User talk:Kebron/Archive Jun 2007

WP:ANI
Kebron, your edit to the admin noticeboard wasn't acceptable. Dredging up unrelated crap, picking and choosing, all to harass and run down another editor. You should know better and I shouldn't have to explain this to you. I won't warn you again. --Duk 16:20, 20 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Then explain to me please why HE can. Why HE can accuse anyone he wants of trolling, of puppetry without proof. WHY?--Kebron 17:59, 20 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Because Merkey isn't stalking people who are honestly trying to do work here, it's the other way around. He's defending himself. He didn't open this door. And most of the stuff Merkey brings up is relevant to the stalking. --Duk 18:28, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Sockpuppets
WP:SOCK is the basic policy on sockpuppets, and WP:SSP is the place to discuss suspected sockpuppets. Anyone can tag suspected sockpuppets but should provide reasonable evidence of their suspicion, otherwise the tag can be removed. Checkuser requests for proving sockpuppetry are not mandatory, indeed checkuser is not a definitive way of proving (or disproving) sockpuppetry, it is just technical weight. Sockpuppetry is primarily considered on a behavioural basis.

Sockpuppetry is not in itself outlawed, alternate accounts can be quite legitimate. What is outlawed is the disruptive use of sockpuppetry, e.g. using it to evade a block/ban, using it to vote more than once (or otherwise "support" each other), using it to harass another user, using it to edit war etc. Evidence of some of those is usually required before any action would be taken against a sockpuppet.

Finally the IP you've listed is actually an AOL IP, AOL allocates IP very dynamically so the tag is pretty meaningless against such an address. I would remove it, but in the scheme of things it's pretty unimportant and would probably cause more drama than value added. --pgk 13:26, 26 May 2007 (UTC)


 * To add, someone frequently adding sockpuppet tags without any reasonable evidence of a connection, or non-permitted sockpuppet behaviour, is likely to be seen as disruptive. That however would be best dealt with through dispute resolution. --pgk 13:35, 26 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your quick response, I just mentioned it because, he does it often and with little or no proof he does it often. --Kebron 13:48, 26 May 2007 (UTC)


 * You might also like to consider the essay (not policy) WP:DUCK --pgk 14:31, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

The project
We are here to write an encyclopedia. You can help with that if you like. If you are here for any other purpose, please leave. Tom Harrison Talk 13:29, 28 May 2007 (UTC)