Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nrcprm2026: Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
GoRight (talk | contribs)
6,435 edits
Line 30: Line 30:


:: Normally I wouldn’t waste my time, but considering how widely used a reference Wikipedia has become, I cant sit back. Your continued antics both here and on other sites make you look positively pathetic. I suggest you seek professional help. [[User:RadTek|RadTek]] ([[User talk:RadTek|talk]]) 01:35, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
:: Normally I wouldn’t waste my time, but considering how widely used a reference Wikipedia has become, I cant sit back. Your continued antics both here and on other sites make you look positively pathetic. I suggest you seek professional help. [[User:RadTek|RadTek]] ([[User talk:RadTek|talk]]) 01:35, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

This is sort of weird to have my name come up here. I have no idea who [[User:RadTek|RadTek]] even is. To the best of my knowledge I have never interacted with him/her at all. I don't believe that I have ever edited any of the pages he/she lists above, nor their talk pages.

I also have no idea who [[User:Noren]] is below, but my one and only ever edit to [[Cold Fusion]] is here, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cold_fusion&diff=267254777&oldid=267182910], where I fix a problem with the bibliography. I have edited the talk page for [[Cold Fusion]] but never to address any significant content questions, although I may have weighed in on a few points here and there. My involvement there was mostly tangential at best and had to do with procedural issues related to the purported topic ban of [[User:JedRothwell]], which I later described here: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests&oldid=268329651#Statement_by_User:GoRight].

Feel free to run your checkuser on me if you wish and report the results back here. I have nothing to hide. --[[User:GoRight|GoRight]] ([[User talk:GoRight|talk]]) 20:51, 19 June 2009 (UTC)


;Comments by other users
;Comments by other users

Revision as of 20:51, 19 June 2009

Nrcprm2026

Nrcprm2026 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Populated account categories: confirmed · suspected


Prior SSP or RFCU cases may exist for this user:

Report date June 18 2009, 21:29 (UTC)
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by RadTek

Nrcprm2026 is a habitual sockpuppeteer. Users listed above, as well as many others to be sure all demonstrate an obsession with particular subject matters including depleted uranium, nutrition, instant runoff voting and hybrid vehicles.

Please refer to prior check users for additional information. [1]

Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.
Denied. User:RadTek is using phrasing and quotations of banned user User:TDC a/k/a User:Hempbilly and is unlikely to "always" misspell the name of his alleged employer. There appears to be no interaction between James Salsman a/k/a User:Nrcprm2026 and anyone from Exelon on the RadSafe mailing list and no posts by James Salsman to RadSafe in the past year. RadTek is deleting secondary peer-reviewed sources from Depleted uranium (the only secondary sources in that entire article) and Uranium. KeepinReal (talk) 01:26, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Mr Salsman, your harassing emails to my supervisor was a few years ago, late 2006. A coworker of mine and member of the RadSafe list informed of this truly sad charade you put on here.
I dont know who tdc or hempbilly are and frankly I could care less.
Normally I wouldn’t waste my time, but considering how widely used a reference Wikipedia has become, I cant sit back. Your continued antics both here and on other sites make you look positively pathetic. I suggest you seek professional help. RadTek (talk) 01:35, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is sort of weird to have my name come up here. I have no idea who RadTek even is. To the best of my knowledge I have never interacted with him/her at all. I don't believe that I have ever edited any of the pages he/she lists above, nor their talk pages.

I also have no idea who User:Noren is below, but my one and only ever edit to Cold Fusion is here, [2], where I fix a problem with the bibliography. I have edited the talk page for Cold Fusion but never to address any significant content questions, although I may have weighed in on a few points here and there. My involvement there was mostly tangential at best and had to do with procedural issues related to the purported topic ban of User:JedRothwell, which I later described here: [3].

