Wikipedia Review article up for deletion Options

[Tarc]

This should be interesting.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipedia Review (3rd nomination) (T-H-L-K-D)

Nominated by User:Rabbit:Farmer:Gun:Run... (T-H-L-K-D), a user who created one article on "rabbit pie" June of last year, then a few edits today before nominating this article for deletion.

Any guesses on this sockpuppet's identity?

[EricBarbour]

Look at Edison's earliest userpages. You'll see this.

I am an electrical engineer, with a graduate degree in experimental psychology. I am interested in politics, music, genealogy, photography, religion, science and technology, the Civil War, and the history of electrical and electronic technology, radio, and television. Thomas Edison and Michael Faraday are particular heroes. I am interested in giving appropriate recognition to scientists and inventors whose contributions may have been obscured by the more famous or financially successful persons who used earlier work without crediting the person who developed the device or process.

At the same time, I wish to refute invalid claims that someone who tinkered with a device was the "true inventor" when their work did not verifiably influence the course of development of the device. Success has a thousand fathers. After someone developed the first usable and practical version of a device in the 19th century, it was common for competitors seeking to invalidate the patent to bring forth fraudulent claimants, complete with post-dated documents, lying witnesses, and prototypes supposedly decades old but in fact newly made. A thousand unreferenced books and websites validate a claim less than a public demonstration, a publication with details of the invention or discovery, or a patent application.

How interesting that this clown, who obviously should know better, fought to kill the WR article.
Then abruptly reverses course when Tarc posts actual references. I think he's another admin sock.

"WR Reader". Hah. Yet another throwaway sock.

I'm beginning to suspect that on average, roughly 15% of the votes in AFDs, RFAs,
Arbcom candidacies, etc. are sock accounts. 15% seems to be the magic number in the
bizarro universe of Wikipedia. We see it again and again.