Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Quixotic92

User:Quixotic92

 * Quixotic92


 * Suspected sock puppets


 * Report submission by
 * Alexius08 (talk) 23:16, 5 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Evidence
 * The group has shown repeated disruption of the AfD process.
 * As the logs show, the page has been deleted twice and the only significant author of both versions is Quixotic92.
 * Around after the prod tagging, Rrindie126, a new sockpuppet, appeared and removed the prod tag. Then the AfD began. Rrindie eventually started to oppose the AfD. Later, Quixotic92 supports Rrindie126. After the sudden deletion of both two posts by Quixotic92, they then brought the discussion to the talk page.
 * Rrindie later votes again and accuses us of not discussing towards consensus, defending Quixotic92 and Kmzgirl.
 * Rrindie126 also posted at the talk page of a relevant image, trying to tell not to delete the image.
 * Comments

You guys are insane. If you read the discussion, Kmzgirl said Dominic was HER friend, not mine, not quixotic92's. I do not know him, and I am in no way affiliated with either Kmzgirl and Quixotic92 in any way, shape, or form. What are your guys' problems with newcomers? And if you pull any IP address crap with me or anyone else involved in this for that matter, I'm not going to believe any of it because for all I know you could be making the IP's up. Wasn't this all started over "proof" anyways?

The page got deleted anyways so who the hack cares anyways? And if you also noticed, Kmzgirl and Quixotic92 stated they weren't even gonna come around anymore anyways. Also, isn't the AfD thing supposed to be a discussion where everyone talks about why the page should stay? Since when is discussion DISRUPTION?!?!

Just drop it!

P.S. And if you wanna play this "sockpuppet" game, I have several websites with proof that all of you admins play that game and have several "sockpuppet" accounts yourselves. So if you nail me for an alleged misdemeanor that's not even true, you're all just a bunch of hypocrites. Like I said, JUST DROP IT!

P.P.S. And by the way, you guys weren't establishing a consensus. If you were, we wouldn't be having this discussion because you all wouldn't be sore over the fact I have stuff AGAINST Wikipedia that reveals how you all REALLY work. Besides, aren't you jumping to conclusions by already accusing us all of being sockpuppets, hmm? For all I know, you could be a sockpuppet of CalendarWatcher that's upset because Quixotic92 called them a snotfaced nerd.

Once again... JUST DROP IT!!!                         --Rrindie126 (talk) 01:01, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok since all of you CONTINUE to make FALSE ACCUSATIONS, I have posted this on both overseeing mods pages: Edit: Prior to this post I recieved an "attack" notice. I'm not attacking, I'm stating a point.

Alright, I've honestly had enough of all this Wikipedia BS. I have assumed good faith. I have given you all a chance. If you read the talk page on this case, Alexius08 is equally as guilty of not "assuming good faith". Alexius08 just went in and on over irrelevant matter, and was COMPLETELY biased against all of the defendants. Whoever Alexius08 is, they gave us no leniency because they just accused us of everything under the sun with little or no ACTUAL RELEVANT supporting evidence. "Assume good faith"... yeah right! So just to expedite this, I'm going to say some RELEVANT stuff. Wikipedia is a useless corrupted community full of partisan views, and hypocrisy among elitist leaders (a.k.a bullies). Now I know why those articles and blogs about you guys were written. In fact, I'm going to go write one myself, and just to let all of you know, I practically hold the world.

I thought this discussion was over anyways when the article got deleted. Why do you all keep perpetuating this?

--Rrindie126 (talk) 02:48, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Because sockpuppetry is not only wrong, but also is against official Wikipedia policy. Using alternative accounts in a deceptive manner (i.e. for "votestacking" or to falsely create a sense of consensus) can result in a block and likely of the indefinite kind. Have a nice day, MuZemike  ( talk ) 06:43, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Note — removing User:Kmzgirl from the case as the checkuser has confirmed that said user is unrelated to the above. Also, there is no proof of meatpuppetry present, as the commenting style is different from the other two users in question. MuZemike ( talk ) 07:16, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Checkuser results


 * Please see Requests for checkuser/Case/Quixotic92 - A l is o n  ❤ 03:46, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't believe any of it. For all I know you guys could be making all this up. Where's your relevant non-trivial proof from third party sources - not Wikipedia?

And I told you we (kmzgirl and I) weren't related in any way, and I'm not related to quixotic92 contrary to your checkuser report. That is why I do not believe it. --Rrindie126 (talk) 14:43, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I love the way no one has responded on this topic to let all of us know what's going on. Rrindie126 (talk) 22:20, 6 October 2008 (UTC)


 * A checkuser confirms that you are one and the same. This is not an online social gathering where people often screw up other people for fun. Wikipedia is serious and encompasses a vast group of people. We are not here to lie about something that is done routinely. Undead Warrior (talk) 05:38, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Your suspected IP address is 71.34.239.151, as the AfD shows. This Geolocate lookup shows that you're from Medford, Oregon. Is it true? Alexius08 (talk) 05:55, 7 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Uh....I don't think you should have posted that one. Undead Warrior (talk) 17:17, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

The sock (Rrindie126) has been blocked indefinitely. SunDragon34 (talk) 00:19, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Conclusions