problematic POVs he inserted earlier as Ozan33Ankara [2], which makes his use of two accounts - despite declaring it - a form of sock-puppeting.
More importantly, from looking at Ozan33Ankara's first edit and the time that he finally declared that he has two accounts on Wikipedia is a whopping 2 years difference. Those two years he was editing with two different accounts and didn't declare it in his user page [3]. So unless he has a legimitate reason for an alternative account or contacted a checkuser/ arbitration committee beforehand, how is this even allowed? -- GoldenDragonHorn ( talk) 03:42, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
- GoldenDragonHorn, what you are mentioning has already been resolved months ago with an admin as you can see by my profile. - Cheers -- AlaskaLava ( talk) 19:58, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
- Its not resolved at all, in my opinion, and I'm gathering updated information on your sock-puppet habits. Stay tuned. -- GoldenDragonHorn ( talk) 13:43, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
- These users appear
Unrelated when it comes to technical data.
~Oshwah~
(talk)
(contribs) 02:28, 7 November 2020 (UTC)
-
Clerk note: Closing with no action taken. The
interaction tool shows me two people who are both interested in Somilia-related topics. Their
timecards show me two people who appear to operate in GMT+3, where Somalia is. None of this adds up to socking. --
RoySmith
(talk) 17:06, 17 November 2020 (UTC)