Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Fwdixon(2nd)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Jesup

 * Suspected sockpuppeteer


 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Report submission by:Marshal2.0 01:43, 7 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Evidence Repeated identical edits (now with misleading summaries, including "minor edit" to hide it from some) on Katana, and Stratemeyer Syndicate related pages. by User:Fwdixon and many, many other identical edits by him (and before page was semi-protected by anon-IP's identified as sockpuppets of him). Furthermore Jesup has been acused of Sockpupetry in the past.Marshal2.0 01:49, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

User:Marshal2.0 is apparently engaging in retribution for my reporting User:Marshalbannana (the self-admitted previous user-id of this user) here as a possible sockpuppet of User:Jacknicholson, and probably because when Marshalbannana tried to acquit himself on Suspected sock puppets/Jacknicholson(2nd) I undid his self-acquital. The Katana article had to be fully protected to deal with the repeated editwarring from anon-IP's and later Jacknicholson/Marshalbannana once it was semi-protected.
 * Comments

Even a cursory examination of my edits will show I'm not a sockpuppet. The "evidence" above isn't supported by my contribution logs or the logs of the various pages, which is probably why no edit links were included.

If you examine the previous case referenced about Fwdixon you'll see it was a totally bogus case where a user accused everyone who disagreed with him of puppetry (and I had only added a short comment on the talk page at that time), and the admin dismissed it almost immediately.

Since this is obviously retribution, I request that someone rule on this quickly and consider if any action against the accuser is appropriate. Thanks. — jesup 04:27, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I should also note that User:Jesup started re-inserting this text exactly 4 days after the previous inserter (User:Fwdixon) was reported, and 4 days is the minimum age of a newuser before they can edit sprotected pages. Note also the deceptive summary for Jesup's last re-insertion before this case was opened: "m (sourced, looks better)" - marked as a minor edit. Marshal2.0 17:05, 7 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I only stumbled here because I had a message on 's talk page. Anyway, when reverting vandalism, many people tag the edit as minor. If Jesup was a sock puppet, then would've likely gotten involved in the revert wars of  and its talk page as well. Also note, Jesup's earliest contribution is August of 2005, so very doubtful that he (sorry if wrongly assumed) was waiting out a 4 day minimum to vandalize an article when his 5th edit was a vandalism revert. &mdash;  RevRagnarok  Talk Contrib 17:30, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

That comment pretty much proves this is a spurious retribution: Marshal2.0's comment is a copy of my comment here in Suspected sock puppets/Jacknicholson(2nd) with the names swapped. Thanks! — jesup 17:23, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Creation time: was about 40 minutes after Fwdixon was blocked. Marshal2.0 17:40, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Broken link. &mdash; RevRagnarok  Talk Contrib 17:55, 7 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Again, a comment of mine copied with the names changed (and slightly messed up in the process) from here. —  jesup 17:59, 7 January 2007 (UTC)


 * A check of the other known sockpuppet IPs for Jesup and the list of anon-IPs used for repeatedly (25+ times) inserting this text and youtube video link show that almost all are BellSouth dynamic DSL IP addresses, plus an edit or two from a school lab account.Marshal2.0 17:47, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Those are Jesup's words reworded again. Do you think we're dumb around here? &mdash; RevRagnarok  Talk Contrib 17:55, 7 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Correct, another comment copied/edited. Yes, he does think we're dumb - but really he's just trying to harrass.  Especially silly since I more or less indicated that the case against Marshalbannana was mostly moot currently, though it hadn't been ruld on yet.  —  jesup 17:59, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Diffs
 * Anyone ever heard of them? Without diffs that demonstrate the purported sockpuppeting there really isn no evidence here.  Recommend that a WP:RFCU be initiated instead.--Isotope23 17:45, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

in due timeMarshal2.0 17:47, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Sooner rather than later. The fact that the "Evidence section" above appears to be a cut and paste job from here sans the diff that were included in that request inclines me to believe that if diffs are not provided here quickly that this request should probably just be closed.--Isotope23 17:54, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to go ahead and be WP:BOLD here. jesup has provided Diffs that pretty clearly indicate that the evidence and accusations provided here are cut and paste jobs from a WP:SOCK investigation he instigated against the previous username of the editor who opened this case. Diffs have not been provided, even though they were asked for. WP:AGF, but this case smacks of WP:POINT and retalitory action. As no real evidence has been provided I'm going ahead and closing this.--Isotope23 14:33, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Conclusions