Are these two admins meatpuppets?

[Cheryl]

Tamzin's report at AN: link

CorbinVreccan and Mark Ironie share an IP address. Tamzin's analysis of Mark backing up Corbin does make their behavior look questionable...



Permalink: link

[AndyTheGrump]

Doesn't look good...

[tarantino]

i looked at Ironie a while back because I thought he was suspicious for some reason. He used to be known as Paul Pigman (T-C-L) or just plain Pigman.

[casualdejekyll]

This is the Thing that Tamzin is REALLY good at, so...

CorbieVreccan revdeled Tamzin's required AN notification, and was promptly given a solid "what, why, huh?" from everyone else.

I count five times so far CorbieVreccan has responded to "how was this revdel worthy" with "It was handled by ArbCom", including once where the conversation went (paraphrased) "How was this revdel worthy?" "It was handled by ArbCom" "...but, how does that make it revdel worthy?" "It was handled by ArbCom." Which is a stunning lack of reading comprehension on CV's part.

Sidenote: As pointed out in the AN/I thread, Tamzin has shared an IP with TheresNoTime in the past, but they *actually disclosed that and didn't act like sockpuppets*, so it wasn't an issue.

[The Blue Newt]

What are the odds they are actually two people?

[casualdejekyll]

BilledMammal has just dropped that in the past 15 years, the two admins have !voted the same way (with one-ish exception) on every XfD that both have comments on. Which is.. suspicious, to say the least, even though most of those XfDs were in 2006-07.

Mark Ironie didn't declare on his user page that he shared an IP with CV until after the AN/I discussion was open.

Here's CV's RfA, and here's Mark Ironie's. They gave eachother a "Huge Honking Support" and "Strong Piggy Support" respectively, because they're funny I guess?

What are the odds they are actually two people?

Honestly, I think it's more likely than you think.

[Katie]

There's this old, from 2005, post by Mark Ironie: link, which has him using "we" about him and Corbie. I don't know if they were talking online or were discussing this in RL, but it's clear both were in communication off-wiki. Corbie said, here: link that they've (referring to both Corbie and Mark Ironie) both shared an IP address sometimes for 18 years.

[casualdejekyll]

There's this old, from 2005, post by Mark Ironie: link, which has him using "we" about him and Corbie. I don't know if they were talking online or were discussing this in RL, but it's clear both were in communication off-wiki. Corbie said, here: link that they've (referring to both Corbie and Mark Ironie) both shared an IP address sometimes for 18 years.

My current hypothesis is that they're either related, in some form of romantic relationship, or the same person, and I'm currently digging into the first two options since Corbie has significant online presence under their real name.

[Hemiauchenia]

From posts made in that discussion (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... d=23016944) I can determine that the real identity of CorbieVreccan is none other than Kathryn NicDhàna , who describes herself as a:

author, editor and artist, writing primarily in the fields of spirituality, politics, satire and music criticism. She is the co-author of The CR FAQ, An Introduction to Celtic Reconstructionism (the only book on CR) and The Gaol Naofa Gaelic Polytheism FAQ (available as an eBook).

http://kathrynnicdhana.com/

[casualdejekyll]

From posts made in that discussion (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... d=23016944) I can determine that the real identity of CorbieVreccan is none other than Kathryn NicDhàna , who describes herself as a:

author, editor and artist, writing primarily in the fields of spirituality, politics, satire and music criticism. She is the co-author of The CR FAQ, An Introduction to Celtic Reconstructionism (the only book on CR) and The Gaol Naofa Gaelic Polytheism FAQ (available as an eBook).

http://kathrynnicdhana.com/

I forget that there's no OUTING on here... granted, CorbieVreccan's username on Wikipedia was actually Kathryn NicDhàna for some years, so this isn't necessarily outing, is it?

Since it might as well be mentioned for completeness: "Mark Ironie" is most likely a pseudonym.

[Hemiauchenia]

From posts made in that discussion (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?ti ... d=23016944) I can determine that the real identity of CorbieVreccan is none other than Kathryn NicDhàna , who describes herself as a:

author, editor and artist, writing primarily in the fields of spirituality, politics, satire and music criticism. She is the co-author of The CR FAQ, An Introduction to Celtic Reconstructionism (the only book on CR) and The Gaol Naofa Gaelic Polytheism FAQ (available as an eBook).

http://kathrynnicdhana.com/

I forget that there's no OUTING on here... granted, CorbieVreccan's username on Wikipedia was actually Kathryn NicDhàna for some years, so this isn't necessarily outing, is it?

Since it might as well be mentioned for completeness: "Mark Ironie" is most likely a pseudonym.

|t wouldn't be considered outing, but it would be considered rude to bringing it up on wiki without good reason, given that they've changed their username.

To be honest, I thought they were Native American, given their consistent focus on Native American topics, but then again, I've been involved in long disputes about whether the term Eskimo is offensive despite definitely not falling under any definition of "eskimo", so I can't really judge.

[casualdejekyll]

http://kathrynnicdhana.com/

CV also owns https://www.bandia.net/, http://www.paganachd.com/, https://nicdhana.blogspot.com/, and several other extremely old websites I can't be bothered to dig up.

[casualdejekyll]

To be honest, I thought they were Native American, given their consistent focus on Native American topics, but then again, I've been involved in long disputes about whether the term Eskimo is offensive despite definitely not falling under any definition of "eskimo", so I can't really judge.

They are white, but they have been a Native American rights activist since the 80s, according to this

[casualdejekyll]

"Sockpuppeting" is explicitly listed on this 98 page FAQ as something a religious organization CorbieVreccan is a part of is against.

