Cannabis Ruderalis

thcscience_admin
If you are creating a new request about this user, please add it to the top of the page, above this notice. Don't forget to add
{{Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Mattisse}}
to the checkuser page here. Previous requests (shown below), and this box, will be automatically hidden on Requests for checkuser (but will still appear here).
The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a Request for checkuser. Please do not modify it.

Mattisse[edit]

  • Code letter: F
  • Block record: [3]

Filed at recommendation of TenOfAllTrades based on discussion here. This is a followup on inconclusive sockpuppet complaint Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Mattisse (3rd). Suspected puppet is stalking Rosencomet and undoing all his edits. Rosencomet was previously harassed in similar ways by Mattisse who is currently blocked for 3RR, so if this is a sock, she is currently using to evade a ban. Further info on previous socks of Mattisse:

Ekajati (yakity-yak) 16:00, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Addition: I'd like to make an addition to this RFCU regarding Mattisse. I would like to add Xampt (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) to the list of sockpuppets of Mattisse per her conversation with me on my talk page. The editing patterns are pretty much the same: tagging lots of citations needed, India-related topics, interest in the Fidel Castro article, and a return to the talk pages of several users she had issues with in the past. Metros232 22:01, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: "A more pertinent issue to examine might be the probable linkspamming by Rosencomet (talk · contribs) of his website, often using the claim that they're "citations". --Calton | Talk 00:45, 26 October 2006 (UTC)" I am adding this from Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (section) - Stalking, vandalism, possible sockpuppetry evasion of block by Timmy12 Mattisse(talk) 03:25, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: Although that may be an issue, this is an RFCU, and therefore the actions of anyone not listed on the users-to-be-checked list is irrelevant. If you have a problem with another user, please use WP:DR. Any further comments which deviate from the subject of this RFCU may be moved to the talk page. Daniel.Bryant 11:03, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I urge acceptance of this checkuser request. Something is amiss here. That's not to say there isn't a seperate issue of link spamming, however. --kingboyk 12:28, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Xampt  Confirmed, no others. Dmcdevit·t 07:05, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sorry to sound so dense, but what are you confirming, exactly? Depending on how you read it, this post is confirming that something is amiss, that Xampt is a sockpuppet, or that there is linkspamming going on. Would you mind expanding this comment a bit? Sorry, no need to answer. I figured out the context. Maury 01:56, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mattisse[edit]

 Clerk note: The following sockpuppets were reported by Rdsmith (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) on 2 September 2006 at User talk:Mattisse [6].


Listerin[edit]

Both accounts show up at similar times with similar views regarding school deletion. Both are interested in Goad, SEFA, schools, and little else. User:Capit has a long string of mainspace edit-count bumping edits (tag placement, change, removal), but none of the mainspace edits I saw actually did anything. Hipocrite - «Talk» 13:11, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note:They don't always seem to be the same [7] and they voted the same two times. Capit seems to some AfD activity, but mainly just various page tagging [8]. Listerin does seem to have only a small number of edits, mostly AfD related, which is suspicious. It might be better to present more evidence other than common interests and two votes.Voice-of-All 18:31, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed I'm afraid it goes a bit further than this. Other socks include:

  1. Teek (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
  2. Massmato (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
  3. Trunk (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

The sockmaster in this instance is Mattisse (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki), formerly known as KarenAnn (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). The user changed their name on July 24 (see [9] log). I've blocked the socks indefinitely, and have additionally blocked Mattisse for 24 hours for disruption of the encyclopedia. Mackensen (talk) 20:18, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New request

Back again. User:Orangehead, who I have taken care not to bite, somehow is already using "be allowed to organically grow,"[10] and "it's a Wikipedia rule that you can't delete schools."[11] Sole contributions are to AFD, user has same "this place is so big and confusing I don't understand what's going on" form as User:Capit, appears out of nowhere the day after blocks above implimented, knows to create userpage in second edit, and writes "my monobook.js" in said userpage.[12]. Account possibly used by many people per statements on my talk page, but confusing. Hipocrite - «Talk» 20:53, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: Based on the discussion (which I moved to the talk page, by the way), it looks like Orangehead has acknowledged using the same computer as Mattisse. Is this correct? And is there further need for a checkuser investigation? (Whether to believe her explanation, and what to do about it, is a subject for another forum somewhere.) Thatcher131 (talk) 05:03, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see no need to continue with this request, no. Checkuser is only for cases where there is technical evidence. If the disruptive users are grandchildren of the good user, and under their authority, it would be best for Mattisse to ban her grandchildren from using the computer. In any case, I expect that I will see no more disruptive sockpuppeting in school afds.Hipocrite - «Talk» 11:48, 1 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the Request for checkuser. Please do not modify it.
Subsequent requests related to this user should be made above, in a new section.


source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Mattisse

Leave a Reply