Houston, TX, eh? Wasn't Enviroknot from Houston?
On 13/12/06, Tariq Ab- Jo- Tu- <tariqabjotu(a)gmail.com> wrote:
And they're both Houston, Texas IP addresses... (see WP:ANI post under
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:ANI#RunedChozo_.28talk_.E2.80.A2_contribs.2…
,
earlier e-mail). The coincidences seem just too many.
Luna wrote:
George Herbert wrote:
As far as I can see, it's entirely over his
editing of his talk page,
removing unblock request refusals and re-unblock-requesting, plus
arguing with people there.
As a personal opinion - lengthening blocks due to ongoing argument
ONLY on a blockee's talk page is among the worst abuses that a pack of
administrators can commit, ganging up on someone.
RunedChozo came into the argument with a bunch of abuses he'd
committed counting against him, and certainly was being disruptive on
several levels. He did have one point that I see - Itaquallah did use
inappropriate edit summaries and remove material with source info
claiming it's unsourced. There was a two-sided abusive edit war going
on; Itaquallah was not an innocent party there, and should have been
warned against that.
It's hard to see this and not wonder if RunedChozo is too disruptive
to be a Wikipedia participant, but a bunch of admins have gone and
collectively beaten up on someone in a way which is not called for or
appropriate. If someone can't stop being a dick on their talk page
while they're blocked, admins need to just walk away and let them cool
down.
Bad day.
All in all, I like that post. I don't think we'll all completely agree
on
everything, but you're attempting to be fair
and objective, and I like
that.
Moving on to the checkuser results -- Essjay reports that it's
"possible"
RunedChozo and 70.114.237.14 are the same
person.
"Possible" means just that. It's objectively possible that it's the
same
person, but also objectively possible that it's not -- meaning that
there
are other people active in this IP range, most
likely. We're probably
not
going to get a solid result, through checkuser;
that evidence seems
circumstantial.
George Herbert brings up an interesting point -- RunedChozo has a strong
tendency to edit at about 10:00-15:00 (my time), but 70.114.237.14 was
editing only between 20:00-23:00 (my time). I can only find two
exceptions
to this, in RunedChozo's edit history:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RunedChozo&diff=pre…
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RunedChozo&diff=pre…
> Both were on 18 November, at about
22:40. This seems to hint away from
> RunedChozo being 70.114.237.14, but given such a brief sampling, it's
> difficult to be entirely certain. We know that he *can* stay up until
> whatever time that is, locally, but also that he does so rarely.
> 70.114.237.14 has two main
"periods" -- once, at 20:16-20:34 on 10
December
(about half a day before RunedChozo's block @
11:45, 11 December), where
the
primary activity was apparently trolling at
Striver. It's possible this
was
another user, or also possible it was a
registered user logging out to
attempt to avoid responsibility for attacks. The IP's second block of
edits
comes at 21:32-22:34, 11 December (about 10 hours
after RunedChozo's
block),
and the first edit again attacks Striver. The IP
then proceeds to the
AN/I
thread RunedChozo started, and makes some more
attacks before being
blocked,
> at which point it continues at its talk page.
> Given the IP started its second block
by attacking Striver, I think we
can
> at least assume the 70.114.237.14 was the same user, both days.
> So, I decided to check if RunedChozo
has had any previous interaction
with
Striver. He has. On 14 November, he made two
edits to Striver's talk
page:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Striver&diff=prev&a…
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Striver&diff=prev&a…
> They appear to have been clashing
over these:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Beit_Hanoun_No…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Israeli_shelli…
> This evidence doesn't seem to
clearly pin RunedChozo as 70.114.237.14,
but
it does establish that he had an antagonistic
relationship with Striver,
and
> we do know that 70.114.237.14 attacked Striver's userpage.
> I can see a few other similarities
between RunedChozo and 70.114.237.14.
> Both consider Striver to be an anti-Israeli POV-pusher and/or
anti-semite.
Both consider the Muslim Guild to be a group of
meatpuppets or some
other
> form of conspiracy.
> They both refer to Future Perfect as
a "tool"
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Muhammad_as_a_diplomat&d…
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Future_Perfect_at_Sunri…
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_notic…
> Both call Tariqabjotu and Itaqallah
"liars" frequently
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RunedChozo&diff=pre…
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RunedChozo&diff=pre…
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_notic…
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_notic…
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_notic…
> And as is no doubt obvious to any
interested party by this point, they
both
> seem to have a high interest in the exact same AN/I thread and the same
> article (Beit Hanoun November 2006 incident).
> So, what do we think?
> -Luna
> _______________________________________________
> WikiEN-l mailing list
> WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
> To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
>
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
_______________________________________________
WikiEN-l mailing list
WikiEN-l(a)Wikipedia.org
To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit:
http://mail.wikipedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l