Marshallsumter

Welcome to Meta!

Hello, Marshallsumter. Welcome to the Wikimedia Meta-Wiki! This website is for coordinating and discussing all Wikimedia projects. You may find it useful to read our policy page. If you are interested in doing translations, visit Meta:Babylon. You can also leave a note on Meta:Babel or Wikimedia Forum (please read the instructions at the top of the page before posting there). Happy editing!

- Ottava Rima (talk) 02:02, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Archives

Old post

Hey there, I removed an old post from your talk page - it was made by a spamming banned user who abused multiple accounts. Thanks for your Wikiversity work! ~riley (talk) 00:53, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

• Hey there, I am seeing your steward votes. Just a heads up that for new steward votes, you need to use # {{Se-vote|2020|Marshallsumter|checked=|cb=}} before your vote rationale. Thanks for participating in the election process. ~riley (talk) 01:14, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

  In the current election, please remember to add |checked=|cb= onto the end as shown above but with 2020 -> 2022. Thanks. --Ferien (talk) 17:13, 22 February 2022 (UTC)

Links

Hi there, you could cite a link by [], you don't have to add url= to it. Happy editing. Lemonaka (talk) 11:25, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

Follow up re SRCU

I'm sorry, I did try and read through your coincidence spreadsheet. It made absolutely zero sense to me - that's why I couldn't see what you were requesting. WV:CIVIL violations are something that need to be handled by a local administrator, Stewards are not involved in that. As for the voting twice - with claims of sockpupptery still, could you please explain this in easier terms than on your spreadsheet for me? -- Amanda (she/her) 16:08, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

I thought you had meant on the same page with actual votes. Expressing an opinion 11 years apart, when you have been a user for that long, is useless in terms of sockpuppetry evidence. So that'll wrap it up for me. Also I note that you are currently blocked from enwv, so you don't have much of a leg to stand on here. Either way, there are no actionable sockpuppetry concerns and everything else is for an admin to consider - not stewards. -- Amanda (she/her) 21:54, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

Pardon @AmandaNP:, I wonder why you made this input on the top of Marshallsumter's replies, is this a bug of DiscussionTool? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:46, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Not a bug, I just wanted to keep it separate from their notes as not to interfere with them. Keep the discussion with discussion. But I also see the notes have changed since I left my message - but I won't be reviewing it. -- Amanda (she/her) 04:50, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Voting twice

Def. "a formalized choice" "on legally relevant measures such as employment or appointment to office or a proceeding about a legal dispute" or "any judgment of intellect leading not only to a formal opinion but also to a particular choice in a legally relevant measure, a point of view as published" is called a vote.

Def. "a person completely controlled by another" or an "alternative [pseudonymous online] account, [especially one] used for abuse" is called a sock puppet.

"Generally users are requested to only use one account, though there are circumstances that may have users to have additional accounts. Where a user has multiple accounts it is an expectation that they publicly disclose those accounts, usually on each of the relevant user pages providing links to each other." m:Sock puppetry

"The major complaints about sock puppetry are where undisclosed accounts are used

• to circumvent the principle of "One person, one vote" in community discussions (talk pages, votes, etc.)
• to circumvent community account blocks." m:Sock puppetry

"Generally the issue of sockpuppetry is a local issue to be managed by each community, there are occasions, however, when the matter will be dealt with universally within the Wikimedia communities. This is usually in the more severe cases and depending on the circumstances and the severity it can involve the use of community global block and/or global lock." m:Sock puppetry

Def. a "person who controls a sock puppet" is called a sock puppeteer.

First time

1. "If the copyright concerns aren't an issue anymore, then I think there's no valid argument here for deletion or exclusion." --SB_Johnny talk 20:44, 24 September 2011 (UTC), url=https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity:Requests_for_Deletion&direction=next&oldid=784380. User:Marshallsumter#Wikiversity 4.
2. "Well, perhaps you're right. I'm just not encouraged that his only contributions here relate to a dispute on en.wiki. This seems emblematic of a person that is not able to disengage from a disagreement. Anyway, I've had my say on the matter, so I'll let it rest for now." Kaldari 05:40, 30 September 2011 (UTC), url=https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Kaldari&diff=prev&oldid=787345.
3. Bureaucrat v:user:SB Johnny's last edit on Wikiversity: 4 March 2020. And, v:user:Kaldari's last edit on Wikiversity: 13 September 2020, last edit on Wikipedia: 30 August 2022. During those eleven years between 24 September 2011 and 18 October 2022, Kaldari stated nothing regarding the fair use images that Marshallsumter had uploaded, the earlier ones without rationales like most other user uploads for the period. The later ones used Template:Information1 which contained a line for the fair use rationale.
4. "Expressing an opinion 11 years apart, when you have been a user for that long, is useless in terms of sockpuppetry evidence." But, then there is User:Omphalographer in 2022-23 attacking Marshallsumter after 11 years over copyright issues and Vox Brevis in 2014 attacking Eric Corbett over an edit revert four days earlier. Per Kaldari: "This seems emblematic of a person that is not able to disengage from a disagreement." Marshallsumter has never used a sock puppet.

