Jump to content

Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/PIO (3rd)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Luigi 28 (talk | contribs) at 22:41, 7 June 2008 (→User:PIO (3rd)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

User:PIO (3rd)

Suspected sockpuppeteer

PIO (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Luigi 28 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

--DIREKTOR (TALK) 23:08, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Evidence

User:PIO has been known to use multiple socks since his block (see Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/PIO) and had previously admitted to using many sockpuppets [1]. PIO's rotating IP is in the 151.67 to 70 range - evidence: PIO editing from his IP address arguing to be unblocked [2] [3] and this discussion User_talk:DIREKTOR#IP_151.67... during which 'Luigi' gets confused about whether he's 151.67 or 151.70 [4].
A previous SSP report by User:AlasdairGreen27 has been inconclusive due to lack of evidence as to User:Luigi 28's editing pattern (see Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/PIO (2nd)). Since then, however, the User's pattern has emerged as an one identical to User:PIO's:

  • This "new" User's first ever edit was to restore a fact tag that PIO had added. [5]
  • User:Luigi 28 edits on virtually the same articles as User:PIO and his socks, i.e. on controversial Dalmatia-related articles [6]. Including: Istrian exodus, Dalmatian Italians, and Roger Joseph Boscovich, which were PIO's favorite revert-battlegrounds. Just like PIO, he also claims to be of Dalmatian origin, living in Venice.
  • Without User:Luigi 28 being mentioned, PIO's sock Agazio was telling us, without being asked or the User being mentioned to him at all, that he had "no connection" with Luigi 28. (see User_talk:Agazio)
  • When the controversial article Istrian exodus was semi-protected against PIO's socks and IPs, User:Luigi 28, supposedly "new" to Wikipedia, was there within hours of the protection's expiration to add census data to it [7], which, strangely enough, had been User:PIO's favorite topic [8].
  • User:PIO apparently found a new way to alter his IP to a degree, as the checkuser did not provide conclusive results. Which is strange considering the facts: he admitted (here [9]) that he wrote this [10] and this [11], where he apparently got confused about which IP he was using. From this it follows that he also wrote this [12], and this [13], and this [14], and this [15], and all these [16][17]. There's also a remarkable similarity between this [18], this [19], and this [20] where he was 'Nemo', and this [21] where he was 'Agazio'.

However, even if we disregard the fact that his IP falls well within PIO's "range" (see [22]), the remaining evidence, coupled with User:Luigi 28's apparently strong convictions in the Dalmatian conflict (identical to PIO's) is more than conclusive in my view. The guy also decided to use what appears to be his his real-world name and info as some kind of "proof", though he could, of course, be simply lying. (Finally: thank you Alasdair, for formulating most of the evidence :)


My defence

My name is Luigi Vianelli (here you can read something; I'm an expert of Holocaust denial: [23][24][25]), I'm Italian and I speak a terrible English: I'm very sorry for that. My family comes from Losinj (Lussino). The family of my wife comes from Rijeka (Fiume). I read more than 300 books in four languages (Italian, French, English, German) about the Adriatic. This is my point of interest from more than 20 years.

  • I wrote here in Wikipedia in voices:

a. Italia irredenta
b. Italian Mare Nostrum
c. Istrian exodus
d. Andrea Antico
e. Sanctorius
f. Roger Joseph Boscovich
g. Rijeka
h. Cres (town)
i. Krk
j. Mila Schon
k. Veli Losinj
l. Missoni
m. Dalmatian Italians
n. SMS Szent István
o. Gabriele d'Annunzio

  • It's simply and completely false that they are the same articles as User:PIO. The User:PIO from all the above articles, wrote only for:

a. Istrian exodus
Here the link from the personal PIO's page:[26]

I repeat: only one of my articles!

