Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Acetotyce

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Acetotyce[edit]

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was IAR Keep This is a sock-puppetry investigation with something that needs to be looked into. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 18:03, 13 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am surprised no checkuser or patrolling admin/clerks have noticed this SPI as it has evolved into a very disruptive argument. I have been accused of sockpuppetry of an account that isn't mine and all proof that it isn't is everywhere on the SPI page and elsewhere, this page has been used a harassment and an attempt to remove me from the project with DocumentError requesting that my accounts to be blocked indefinitely [1] following my retirement which I reconsidered as I will not let myself go down without seeking justice. I request this page be deleted as it is only causing trouble to good editors and none other than harrasment against me and another editor. Acetotyce (talk) 01:53, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The account in question (WikiButterfly) was formerly a registered alt account of Acetotyce. Acetotyce gave-up the account 30 days before it became active again - its only off-userspace edits since then (and as of the timestamp of this post) have been to support Acetotyce in edit discussions. After the SPI was opened, primary account Acetotyce, first, left a strange "apology" on my User page in which he/she said his/her aim was to "start fresh" and "consider this my honest plea and apology for my actions earlier," which I construed to be an admission of puppetry. [2] After I indicated I felt the SPI should continue regardless of his/her aim to "start fresh," editor suddenly announced his/her retirement [3]. (In the past, other socks have retired once an SPI has been opened in order to evade a block, then suddenly returned after the SPI was closed.) The backlog at SPI has caused this case to languish, however, and Acetotyce then suddenly un-retired with a prominent page note that WikiButterfly was "a close affiliate" whatever that means (though this was previously denied) to try to get the SPI closed through this unconventional means. A suspicious pattern of activity does not warrant "conviction," but it does warrant investigation, which is all the SPI is; there is no harm letting it run its course. Also, the phrase "I will not let myself go down without seeking justice" [4] is strange and troubling, to say the least. DocumentError (talk) 04:08, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

When I say "a close affiliate" as clearly highlighted on my userpage well before the SPi, meaning the user is close to me. Where is this "suspiscious activity" you talk of, and neither one of us has ever edited disruptively and highlights that you are simply harrasing editors, and failing to assume good faith. This page also seems to lack any evidence that WikiButterfly is even a sockpuppet or meatpuppet, and shouldn't be here. My retirement edit was thanked by DocumentError [5]which gave me every reason to come back and start an MFd for this disruptive page. --Acetotyce (talk) 13:41, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanking someone for an edit is a form of harassment? When you say things like this it makes it difficult to AGF in your commitment to "a fresh start" on WP. DocumentError (talk) 17:06, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't recall fresh starting, clarify that to me. Be careful on what edit you "thank" as it can be provocative depending on what edit you "thank". --Acetotyce (talk) 17:57, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Acetotyce is quite right about the other editor trying to force editors who disagree with him off the project. I also will not be bullied into leaving wikipedia by an editor who specializes in error. He failed to prove any of his accusations against me as well. Legacypac (talk) 20:33, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On a side note, what is going on with users saying they are retired and then just coming back. For Acetotyce I can understand that you might want to clear your reputation first but DocError also claimed they were retiring because of "bullying" a little while back but that only lasted a couple of days. It seems to me if you are going to retire don't stay retired for 5 minutes and then come back. - SantiLak (talk) 20:49, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

great point DocumentError (talk) 22:29, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Legacypac - what specific accusations did I make against you? I requested you stop moving pages against consensus, you replied by calling me a "crying" "anti-America" "hissy fit" throwing editor and PBS came and sorted it all out by explaning the difference between RfC and RM [[6]]. How is that "trying to force" you "off the project?" With all due respect, you seem to revel injecting yourself into conversations of editors with whom you've had past editorial disagreements on IS-related topics with declarations of how you've been wronged in the past. This has the same unsettling sensibility as Acetotyce's above declaration that he would go down in flames fighting for justice or whatever it was. While I personally wish everyone would focus on content creation instead of trying to "stir the pot" I accept we're all at WP for different reasons. DocumentError (talk) 22:18, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Details in my original reply. This is already too long for me to start quoting myself. DocumentError (talk) 22:28, 12 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.