Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Yomangani/Archive

Evidence submitted by WritersCramp

 * Yomangani is the puppet master of at least one sock puppet Yomangan and possibly other puppets. Both editors have virtually identical names are editing the same "obscure" articles confirming a pattern: Beagle, Monkey-baiting, Terra Nova Expedition, Wyld's Great Globe, see articles history. WritersCramp (talk) 13:14, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, don't be silly. there's no secret. I'm Yomangan and Yomangani. Look at the talk pages. Yomangani talk 13:18, 8 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Yomangani confirms being the puppet master of Yomangan. What other sockpuppets do you have? WritersCramp (talk) 13:21, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't have any sockpuppets. What are you getting so worked up about? Yomangani talk 13:22, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * P.S. Yomangan would have to be the worst sockpuppet of all time - I even kept the sig when I swapped accounts. For an explanation as to why I switched back, see this diff and the preceding conversation on Karanacs talk page. Yomangani talk 13:57, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users
Just for future reference: See the table at Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of SirIsaacBrock for background on the individuum who filed this. He was already Arbcom banned, but John Vandenberg has given him a last chance. I never understood why, as it is obviously a WP:COMPETENCE problem that won't go away. Hans Adler 14:47, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Well, there's no need for checkuser here, since the relation is admitted. However, I don't see how this is a legitimate use of alternate accounts. Is there a reason you have two accounts? TN X Man 14:17, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't see how it isn't a legitimate use of two accounts. I don't wish to be numbered, stapled, and accounted for. If you want to block me or ban me for that you are probably within your rights as since the sockpuppetry policy has been rewritten the concept of "doing no harm" has presumably been edited out. By the way, WritersCramp is apparently an alternative account of a user who was banned from editing Monkey baiting. Since I corrected a few points there, they apparently thought a frivolous SPI would be the best way to counteract my editing. I guess they were right - I only came back today and and apparently all I missed was pettiness. Yomangani talk 14:27, 8 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Yomangani edit history reflects he was editing with both accounts during the same time period and as I noted above some of the same articles.  Sockpuppet is a serious offence at Wikipedia, normally dealt with at least a temporary block of the editors account. WritersCramp (talk) 14:34, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, here's what we'll go with then. The User:Yomangan account appears to have been abandoned - and that's OK. I don't see a reason to block it at this time, since blocking is a preventative measure, not a punitive one. However, if it resumes editing, especially if User:Yomangani is active at the same time, it is subject to being blocked immediately. If WritersCramp is suspected of abusing alternate accounts, then please open an SPI. I'm marking this for close. TN X Man  14:39, 8 October 2010 (UTC)


 * As both accounts are properly connected via links from one to another on the userpage, there is no violation of WP:SOCK. NW ( Talk ) 14:52, 8 October 2010 (UTC)