John254 and Kristen Eriksen sockpuppets? Options

[Anonymous editor]

Smith Jones even proves that he knows how to spell sockpuppet in the very same edit, but chooses to spell it three or four different ways.

[C H]

Smith Jones even proves that he knows how to spell sockpuppet in the very same edit, but chooses to spell it three or four different ways.

Yes, he is clearly a joke account, and I for one find him hilarious!

[Eva Destruction]

This pearl of wisdom from John has got to be my favorite edit in the history of Wikipedia; thanks to "Kristen" for pointing it out. (This gem earlier today is a close second.)

[Bottled_Spider]

This pearl of wisdom from John has got to be my favorite edit in the history of Wikipedia; thanks to "Kristen" for pointing it out. (This gem earlier today is a close second.)

"You probably have a two inch willy. Whether you're a boy or a girl" ......
Mr. 212.44.61.190 is accusing you of transexualism and/or hermaphroditism? I'd sue. I'd bloody sue.

[Alison]

This pearl of wisdom from John has got to be my favorite edit in the history of Wikipedia; thanks to "Kristen" for pointing it out. (This gem earlier today is a close second.)

"You probably have a two inch willy. Whether you're a boy or a girl" ......
Mr. 212.44.61.190 is accusing you of transexualism and/or hermaphroditism? I'd sue. I'd bloody sue.

Iridescent is a 'she'. I strongly suspect she has a two-inch willy kept in a jar of formaldehyde in the bathroom or something. A trophy from a particularly egregious vandal maybe?.

[gomi]

I strongly suspect she has a two-inch willy kept in a jar of formaldehyde in the bathroom. A trophy from a particularly egregious vandal maybe?

You're projecting again, Allie.

[CharlotteWebb]

John254 is bad news.

See...

http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=15420&hl=

...and other crimes.

I'll vouch that John is clueless at times but he might be more BLP-sensitive than you give him credit for, or maybe he just likes to cite the policy. I searched his edit summaries and came up with a few sample edits. You can decide I guess:
*Rachel Marsden [1][2]
*Roman Polański [3] (n.b. this is a bureaucratically correct removal as he escaped after "pleading guilty" but before being "found guilty")
*Rick Ross [4]
*Jerome Corsi [5]
*Vicky Iseman [6]
*Adam Clayton Powell IV (who??) [7]

Some less-notable people he has nominated for deletion on the basis of BLP:
*Eyad Ismail [8]
*Djamel Zitouni [9]
*James Coburn (criminal) [10] (Edit: my mistake this person is deceased, as is his namesake the actor. No lower standard should apply however.)

Also I recall him filing an RFAR alleging that other editors were violating BLP in relation to the Eric Lerner article. [11]

My observation is that his efforts in this area tend to be poorly received by pretty much everyone. Forget it, John. It's Chinatown.

(n.b. I will note that Kristen does not share John's annoying habit of linking the name of every user he mentions by name, every time, often twice in the same sentence. Assuming they are the same person this could mean he is conscious of this quirk.)

This post has been edited by CharlotteWebb: Tue 27th January 2009, 8:41pm

[the fieryangel]

Getting back to the NNN subject at hand, when I started the original KE thread (as Carruthers), it wasn't just because I was wikistalking this delicious dish: I was tipped off by a CU that something was rotten in Denmark. The fact that something is indeed fishy about her and her story (the nude editing, the crazy ex-boyfriend, the porno history) goes without saying.

It's only a matter of time before somebody figures out who it is. Krimpet could very well be right, but even if she isn't, something is going on here.

[CharlotteWebb]

Getting back to the NNN subject at hand, when I started the original KE thread (as Carruthers), it wasn't just because I was wikistalking this delicious dish: I was tipped off by a CU that something was rotten in Denmark. The fact that something is indeed fishy about her and her story (the nude editing, the crazy ex-boyfriend, the porno history) goes without saying.

It's only a matter of time before somebody figures out who it is. Krimpet could very well be right, but even if she isn't, something is going on here.

Yeah, this would disappoint anyone hoping for a "massive conspiracy" (say what, John acted alone in this?)

[Eva Destruction]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Adm...Unblock_request

i find it aht it does not beat hte laugh testthat htis user has so quickly acomplied a detailed set of dilinated separatives between herself and John. i am asssumin g good faith that kristen and john are not the same, but the style of which they argue seems increasingly simular -- i compared x here re: to y here (where x = john and y = kristen) and they are strikingly similar in connotative denunciation.
further more i declare this kristen eriksen as compared to john254. in this matter, you can see the striking similarities between their edit contributions ratio. kristen has like 46% article contribs to john's 38%, which is only a few percentage points off when revised with the standard mean in these types of cases.
none of this proves byon a shadow of a doubt that they are sockpuppets but it does estlabish a patern of strange and overlapping edits that should be discussed inf urther despite "Nordic goddes" Kristens objections to te contraire. Smith Jones (talk) 21:22, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Smith Jones, whoever's behind you, I take my hat off to them.

