Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Iwazaki

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:Iwazaki

Suspected sockpuppeteer

• Iwazaki (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
  

Suspected sockpuppets

• Sennen goroshi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
  

Report submission by:Bermudatriangle (talk) 06:08, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Evidence:

Dhirrosses has pointed out[1] the following evidence that User:Sennen goroshi is possible User:Iwazaki by these Edit Summary and the diff, where the phrases "...care to explain" and "...care to answer" are proceeded by "..." .

When I asked "Are you Iwazaki?", the answer was somewhat suspicious and startered with "We are not here to discuss any IDs that I may or may not have." and then only the user conferred, "But for the record, no, I am not Iwazaki, we both live in Japan.."

User:Iwazaki, User:Lahiru k and User:Snowolfd4 were heavily debated to delete Rajkumar Kanagasingam article from wikipedia.

There are more evidences on this and this.

The removal of the Institute's details from the Diana, Princess of Wales started with User:Lahiru k[2]and then by User:Sennen goroshi [3]and the "Speedy Deletion" of the(Sri_Lanka)_Princess_Diana_Institute_of_Peace by User:Snowolfd4 [4]. He came to the scene after many months of interval.

An uninvolved editor who facilitated the removal/addition of the "Princess Diana Institute of Peace" on Diana, Princess of Wales also pointed out[5], "I believe it is highly probable that Bermudatriangle is a sockpuppet of someone. I also believe that is quite possible that User:Sennen goroshi is also a sock/secondary account."

But the User responded that is a personal attack and demanded for checkuser on his/her account[6].

Comments:

Iwazaki has been gone since December 2007. He was given two temporary blocks but no permanent block, and he left voluntarily. Sennen goroshi, as an account with 8+ months experience, is unlikely to be anybody's sock, and even if this allegation is true, there is no violation of policy in the last 5+ months. I see no reason to intervene. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 07:09, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

But the intention of edits shows the current dispute on the article Diana, Princess of wales is the extension of the previous conflicts in the Sri Lanka related issues.Bermudatriangle (talk) 07:33, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Conclusion: Okay, I see what happened. Somebody alleged, without evidence, that Sennen goroshi is a sockpuppet. Sennen goroshi says, don't make baseless allegations: if you really think I'm a sockpuppet, go file a report. Bermudatriangle calls his bluff and files a report.

As I already said, I see no evidence that Sennen goroshi is a sockpuppet, and I think it's highly unlikely. There's a dispute here, but I'm not equipped to resolve it. Sorry. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 14:54, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Addendum: This request appears to be in retaliation for Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Rajkumar Kanagasingam, where Bermudatriangle is accused by Sennen. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 14:55, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh dear, where to begin with this sad little report?

1. Dhirrosses said I was a sockpuppet? one small detail that has been left out of this report regarding Dhirrosses is that the account was made, shortly after Bermudatriangle got blocked, and was used solely to accuse me of sockpuppetry, when I reported this account to an admin, it was indef blocked. So you have a indef blocked sockpuppet account, accusing me of sockpuppetry.

2. When I was asked if I was Iwazaki, my response was to be expected, I made it abundantly clear that I was not Iwazaki, and I said that despite me answering, this was neither the time, nor the place. That is because Bermudatriangle had attempted to turn my sockpuppet report against himself, into his Q and A session, I was not about to have my report filled with such BS, and asked him to talk about on my talkpage.

3. Which brings us to the person who filed the report - Bermudatriange. He was been warned for his racist comments, he has been blocked due to my 3RR report, and he is currently the subject of an ongoing sockpuppet investigation, started by me. Seems strange he didn't mention those details in this report. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/Rajkumar_Kanagasingam

4. Iwazaki, What do I have in common with this dude? We both reside in Japan. Along with another aprox 135 million people. We certainly don't share a similar editing history. From checking his contribs, he seems to like editing pretty much only articles that have something to do with Sri Lanka, and more specifically terrorism in Sri Lanka. Before I chanced upon the Institute of Peace article, I had never touched a Sri Lanka article. What was I doing? making a sockpuppet, making 1500 edits on unrelated topics, just in the hope that I could mess with a Sri Lanka article, once I had given myself some credibility?

5. This report is a waste of time, not backed up with any evidence, and an obvious (poor) attempt at retaliating against myself, for the 3RR report, the sockpuppet report and the edits relating to the Institute of Peace. I suggest sanctions against Bermudatriangle, in the form of an indef block, for abusing wikipedia procedures in order to make such an unfounded and malicous report.

6. After reading the above, I am trying to understand what evidence has been shown? the fact that I say "care to explain" ??? is that it? If any admin wishes to use checkuser, I encourage them to do so, to bring this mess to a close as soon as possible.

Sennen goroshi (talk) 14:56, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

I've removed the archive tags for now until I decide how to address the larger dispute. Basically, I agree with Sennen goroshi. Bermudatriangle's filing of this report violated WP:POINT. An indef-block may be too much: I need to review this case before I make a recommendation on how to respond to him. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 15:13, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

My opinion (not that it means much, considering I am just an editor) is that, you are right, an indef block for making a malicious report would be over the top. However, when I look at the whole picture and see a single purpose account, which is a pretty good candidate for being either a sockpuppet or meatpuppet, making disrputive edits with no respect for consensus, a block for 3RR, a warning for racism, a warning for abusing edit summaries. There might be editors who cause lots of problems, and don't receive indef blocks, because the trouble they cause is balanced with the good edits they make, that does not apply to this user. Single purpose, contributes nothing, detracts from wikipedia - all of the above from an account that is about 5 weeks old. Sennen goroshi (talk) 15:24, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Don't try to have too many roles here on wikipedia. Who are you to suggest an indef block? What is the authority have you got? 3RR is not a big violation. I never meant my comment should be directed towards racism, but that was interpreted as such a away. Don't bully others here. You have corrupted edit history. You are using widely the words "fucking" and "asshole" and if one question you are telling wikipedia is not censored. Even your UserSpace carries the agony of other affected Users. Put your home in order first.Bermudatriangle (talk) 16:36, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Bermuda, for the benefit of the other people who have to read this, I don't think I will reply unless there is new evidence or something interesting happens. Please talk to me on my talkpage, if you would like a discussion, although I am going to sleep soon, I will reply as and when I can. Sennen goroshi (talk) 17:05, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

From another User's experince with you, I also feel, "Talking with you is not productive but exhausting myself, so I've chosen not to talk with you.REGARDS"Bermudatriangle (talk) 17:20, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Closing. Inconclusive and probably a bad faith filing. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:48, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

---