Feel free to run your checkuser on me if you wish and report the results back here. I have nothing to hide. --GoRight (talk) 20:51, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

User:Splargo has showed up at Talk:Cold_fusion#How_to_get_patent_story_NPOV.3F with massive knowledge of what has been going at the article despite being a new account that had never previously contributed to the article. He is defending the text that was inserted by User:GetLinkPrimitiveParams, who started editing in 18 November 2008, eight days after thelast checkuser in LossIsNotMore, and has stopped editing in 1 June 2009. Splargo has started editing in 14 June 2009. Checkusered User:IwRnHaA also defended lots of primary sources in Talk:Cold fusion [4] to try to contradict secondary sources, just like these two users did. I would advice a checkuser to catch the whole sock farm. --Enric Naval (talk) 03:50, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:GoRight arrived as an apparently experienced editor a few months after Nrcprm2026 was banned, taking a very active position in Global Warming topics as Nrcprm2026 did, and also later acting in the Cold Fusion article similarly to how Nrcprm2026 and later his sock IwRnHaA edited Cold Fusion. None of this is conclusive, but I do think a check would be worthwhile. --Noren (talk) 04:41, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RadTek is an SPA, quite possibly a sock, registered to file this report,apparently bringing here an off-wiki dispute. Enric Naval, above, has tossed in a number of accounts he'd like to check out, on the thin or zero evidence. One or two of the accounts originally listed by RadTek may indeed be Salsman socks. GoRight is extremely unlikely to be one, his politics are about the opposite of Salsman in areas I'm familiar with, and he's quite a long-term editor. (I have long experience with Salsman, I cut my teeth on socks of his, see my block record, first block.) Given the above, I'd suggest that RadTek be immediately blocked, even if he's right about Salsman and a sock or two. At the very least, this editor should be strongly warned. --Abd (talk) 13:09, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Abd, I have responded to you on your page. Block me if you want, but I am not posting as a sockpuppet and my intentions are good. The user in question needs to have his activities here curtailed and he needs to get some help. RadTek (talk) 14:46, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's a reasonable surmise that KeepinReal (talk · contribs) is Nrcprm2026, likewise Splargo (talk · contribs), they are worthy of checkuser. Nopetro (talk · contribs) seems quite unlikely. GetLinkPrimitiveParams (talk · contribs) seems unlikely, but, hey, there's one under every bed. GoRight (talk · contribs) seems almost impossible to me; if he's a Salsman sock, he's lasted longer than any other I've seen, and has been very successful at partitioning attitude and behavior. Thanks to Noren for pointing out IwRnHaA (talk · contribs); I wasn't involved with Cold fusion then and missed it entirely. With the IP editor, I'd noticed [5], which would be a typical Salsman edit, but, big yawn, the material wasn't sourced, though "true," so why get exercised about it? Salsman has a habit of selective enforcement of guidelines, which he knows well, to favor his POV. Hence many of his edits are technically correct, but the net effect can be to warp articles. --Abd (talk) 16:10, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The parties haven't been notified, BTW; my guess is there is at least one Salsman sock up there, probably two, and it's not impossible there are more. I've been checkusered before, and, frankly, I'd rather not even know about it except for after the fact. If someone thinks the parties should be notified, they can certainly do it, but if the accounts aren't Nrcprm2026, it would be a waste of time for them to respond here, it is practically never possible to prove one isn't a sock, and if they are socks, I'd like to know!, I've worked extensively with one of the editors. (Very rarely, checkuser errors have apparently been made, but it's far more efficient to cross that bridge if we come to it. We can always ask for a second opinion, or for other evidence if needed.) --Abd (talk) 17:36, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I have seen cases where both the accuser and the accused were sockmasters. They turn each other in because they hate their mutual guts. --Enric Naval (talk) 18:57, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{{RFCU}} is deprecated. Please change the case status parameter in {{SPI case status}} to "CURequest" instead.

Checkuser request – code letter: F (Other reason )
Current status – Awaiting initial clerk review.
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
  •  Clerk note: Without additional evidence in the form of diffs, this request will be declined. As a general note, this is not a noticeboard for freeform discussion or the continuation of content disputes. All comments that are not both concise and specifically aimed at investigating or refuting the allegation of sockpuppetry will be removed without additional warning. Nathan T 18:58, 19 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Conclusions


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Nrcprm2026&oldid=297426979"