This post has been edited by Eva Destruction: Tue 27th January 2009, 9:36pm

[EricBarbour]

i find it aht it does not beat hte laugh testthat htis user has so quickly acomplied a detailed set of dilinated separatives between herself and John. i am asssumin g good faith that kristen and john are not the same, but the style of which they argue seems increasingly simular -- i compared x here re: to y here (where x = john and y = kristen) and they are strikingly similar in connotative denunciation.

Aagh! Head hurts!

If I had this time, this is the kind of subversion I'd do.....

(The one below it is even more stupid.)

[that one guy]

About time. Now if we could only take care of another obvious combo.

[Eva Destruction]

I'll vouch that John is clueless at times but he might be more BLP-sensitive than you give him credit for, or maybe he just likes to cite the policy. […]

My abiding memory of him was his "non admin close as keep" of this AFD, which was possibly the oddest interpretation of "consensus" I ever saw.

That AFD was on an article written by User:MurderWatcher1, incidentally, who is possibly the single oddest character amongst Wikipedia's entire corps of editors (and that's against some stiff competition). His userpage makes for fascinating reading.

[that one guy]

Can someone explain how that userpage is still there?

[Bottled_Spider]

This pearl of wisdom from John has got to be my favorite edit in the history of Wikipedia; thanks to "Kristen" for pointing it out. (This gem earlier today is a close second.)

"You probably have a two inch willy. Whether you're a boy or a girl" ......
Mr. 212.44.61.190 is accusing you of transexualism and/or hermaphroditism? I'd sue. I'd bloody sue.

Iridescent is a 'she'. I strongly suspect she has a two-inch willy kept in a jar of formaldehyde in the bathroom or something. A trophy from a particularly egregious vandal maybe?.

Mystery solved - it's not this Eva/Iridescent person that has a microscopic appendage - it's the Incredible Hulk. Poor wee Leah. Kids, indeed, should not be exposed to this kind of thing.

[Eva Destruction]

Can someone explain how that userpage is still there?

Because if you delete it he WILL FIND YOU OUT AND WE WILL MEET IN REAL LIFE! TRUST ME YOU WON'T LIKE THAT!, probably.

[Krimpet]

It's hard for me to take Krimpet seriously; too often her behavior strikes me as trollish. I haven't forgotten about that link to that toxic site she tried to trick everyone into visiting.

Just to clarify this again, I didn't intend to trick anyone into visiting that site. Two maniacs were trying to dig up personal information on me by combing through my personal web space, and I hastily tried to get them to go away by putting in mod_rewrite rules based on referrer to an "inescapable" website. But I'd forgotten I put this in place a few days later when I linked to one of their smears-in-progress on me on one of those blacklisted-referrer sites, which itself linked back to my personal webspace, so anyone who read their smearing and clicked the links... urk. It wasn't intended for anyone else to get redirected, and I'm sorry.

[Anonymous editor]

"i compared x here re: to y here (where x = john and y = kristen) and they are strikingly similar in connotative denunciation. "

...

[The Adversary]

It's hard for me to take Krimpet seriously; too often her behavior strikes me as trollish. I haven't forgotten about that link to that toxic site she tried to trick everyone into visiting.

Just to clarify this again, I didn't intend to trick anyone into visiting that site. Two maniacs were trying to dig up personal information on me by combing through my personal web space, and I hastily tried to get them to go away by putting in mod_rewrite rules based on referrer to an "inescapable" website. But I'd forgotten I put this in place a few days later when I linked to one of their smears-in-progress on me on one of those blacklisted-referrer sites, which itself linked back to my personal webspace, so anyone who read their smearing and clicked the links... urk. It wasn't intended for anyone else to get redirected, and I'm sorry.

To everyking: I think I was the only one who got redirected to that site ..And when I cried out, Krimpet apologised at the time, both in public and in private (and changed the link). So I have long since forgiven and almost forgotten about the incident; therefor, Everyking: don´t you think you can also "let go" and forget about it? I mean, really. We all do mistakes, if people clearly admits it, and apologise, then its time to move on.

[tarantino]

It's hard for me to take Krimpet seriously; too often her behavior strikes me as trollish. I haven't forgotten about that link to that toxic site she tried to trick everyone into visiting.

Just to clarify this again, I didn't intend to trick anyone into visiting that site. Two maniacs were trying to dig up personal information on me by combing through my personal web space yadda yadda yadda

Are you calling me a maniac, Fran? I find that amusing. I also thought you had already made your peace with the other one. Maybe we should have a poll. ¿Quién es más loco?

This post has been edited by tarantino: Wed 28th January 2009, 12:30am