User:Mattisse//myBox9

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Your admin toolbox is needed

This edit [1] contains personal information that perhaps should be rm'd from history. Cheers! Anger22 19:15, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

PS I am watching the other situation as well. Another editor(more familiar with the pointer) is in battle over several articles now. Anger22 19:22, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Do me a quick favour if you will. Follow the conversation at the bottom of my talk page.(I don't normally converse with trolls but on this occasion I thought some advice might help a user with a tainted history) Then follow that users plea at ani and the response the user got. Some days I understand why MightyMoose22 quit this place altogether. Sigh! Anger22 17:09, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for looking through the mud and seeing it clearly. And I guess I'm a she?? That particular user is also puppet master for a drawers worth of socks(see also earlier cry for help on my talk page) who tag without any pre-plan to actually edit in what can only be called an extreme case of WP:POINT. Nothing positive will ever come from that. It's wiki-snobbery at it's highest. If the user would actually step back and cite the articles she tags(I will AGF that maybe she will this time) the project would benefit from it as it would turn several notable Blues guitarist articles from starts to B's or even GA's. One could only hope. Cheers! Anger22 17:51, 23 October 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Mattisse

Do be aware that this is not the first time Mattisse has gone on a tagging spree. The first time she tagged every article listed in Starwood Festival. She then created multiple sockpuppets to continue tagging the same set of articles. Several of us suspect that Timmy12 is a sockpuppet being used by Mattisse to do such tagging now. Ekajati (yakity-yak) 19:23, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

No, that whole list of restrictions, etc. on checkuser is completely intimidating. I would prefer if this came to the attention of an admin who could file the checkuser. I noticed that Hanuman Das tried to open a sockpuppetry case on it Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Mattisse (3rd) but got shot down, even though there are two similar earlier complaints that got confirmed: Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Mattisse & Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Mattisse (2nd). Ekajati (yakity-yak) 19:44, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
There was a Sockpuppet check which was closed as not similar enough to demonstrate a sockpuppet relationship. --Salix alba (talk) 20:17, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Yes, AFAIK, a checkuser has never been done. After reading all the restrictions on the use of checkuser, I prefer for an admin to file the request. The users in question seem to think that my pointing out the similarity of pattern between the two users modus operandi plus the overlap in the articles targeted is harrassment. Can an admin please follow up on doing a checkuser and/or looking into this further? Ekajati (yakity-yak) 21:51, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
If you think so. I am surprised that someone who has a history involving 18 sockpuppets over three different incidents has not been indefinitely blocked. How many times do you have to be warned and have sockpuppets blocked before it becomes "serious"? The second incident involved stacking of AfDs, apparently. Why is this user still free to continue this activity? Ekajati (yakity-yak) 21:57, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
Here's the stacked AfD: [2]. No less than 5 of Mattisse's confirmed socks voted or commented on it: Mattisse, GBYork, NLOleson, Gjeatman. and AgastNeey - although I guess they didn't stack the vote as it looks like they cancel each other out...but there were other single-purpose accounts likely to have been the same user. The article had to be undeleted, the AfD reopened, and the article ended up being kept w/o Mattisse's interference. Ekajati (yakity-yak) 22:15, 23 October 2006 (UTC)