  • From my first message here in Wikipedia, I was accused to be a sockpuppet:
  1. When I wrote my first message: [User:AlasdairGreen27] wrote immediately a request for checkuser[27]. Only few minutes ago (in Italy are the 03.28 in the morning - Saturday 06.07.2008) I've seen that! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Luigi 28 (talk • contribs) 01:29, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Here:[28] User:AlasdairGreen27 wrote that I'm the banned User:PIO
  3. Here:[29] Alasdair insinuated that I'm the banned user Agazio/alias PIO: seem pretty conclusive to me that Agazio and Luigi 28 are one and the same
  4. Here:[30] Alasdair confirm that I'm PIO: I'm getting together an RFCU now
  5. Here: [31] Alasdair wrote that I'm the banned user PIO: they're indeed the same person
  6. Here: [32] User:DIREKTOR wrote that I'm the banned user PIO: they're the same person allright, the grammar mistakes are identical. When one listens to him long enough, one gets used to PIO's distinct "style" of expression. I have the PIO's style of expression!
  7. Here: [33] DIREKTOR wrote that I'm the banned user PIO, and call me Venetian irredentist radical. Venetian irredentist radical !!!
  8. Here:[34] ">DIREKTOR reverted my contribute without any explanation, except: reverting unreferenced info added by banned User:PIO
  9. Here:[35] DIREKTOR reverted for the second time my contribute, without any explanation.
  10. Here:[36] DIREKTOR reverted my contribute for the third time without any explanation, except: you're banned from editing remember?
  11. Here: [37] DIREKTOR wrote that I was another guy, named PIO: What are we going to do about PIO? He's a real fanatic, this one. Please, note the word fanatic, wich is for me, 'cause he thinks I'm PIO.
  12. Here: [38]User:AlasdairGreen27 is trying to insinuate that I'm that banned PIO
  13. Here: [39] DIREKTOR wrote that I'm the banned Pio: Yep, you're PIO alright
  14. Here: [40] DIREKTOR wrote that I'm the bannedo PIO
  15. Here: [41] Alasdair wrote another time that I'm PIO and others banned contributors.
  16. Here: [42] Alasdair insinuate that I'm PIO: If you click on the IP addresses, then at the user contributions screen click on WHOIS at the bottom left of the page, it tells us they are all the same and the others banned contributors.
  17. Here: [43] DIREKTOR wrote that I'm PIO: I know, you're Luigi. Your Wikipedia name was PIO, though...
  18. Here: [44] Alasdair insinuate that I'm another one: Yes, Luigi, you know who you are. Your problem is that everyone else also knows
  19. Here: [45] DIREKTOR insinuate that I'm that banned PIO
  20. Here: [46] DIREKTOR wrote that I'm PIO (hi PIO) and reverted my contribute without any explanation
  21. Here: [47] DIREKTOR reverted my contribute without any explanation
  22. Here: [48] DIREKTOR reverted my contribute without any explanation


"he admitted (here [49]) that he wrote this [50] and this [51], where he apparently got confused about which IP he was using. From this it follows that he also wrote this [52], and this [53], and this [54], and this [55], and all these [56][57]. There's also a remarkable similarity between this [58] and this [59] and this [60] where you were 'Nemo', and this [61] where you were Agazio."

  • From the above, I wrote only:

This: [62]
and this: [63]
(the first two messages)
no more!

(see [64]), the remaining evidence, coupled with User:Luigi 28's apparently strong convictions in the Dalmatian conflict (identical to PIO's) is more than conclusive in my view.

Well, if you read carefully, all my words are a long quote from Francesco Bruni[65][66][67], professor of Italian Literature at the University of Venice. Here you can read my Bruni's quote, in the original link:[68]. Now: a very famous Italian professor is like User:PIO? A Venetian Irredentist? Please, if you understand the Italian language, read the Bruni's quote: the primary source is an old book of Giovambattista Giustiniani...

  • Please, look my talk page here[70], where I try to explane to User:DIREKTOR who I'm, why I'm interesting in history of the Eastern Side of Adriatic Sea, and finally that I'm not that PIO!
PIO, you misunderstood a lot of my points, and links... --DIREKTOR (TALK) 01:06, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The last provocation from User:DIREKTOR: I'm not that PIO! You misunderstood all my words, from the first one to the last one. You misunderstood me.--Luigi 28 (talk) 01:14, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Comments
What really bothers me is how did he not notice this? I mean, is he stating his non-involvement with articles based on a check of the History page, or simply on memory. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 16:28, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • My answer: I'm not User:PIO and I've read the edits of User:PIO, on the History page. I've not seen the edit of Dalmatian Italians. So:
    • It's simply and completely false that they are the same articles as User:PIO. The User:PIO from all the above articles, wrote only for:

a. Istrian exodus
b. Dalmatian Italians
Here the link from the personal PIO's page:[73]