Second time

1. "Where does that put us with regards to further [file] uploads by Marshallsumter, though?" Omphalographer 19:00, 16 November 2022 (UTC) and "Now blocked." -- Dave Braunschweig 16:55, 17 November 2022 (UTC), url=https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Wikiversity:Requests_for_Deletion&oldid=2451670. --Marshallsumter (talk) 17:47, 9 January 2023 (UTC)
2. Omphalographer's first edit on Wikiversity: 18 October 2022 was on Wikiversity:Colloquium ‎ →‎Pervasive copyright violations by User:Marshallsumter: new section. Same day Omphalographer put six resources up for deletion - all were reversed by other Wikiversity users, oldest, url=https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Omphalographer&target=Omphalographer&dir=prev.

Omphalographer-Omphalos coincidences

Item	Omphalographer	Meaning	Omphalos	Coincidences	Sockpuppetry
1. omphalo-	Omphalo, c:user:Omphalographer	navel	c:user:Omphalos	1.0	0.0
2. Autoconfirmed users	c:user:Omphalographer, 4 edits, 3 deleted	Autoconfirmed users	c:user:Omphalos, 26 edits, 7 deleted	0.75	0.25
3. User page on en.Wikiversity	User account "Omphalographer" is registered on this wiki, 4 January 2023. No information has been provided by this user yet. 374 edits, 67 deleted	registered users	User account "Omphalos" is registered on this wiki, 22 October 2008. No information has been provided by this user yet. 0 edits.	0.67	0.33
4. User page on login.wikimedia.org	User account "Omphalographer" is registered on this wiki, 18 October 2022. There is currently no text in this page. 0 edits.	registered users	User account "Omphalos" is registered on this wiki, 26 June 2015. 0 edits. There is currently no text in this page.	0.75	0.25
5. User page on meta.wikimedia.org	User account "Omphalographer" is registered on this wiki, 18 October 2022. There is currently no text in this page. 0 edits.	registered users	User account "Omphalos" is registered on this wiki, 2 August 2008. There is currently no text in this page. 0 edits	1.0	0.0

No coincidental edits no sock puppetry.

