User:Tennislover/Archive 3

Sit tight, we are looking into the situation. It looks like it may have been an accident followed by a misunderstanding. Hopefully things will be cleared up shortly, but please give it time. Although I'm an admin, I don't understand what happened here and so I cannot myself lift the block. But I have contacted two others and we'll try to get this resolved shortly. --Yamla 23:33, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

The unblock will not happen. This is a confirmed sockpuppet, an account editing from the same IP address range as Cute 1 4 u. --Yamla 23:50, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't live in Chicago. Yamla, you know I found one of her sockpuppets before.Tennislover 00:32, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't act anything like Cute 1 4 u. Look at my edits. I don't care about fashion or the disney channel. All I usually edit for is tennis articles. Why is this happening?--Tennislover 00:38, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I live nowhere near the Chicago area. I'm telling the truth. I've been trying to hunt down sockpuppets. I've never done vandalism. Please someone help me.--Tennislover 00:40, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

This is out of my hands. Please contact the blocking admin, Dmcdevit (talk · contribs), probably by email. Occasionally, checkuser results are false positives, but as I don't have access to the checkuser results, there's nothing I can do for you myself. Sorry. --Yamla 01:00, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I have no email address Tennislover 01:51, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Tennis expert and myself are not the same person. He or she has made mistakes on the Grand Slam format. I know the format and never do anything like that. Please, I am not cute14u. Remember User: Pumpkin Pie. I was the one who notified Ed about it. Why would I rat out one of my own sockpuppets if I was Cute 1 4 u?Tennislover 02:17, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

This has to be some sort of mix-up. I am not a sock. I'll keep on saying this. Can I file a report on the incident board?--Tennislover 21:40, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I saw Tennis Expert was unblocked. Why was he?--Tennislover 21:45, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

This is so unfair! Why do I have to blamed for this. I didn't do anything. I'm not Cute 1 4 U or Tennis Expert. I love Wikipedia. Can someone just please answer me about User: Pumpkin Pie? This is the strongest point of my case.--Tennislover 21:52, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Is it your sworn statement(*) that you are not Cute 1 4 u and that you have no contact (apart from on the Wikipedia) with Cute 1 4 u? Tennis Expert was unblocked because a more detailed investigation proved the claim of sockpuppetry unfounded. My understanding, however, is that it has been proven that you have edited from the same computer as Cute 1 4 u. Please note that your notification about Pumpkin Pie is circumstantial, it does not provide proof that you are not Cute 1 4 u. We've certainly seen sockpuppets do this sort of thing in the past. Now, please note that I myself have not seen the checkuser results (they are not available to me), so I am not claiming that you are a sockpuppet of Cute 1 4 u. (*) When I say "sworn statement", I'm not asking you to sign a document with your blood or to make a legally binding statement or anything. --Yamla 22:06, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

That is a complete sworn statement that I am not Cute 1 4 U.--Tennislover 22:34, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Why were your first posts [1] [2] on Wikipedia protesting Cute 1 4 U's innocence? Did you join Wikipedia to tell us Cute 1 4 U was innocent? How did you know so much about her and her case? Sarah Ewart 22:49, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I orginally started Wikipedia annymously.--Tennislover 22:51, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Those first two edits have made me look very sucipicous. But I assure you I orginally thought Cute 1 4 U deserved a second chance. Now, with all those sockpuppets I do not want the ban lifted.--Tennislover 22:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

We also need your statement that you have had no contact (apart from Wikipedia) with the person known here as Cute 1 4 u. We need to determine the extent of your relationship with this person, given that it seems likely you have edited from the same computer. --Yamla 23:00, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Sworn Statement: I have not had any contact with Cute 1 4 U apartpart from Wikipedia.--Tennislover 23:02, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay, now we need the blocking admin to come by. There's nothing that a regular admin can really do here as we don't get to see the checkuser details (for privacy reasons). I still have no idea why checkuser would show that you and Cute 1 4 u had used the same IP address (as I understand it) given that you are different people. The odds against it are somewhere higher (not lower) than one in four billion. --Yamla 23:11, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

The funny thing is, I don't live in Chicago. I live in Kansas.--Tennislover 23:13, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

I am appalled by the fact that this user mentioned my name was mentioned in his/her (sorry...) unblock request and I was never asked for input! Meh-