I repeat: only two of my 15 articles (13.3%)!
--Luigi 28 (talk) 17:13, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Another one personal error: I wrote also for:
p. Nazario Sauro
So I have to repeat:
  • It's simply and completely false that they are the same articles as User:PIO. The User:PIO from all the above articles, wrote only for:
a. Istrian exodus
b. Dalmatian Italians
Here the link from the personal PIO's page:[74]
I repeat: only two of my 16 articles (12.5%)!
--Luigi 28 (talk) 17:13, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


  • Luigi, the mile-long "defense" does not really address the matter at hand. If I call you PIO, that's not a personal attack. Even if it were, this discussion is about your sockpuppeteering, nothing else. Please Refrain from huge explanations with no real bearing on the matter. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 16:26, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You reverted many time my edits[75][76][77][78][79][80][81][82][83][84], without read one word, only because you think that I'm that PIO. This is only a personal attack. You reverted my edits simply for a personal attack. I'm not a sockpuppet and your statement against me is completely false. All your words against me are personal attack: you wrote that "edits on virtually the same articles as User:PIO and his socks": this is false. You wrote about my error (one voice / two voices): "his non-involvement with articles based on a check of the History page, or simply on memory": this is a personal attack. I'm not PIO and I'm not a sockpuppet, and that's all.--Luigi 28 (talk) 17:46, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Calling you PIO is not a personal attack, if I want to call you Johnny I am perfectly within my rights to do so. Reverting your unsourced edits is also not a personal attack. Just WP:SHOUTing you're not a sock is not going to prove anything, PIO, if I created a sock I really wanted to keep I would do the same. Your identity is quite obvious for all the reasons plainly stated above. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 18:10, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You wrote: Reverting your unsourced edits is also not a personal attack.. This is completely false. For example: I wrote a list of the City Mayors of Rijeka[85], every one with one or two sources: you reverted[86]! Another example: I changed a part of the voice Istrian exodus with two sources[87]: you reverted[88]! You made a personal attack against me. Your words are false. You were punished another time for Edit warring:[89]--Luigi 28 (talk) 18:28, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please read this WP:PA. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 18:47, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You were punished another time for Edit warring[90]: it's simply a fact.--Luigi 28 (talk) 18:54, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, a 24 hour block, while you on the other hand were banned completely. Ok, please stop with this nonsense. This page is intended for discussing your sockpuppeteering, not some imaginary policy breaches of yours. --DIREKTOR (TALK) 19:04, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm never banned, because I'm not a sockpuppet. This is another simply fact.--Luigi 28 (talk) 19:13, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You may or may not be a sock (the check user report will determine that) but you have now edited this report 53 times [91]. What's that all about? AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 21:01, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, because I make too many mistakes writing in English (so I'm trying to correct something) and I don't know how to edit the page: have a look to my edits! I'm new in Wikipedia, even if you do not believe: I learned the words sockpuppet and checkuser only one or two days ago. This is another fact! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Luigi 28 (talk • contribs) 21:17, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That makes perfect sense, PIO is a noob. Apparently this sock is the main attempt... --DIREKTOR (TALK) 21:31, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Luigi, you say "I'm new in Wikipedia", but unlike other newbies, you know enough about Wiki that your very first edit was a fact tag [92], and your second was a properly formatted external reference [93]. Come on buddy. Can we agree that you are not as new as all that? AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 21:45, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hey man: you made more or less with your second[94], and your guy User:DIREKTOR - mr Ivan Rumora - create his own page the very second day of active Wiki-life, with a complicate tag[95]! Boys: are you perhaps two socks?--Luigi 28 (talk) 22:41, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That makes only perfect sense: you make a personal war against me, without interest to what I write. You reverted many times my edits[96][97][98][99][100][101][102][103][104][105], also fully documented and sourced, without any kind of explanation, only because you think I'm PIO.--Luigi 28 (talk) 21:39, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yeah, I always pick on new guys on Wikipedia. In fact, that's all I ever want to do with my time... --DIREKTOR (TALK) 21:59, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't care about other guys: I know that with me you are conducting a personal war, from my first edit.--Luigi 28 (talk) 22:21, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Right, boys I suggest we all keep up a dignified silence on this from now on. This discussion is leading nowhere. Hopefully the CU will be in fairly quickly. Then we'll see. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 22:06, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Conclusions


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/PIO_(3rd)&oldid=217838091"