Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/TingMing

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Comment by Vic226

Previously, I filed an Arbitration request against Nationalist, but it was considered unnecessary by the ArbCom because Nationalist will eventually get indef. banned should the sockpuppetry continue. However, I would like to stress that block evasions are quite easy in this internet world, and I find it surprising for sockpuppetry to be an excessively recurring problem in Wikipedia. Now that TingMing was checked only to be a possible but not confirmed a sockpuppet, I would rather like to see some actions taken from the higher powers. I do not doubt the ArbCom's last decisions, but I feel that it was being treated too lightly as it was taken for granted that the problem will solve by itself. Instead, half a year has passed, but nothing has changed about this struggle with one of the more aggressive editors who pushes his own POV (I can claim this as I have yet to see any support for his standpoint) throughout the Wikipedia, therefore disrupting it in general, without taking in any opinion from other editors. Vic₂₂₆ 19:38, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I would like to urge TingMing not to translate the CheckUser result to his own flavor. It is written clearly that he is a possible sockpuppet of Nationalist, and that warrants our suspicion on him. While we can't rule that he is definitely a sock of Nationalist, there are no grounds for him to change the meaning of "possible" to "unrelated". I would like someone to get a dictionary to look up "possible" and tell me in what part would "possible" mean "innocent" in any way. Vic₂₂₆ 03:21, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Also, for the CheckUser case, I am only pointing out the obvious part, which is the decision made by CheckUser, rather than trying to spur up more offense against TingMing with make-believe facts as he accused me to be. Simple as this: there is no apparent evidence in the CheckUser result that "proved" TingMing's "innocence" of being Nationalist's sockpuppet as he suggested. I also want to say that I have nothing to do with the accusation of TingMing being a sockpuppet of Heqong or anything because I barely have any knowledge about Heqong.

About TingMing's claim ([1]), I would like to state that it does not matter what the original was as it could be factually wrong/POV-biased in its first edit anyway. One does not engage in revert war when a change was made, but instead start a discussion for an agreement between both parties. And by that it does not mean presenting one's opinion and attempt to completely convince another almost by force. Oh, and saying someone is "extremely counter productive" is not really assuming good faith.

Quoting from Certified.Gansta-Ideogram decisions proposal: "Wikipedia editors are expected to adhere to policy regardless of the behavior of those they are in disputes with; inappropriate behavior by others does not legitimize one's own." In addition to the evidences both TingMing and Jerrypp772000 provided (either for defense or for accusation), here is another attack message left in Ideogram's talk page: [2]. After Ideogram reverted it as personal attack ("Comment on the content, not the contributor" and ArbCom's ruling of individual freedom to edit/revert own talk page even if offensive to others should apply), TingMing started a revert war against him, reverting his attack message back and forth again and again. In addition, his self-contradicting statement informing others to have good faith (while he himself isn't) and further attempt to defame Ideogram, followed by his attempt to twist the CheckUser result to his flavor, suggest his belligerent personality against other editors, and should be dealt with proper actions. Vic₂₂₆ 20:55, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

I also welcome a CheckUser request against Jerrypp772000 and me for "possible" sockpuppetry as TingMing claimed. If proven wrong, however, it would suggest his tendency to pull out baseless accusations against other editors who go against his edits. Vic₂₂₆ 21:16, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comment by Loren36

For reference, the CheckUser on User:TingMing returned plausible, based on geographic region. It should be noted that Nationalist has been known to create new sockpuppets using other ISPs in an attempt to defeat CheckUser requests (see User talk:Chunghwa Republic for example), though such socks are easily identifiable from their common belligerent behavior. -Loren 04:37, 24 April 2007 (UTC)