Personally, I believe we should have another Checkuser, as done to Tennis Expert.--Ed ^{¿Cómo estás?} 03:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Why should they have asked you for input? I wasn't the admin who reviewed this request, but if I had, I certainly wouldn't have asked you about it. It's pretty straight forward as it stands. Sarah Ewart 06:14, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Because I was asked for in the Unblock Request. Besides, it is always common courtesy to notify all users that you know would be interested in the situation. When Tennislover told me about Pumpkin Pie's possibility of being a sockpuppet, I notified Yamla, because I knew he would be interested in this sockpuppet.--Ed ^{¿Cómo estás?} 04:31, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

He didn't ask for you; he asked that we verify information with you. Big difference. And the information he wanted us to ask you about is not relevant to the block. If we have users who will log out of their accounts, vandalise the site under their IP and then log back in to revert the vandalism, I have no trouble believing that people would also give up a sockpuppet account to make their main account look authentic. As for notifying all users who may be interested in a situation, that's just not how we work. No admin has time to run around to every user who may have an interest in a situation before making administrative decisions. It just doesn't work that way. Sorry. Sarah Ewart 23:36, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I do believe we need another checkuser done.--Tennislover 23:09, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

My DSL might be using DHCP. So the IP address assigned could be the same.--Tennislover 23:09, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm a he not a she. Just for further notice.--Tennislover 00:13, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

My apologies. Corrected. Sarah Ewart 01:25, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't sound rude, but are we going to get to the bottom of this? I swear I am not Cute 1 4u. I understand if you think I am, because their is a lot of evidence against me. Your just doing your job as a Wikipedian. All I ask you to do is listen to my opinion. There is tons of information I can give back to the community. If someone could just run the Checkuser over again, that would be great. Thanks.--Tennislover 01:39, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Has the Checkuser Request been sent yet? If not, I'm requesting it myself. This user, whether he is a sockpuppet or not, deserves the justice he needs.--Ed ^{¿Cómo estás?} 02:33, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

You will have to take it up with the blocking admin and Checkuser, Dmcdevit. Sarah Ewart 03:35, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Tennislover, I do hope that you are not Cute 1 4 u, since I requested another CheckUser at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Cute 1 4 u--Ed ^{¿Cómo estás?} 04:58, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. I appreciate it.--Tennislover 21:56, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Okay, we've done another checkuser and another unblock request is currently being processed. I'm a little too close to the issue to take action to reverse another administrator, but I have strong hope that you will be unblocked today. Your continued civility during this block is more than commendable. --Yamla 22:04, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

I've unblocked you, but you need to respond to the findings that you're running a sockpuppet of your own (User:Twister_Twist). Sarah Ewart 23:38, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Note: Refer to Checkuser findings at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Cute 1 4 u. If I may ask, where are the computers that you have used for Wikipedia since September? You don't have to tell my a precise address, but can you tell me what major city you were closest to since September?--Ed ^{¿Cómo estás?} 01:16, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I have been in the same city since September(kansas city). I've also used a compouter in Fort Dodge, IA. As for Twister Twist, that's my sister's account. I introduced her to Wikipedia, so she created an account.--Tennislover 01:25, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Resilient Barnstar
		Thank you for maintaining your civility while dealing with the recent block. Yamla 01:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

This barnstar was awarded to you because you could very easily have become frustrated and started lashing out at the people who blocked you. You did not, you remained civil even when it looked like your unblock was not going to happen. I wish everyone could behave as well under pressure. Please accept Wikipedia's apologies for your block. --Yamla 01:34, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Cleanup

I do not see a sockpuppet notice on your page. Feel free to remove comments about your recent block, including the unblock request, ideally with an edit summary saying something like "Unblocked, misunderstanding cleared up, removing". You may want to move the comments to an archive page, though nobody would blame you if you simply deleted them. If you wish, you may want to add a brief section at the top of this page which notes that you were accused of being a sockpuppet but that this was cleared up, along with a link to the checkuser. If you do so, please let me know and I will add my comments and/or endorse your statements. This may help with future editors viewing your page if they are unsure as to what lead to your block and why this should not affect future interactions with you. --Yamla 01:49, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually, you might want to send all of this stuff to an archive. That way, you can have "evidence" should someone accuse you again. Keep this stuff in a special archive. Include links to the CheckUser, involved admins, etc.--Ed ^{¿Cómo estás?} 02:11, 12 December 2006 (UTC)