Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Hanuman Das


 * 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:Hanuman Das

 * Suspected sockpuppeteer


 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Report submission by:

BostonMA talk 15:41, 5 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Evidence

Evidence of alternate account by same user:
 * states that he/she interprets the result of an RfC as permission to use sockpuppets.
 * account is created and replies immediately on the RfC page with
 * "Me, too. I completely agree with Hanuman Das. That's exactly what it means."

Evidence of abusive use of alternate account:
 * The names clearly suggest the same user.
 * Please see below why this report is being filed. There is a technical violation of engaging in discussion on an RfC talk page using two accounts.  However, it should be obvious that no deception was intended, as the name of the alternate account was chosen to be similar to that of the main account.  Nevertheless, for the sake of dotting the 'i's, the technical violation is using two accounts on the same RfC.
 * The technical violation is not the reason why this report is being filed. Rather, there is concern that the user has threatened to create sockpuppets in the future    This report is intended to serve as a warning against such a course and a reminder to observe WP:Point.


 * Comments

I have already indef blocked, but as BostonMA states, this is relevant to get on record because has essentially stated his intent to disrupt using sockpuppets since he perceives that  has gotten away with it. -- Ars Scriptor  15:57, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

This report and the blocking were a policy violation: An alternate account that is not used for abuse does not warrant a complaint &mdash;Hanuman Das 20:51, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

It was a joke. Too bad Ars Scriptor does not have a sense of humor. Not a single policy violation was committed by User:Danuman Has. It was simply used as an excuse to harass me by User:BostonMA. If this is the wrong place for this comment, please move it. Also, please delete the user and talk page of User:Danuman Has and lock the account if you are afraid (without cause) that I will abuse it. You guys need to lighten up. &mdash;Hanuman Das 20:47, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't think there's any evidence or even suggestion that Hanuman Das has actually sockpuppeted except for this one making-a-point occurrence, is there? And I'm not sure that that was actually a case of disruptive sockpuppetry, since it was deliberately obvious and not doing anything destructive. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 16:33, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

MER-C 03:18, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Conclusions
 * 06:20, 6 December 2006 Redvers (Talk | contribs) blocked "Hanuman Das (contribs)" with an expiry time of indefinite (Abusively used sockpuppet (admitted); personal attacks; vandalism; etc)
 * 06:52, 6 December 2006 Redvers (Talk | contribs) unblocked Hanuman Das (contribs) (Okay... advocacy from other editors leads me to unblock. But please be aware of the thickness of the ice you're on.)
 * 23:06, 5 December 2006 Ars Scriptor (Talk | contribs) blocked "Danuman Has (contribs)" with an expiry time of indefinite (abusive sockpuppet)