Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Parsssseltongue


 * 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. 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:Parsssseltongue
User:Dain Quentin Gore has only one edit, a "strong keep" vote at Articles_for_deletion/Ryan_avery, an issue near and dear to User:Parsssseltongue's heart. Not only did Gore feel so strongly about the issue that he voted "strong" keep, he also felt the need to defend Parsssseltongue's practice of arguing with every "delete" vote, which I and others had criticized PT for. &mdash;Chowbok 14:45, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Evidence


 * Comments
 * First, I support PT's right to argue every vote - that's what AfD is for - discussion (voting is secondary). I expressed this support in this same AfD before Dain's edit, and this may have influenced his writing - but maybe I'm another of his sock puppet's too?  even though I generally disagree with his opinions.  Second, I wish more editors would take the time to research their cases the way PT does.  He does a good job of it, though I disagree with his conclusions.  He's an inclusionist, and I'm not.  Third, I think the evidence above is exceedingly weak.  Indeed, if this was accepted as evidence, then expect to see a rash of new users parroting dissenters in order to discredit them.  I do support diligent investigation of this matter (as I would any such claim), but once that is done, and if this is the best or only evidence, then the matter should be dropped.   Rklawton 15:47, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * This is outrageous! First, a quick look on google turns up an artist of the name Dain Quentin Gore who seems like a guy that might be interested in this subject.  I might point out that from time to time people do actually read the articles on wikipedia.  If said people see that something of interest to them is up for deletion they might choose to enter the debate.  Second, I've been keeping a bit of an eye on PT since I welcomed him many month's ago and his pages first entered my watchlist.  This isn't the first time that an article of his has landed in AfD, and yes, he does always vigorously defend them.  Sometimes I've supported him, sometimes I've voted the other way, sometimes I've stayed out of the debate.  I can tell you this much, from what I've seen, he has always played by the rules.  Then agian maybe I'm a puppet too.  As noted above, this matter should be settled quickly and dropped. -MrFizyx 16:30, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Dain Gore is a Phoenix area artist who is friends with the subject of an article I originated. I am not Dain Gore. This is the third time I have been accused of being someone else (though the first time I have been accused of being a sockpuppeteer), and it is the third time I am here to say, "Nope, I'm not him/her." I write on a lot of Phoenix area subjects, am I going to be accused every time if one of those articles comes up for deletion? PT  ( s-s-s-s ) 17:06, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * It's pretty weak evidence to be accusing someone on. PT seems perfectly content to discuss the matter under his own name.  (And there's nothing wrong with arguing with every delete vote -- which he didn't do, anyway.)  I obviously don't agree with him about this particular article, but he's been civil and aboveboard, and he and Dain have offered a more compelling defense than most AfDs get. Shimeru 19:59, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. The comments here have convinced me I was too hasty posting this. &mdash;Chowbok 20:32, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Now remove that ugly, unwarranted notice from my talk page. PT  ( s-s-s-s ) 20:36, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Dismissed: Insufficient evidence. Iola k ana |T 12:40, 9 August 2006 (UTC)