Coincidences of behavior between Omphalographer and Kaldari

Item	Omphalographer	Meaning	Kaldari	Coincidences	Sockpuppetry
1. single purpose account I	"Please note that your request would have much more credibility if you used your regular wiki account rather than a single-purpose account."	wiki account	"I would like to report myself for making this edit from a single-purpose account."	1.00	0.00
2. single purpose account I	see 1. above	wiki account	"I used one sockpuppet account to make one edit in violation of the policy (in an effort to report incivility anonymously)."	0.75	0.25
3. deflecting responsibility	"And I'm concerned by your suggestion that this request lacks "credibility"."	wiki account	"the inability to examine motivation and history is exactly the reason that our socking policy forbids such use of alternate accounts."	0.50	0.50
4. deflecting responsibility	see 3. above	wiki account	"Then why did you feel it was necessary to make it sound like I was purposefully abusing the tools and was no longer a trusted user of the rights?"	0.25	0.75
5. deflecting responsibility	"This is the only active account I have. I was an active editor on enwiki 10-15 years ago, but I've long since lost the login information."	wiki account	"If at some point an administrator feels that they need to use deception or some other means to deflect retaliation in the course of performing the administration role, rather than taking those steps (like creating an undisclosed sock account) they should consider whether or not they should resign the bit."	0.20	0.80
6. copyright	"Most of these images were uploaded under a claim of fair use."	fair use	refers to works by Marshallsumter	0.17	0.83
7. Marshallsumter	see 6. above	Wikiversity user:Marshallsumter	refers to works by Marshallsumter,	0.143	0.857
8. Wikiversity:Exemption Doctrine Policy (EDP)	Wikiversity:Exemption Doctrine Policy redirected to Wikiversity:Uploading files#Exemption Doctrine Policy	EDP point 6. Wikiversity content that is used under the fair use doctrine must be properly attributed to the copyright holder.	"#Wikiversity content that is used under the fair use doctrine must be properly attributed to the copyright holder." Kaldari 22:00, 22 September 2011 (UTC), {{Policy|WV:EDP|5 August 2010}}	0.125	0.875
9. attributing to copyright holder	see 8. above	This was unauthorized change to our EDP	see 8. above	0.111	0.889
10. single purpose account II	"I was an active editor on enwiki 10-15 years ago, but I've long since lost the login information."	wiki account	"I would like to report myself for making this edit from a single-purpose account."	0.10	0.90
...
76. editing Commons in the last 90 days	c:User contributions for Omphalographer	gaming the system, c:Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Kaldari, see m:User talk:Vituzzu#CheckUser help from Commons/Checkusers	c:User contributions for Kaldari	0.0132	0.9868, or 99% certainty
77. User:SB Johnny leaves Wikiversity in March of 2020	Omphalographer shows up on Wikiversity to attack Marshallsumter regarding copyright in October of 2022	after more than 2 years of being gone SB Johnny's bureaucrat tools have been taken away by stewards	while SB Johnny is on Wikiversity Kaldari makes no further copyright attacks on Marshallsumter	0.013	0.987, or 99% certainty
78. Registered on Commons	Omphalographer, 4 edits, 3 deleted	registering sock puppets	Vox Brevis, No changes were found matching these criteria, 0 edits	0.0128	0.9872, or 99% certainty
79. Attacking other users with sock puppets	Marshallsumter over copyright issues	"This seems emblematic of a person that is not able to disengage from a disagreement."	Eric Corbett over an edit revert, using User:Vox Brevis	0.0127	0.9873, or 99 % certainty
80. First edit/last edit	17 November 2022 first edit (registered) on Commons, 18 December 2022 last edit on Commons	No check user possible unless abusiveness shown	19 May 2005 first edit on Commons, 5 December 2022 last edit on Commons and everywhere	0.0125	0.9872, or 99 % certainty
81. Disparagement	"did not care to use the ones you found"	disparagement, incivility	"The only other possible explanation I can conceive of is that this editor has some extreme form of autism which makes his mode of organizing information appear to be total nonsense to a normal reader."	0.0123	0.9877, or 99 % certainty

Just a sampling! --Marshallsumter (talk) 02:09, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

The rest is on my user page. Marshallsumter (talk) 18:56, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

Re:

Some of the coincidences you highlighted are significant, others aren't at all. But the main point is: what is/are the abuse(s) by Omphalographer which would justify a block if proven to be an alternate account of Kaldari? Vituzzu (talk) 23:26, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your interest and comment! The behavioral coincidences including the positive ones by Omphalographer to our Wikiversity software demonstrate beyond any reasonable doubt together with all the others I've listed on my user page that there's a 99 % probability that Kaldari is the puppet master of Omphalographer. I put that together to demonstrate that even though use of check user fails because Kaldari is gaming the system, the behavioral coincidences succeed using the duck test. His lying about fair use and rationales, voting twice on excluding me from Wikiversity, putting 17 resources up for deletion where others have had to remove all his deletion tags is sufficient abusive behavior to warrant an indefinite block on Wikiversity. I've been blocked for far less! Altering our EDP after consensus approval so that he could misuse it later is egregious.

The three custodians here at v:Wikiversity:Request_custodian_action#User:Marshallsumter failed to fulfill their duties as custodians to review the evidence presented here as you were courteous enough to do. I realize voting twice by Kaldari over eleven years to have me excluded from Wikiversity is a stretch to the belief system, but it is what it is! Please block Omphalographer and for a real challenge remove the custodial tools from the three custodians who have been derelict in their duties to Wikiversity. It is not a consensus matter! Also, the 90 day period for check user is arbitrary, check user should be allowed to specify this period so that appropriate checks can be performed even here at Meta where Kaldari edited last February. --Marshallsumter (talk) 01:36, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Just FYI: what Omphalographer/Kaldari is doing is fighting against reasonable fair use so as to continue to promote Commons. Recent research has demonstrated that fair use is a far easier and better tool to use to advance scientific research & journalism than Creative Commons which often requires reinventing the wheel. --Marshallsumter (talk) 18:20, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

While I use Commons images a lot and will continue, images often end up getting deleted for one reason or another and I've had to fairuse the image to keep it available in resources. --Marshallsumter (talk) 00:10, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Omphalographer changed 46 GFDL files, as designated by the uploader v:User:SpicerK, to fairuse by declaring each to be a "non-free screenshot" and that "The individual who uploaded this work and first used it in an article, as well as subsequent persons who place it into articles, asserts that this qualifies as fair use of the material under United States copyright law." which they did not! Each qualifies under de minimus for GFDL. --Marshallsumter (talk) 00:29, 7 February 2023 (UTC)