Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Panehesy/Archive

Report date November 12 2009, 18:48 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets

Both editing Race of Jesus and arguing endlessly on the talk page, IP claims he's not Panehesy, but so obviously is. Abusive use in an attempt to create false consensus. Auntie E. 18:48, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Evidence submitted by Auntie E.
 * Additional evidence of meatpuppetry: In this diff Panehesy admits to meatpuppetry. Either way, we have a nest of socks or meatpuppets which need to be cleared out. Auntie E.  21:42, 12 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.

Bull. This is just an attempt to block excellent contributions from being added. This is harassment, plain and simple. --Panehesy (talk) 20:35, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't matter. Ban the user, ban it all. We've found ways around that and have been successful for a couple of years now. Unless you want to ban every black person that contributes, you're not going to stop people from contributing. I am not Panehesy but I do not care if you think that I am. In fact, I hereby request that you block my IP address. Thank you and have a nice day. --68.41.101.63 (talk) 18:50, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments by other users

Oh there is one thing that I notice, about 10 minutes before hand the access to the entire site was "down" except for the main page and over the past week my ability to type on Wikipedia pages was slowed down a bit. It felt very strange and of course at that point I was not surprised when the situation went in this direction. I'll pay attention more closely when the next time I contribute, whether or not anything unusual happens. --68.41.101.63 (talk) 18:59, 12 November 2009 (UTC)


 * From what I see, this is massive meatpuppetry, but not necessarily sockpuppetry.--Unionhawk Talk E-mail Review 19:17, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Quote from the IP: "[...]Oh by the way... Osirica says hello." diff. Osirica is a sockpuppet of banned user Zaphnathpaaneah. The IP appears to follow the same editing patterns as Zaphnathpaaneah.--Unionhawk Talk E-mail Review 19:23, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi, it's me again. No it doesn't follow the same editing patterns. Osirica would make 60 edits sometimes in one night. She would argue with everybody. I don't know that much about Zaph but I know Panehesy and nope. Wrong again. What we are doing is currently showing these procedural methods to other people who then sign up and contribute. They see the unfairness, the manipulation. For example, in the Race of Egyptians, you say they are Mediterranean and not Caucasian, but in the Mediterranean race article, it is clearly laid out as a Caucasian subgroup. I show that, and the comments to people, esp. the comments that justify this kind of status quo method and it aggrivates people to contribute. Banning me isn't going to do nothing. Thats what got me involved. I was recruited I guess. I wasn't that interested in the thing, but yea I can see why they say what they say. As soon as a reputable method is used that cannot be denied, you try to block editing of an article and if that doesn't work, call the contributor a sockpuppet. You'll never know what my user ID on here is. --68.41.101.63 (talk) 21:43, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Conclusion is that black contributors have spread the word to many other black people who contribute and successfully overcome the silly methods used to misrepresent black and egyptian history. A thousand blocks and bans only make it easier. --68.41.101.63 (talk) 21:46, 12 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

Sock or meatpuppetry (I suspect the latter), blocking IPs won't do much good. If they continue with disruption, the only other viable option would be to request protection of the pages. Otherwise, there's nothing else that can be done here, so I'm marking as closed. MuZemike 23:41, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Conclusions