This is either proof that Mark Ironie is a separate person, or the funniest thing in sockpuppetry history. I am currently in the former camp, but come on, I wouldn't blame you at all for being in the latter camp.

[tarantino]

i looked at Corbie before too.

I looked at CorbieVreccan (T-C-L), one of the recent editors to that article, before. She's an ... interesting character. She's also been known as Kathryn Price NicDhàna, Caitríona NicDhàna, and Kathryn Price Theatana. She's a self-professed early pioneer of Celtic_Reconstructionist_Paganism (T-H-L). According to interviews and her website, she lives in the woods of Massachusetts, which she calls Wabanaki Territory.

[ArmasRebane]

Easiest guess is that it's two people who are presumably long-term domestic partners, and Corbie is just leaning back in her chair to get her guaranteed +1 to jump in.

If ArbCom really just told them to confirm the connection and knock it off like Corbie is implying, that's a really shitty decision by ArbCom and I don't blame Tamzin for bringing this up publicly.

Also, Celtic reconstructionism probably isn't a notable topic, if the fact that half the citations are to random letters and the like is any indication.

[casualdejekyll]

i looked at Corbie before too.

I looked at CorbieVreccan (T-C-L), one of the recent editors to that article, before. She's an ... interesting character. She's also been known as Kathryn Price NicDhàna, Caitríona NicDhàna, and Kathryn Price Theatana. She's a self-professed early pioneer of Celtic_Reconstructionist_Paganism (T-H-L). According to interviews and her website, she lives in the woods of Massachusetts, which she calls Wabanaki Territory.

Ah, I didn't catch those alternative names. I've not a clue where "Theatana" comes from, though it appears to be the older version (change to NicDhána happened sometime 2000-2006) - Is it a maiden name? Or is NicDhána a literal patronymic? (It appears to be unique to CorbieVreccan.) Not sure. The rest of these (you missed Caitríona Rhys NicDhána by the way) are all Gaelicized versions (NicDhána is already Gaelic, so it doesn't need to be changed)

The Wabanaki stuff is connected to her history with Native American tribes.

[AndyTheGrump]

Easiest guess is that it's two people who are presumably long-term domestic partners, and Corbie is just leaning back in her chair to get her guaranteed +1 to jump in.

If ArbCom really just told them to confirm the connection and knock it off like Corbie is implying, that's a really shitty decision by ArbCom and I don't blame Tamzin for bringing this up publicly.

Also, Celtic reconstructionism probably isn't a notable topic, if the fact that half the citations are to random letters and the like is any indication.

Guess who cited who in the Celtic reconstructionism article: link

The book in question is self-published, and had only been published a few weeks before it was cited on Wikipedia.

[casualdejekyll]

They've known eachother since at least 2001, when they offered web design services under the name "Big Electric Celt". That is the most 2001 website I've ever seen. (Amazingly, Paul Pigman appears to be his real name. I guess someone called Casual DeJekyll would be throwing stones in glass houses to point out that's an unusual name.)

What are the odds they are actually two people?

Pretty much 100% at this point, amazingly.

[The Garbage Scow]

Per WP:SPI (and per WP:MEAT, the same policies apply): "If you suspect sockpuppetry by an administrator, or if you need to submit off-wiki evidence for some other reason, you must email the checkuser team to open an investigation. Private information, emails, logs, and other sensitive evidence must not be posted on Wikipedia. "

Stuff like this infuriates me. Why do admins get to have their rulebreaking concealed and hidden away from criticism while the rest are dragged to the "drama boards"??? What a load of elitist horseshit.

[The Blue Newt]

They've known eachother since at least 2001, when they offered web design services under the name "Big Electric Celt". That is the most 2001 website I've ever seen. (Amazingly, Paul Pigman appears to be his real name. I guess someone called Casual DeJekyll would be throwing stones in glass houses to point out that's an unusual name.)

What are the odds they are actually two people?

Pretty much 100% at this point, amazingly.

That is, in fact, amazing. Right down to the Pigman, and all the Plastic Paddy foofarrah.

[bagofworms]

Picture of them here. Some next-level New Age cringe.

[eppur si muove]

I found this interesting diff

CR Paganism
Um, I believe you made a slight mistake in adding the Notable Wikipedian template to the Talk:Celtic Reconstructionist Paganism page with my name. I'm not mentioned in the article nor have I ever been mentioned in the article. Would you mind removing the tag? Unless there's something I'm missing or a reason not readily apparent to me? Please let me know if there is. Thanks, Pigman 22:01, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

The text of notable Wikipedian as given for Pigman's partner is

The following Wikipedia contributor may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.
Kathryn NicDhàna (talk · contribs) / Celtic Reconstructionist Paganism This user has contributed to the article.

I think we've seen enough in this thread to be clear that Pigman is very much personally connected with the subject but he chose to get this connection hidden.

[Katie]

Mark Ironie and Corbie have known one another since 1984, at least, according to this: link.

[Anroth]

Stuff like this infuriates me. Why do admins get to have their rulebreaking concealed and hidden away from criticism while the rest are dragged to the "drama boards"??? What a load of elitist horseshit.

Well its not just admins in this situation. The admin is a red herring here, as its nothing to with advanced tools. Its two users who live in the same household. In order to verify they are different people, there's a level of disclosure that requires arbcom-level oversight due to the personal information. It would be the same if they were not admins.

There are already documented processes in place to handle this situation, both users are treated as one person for the purposes of discussions (since you could never really be sure who was operating which account) the problem here is no one knew and they have never caused enough trouble for anyone to bother looking in the first place.

Not sure what Tamzin's end game is for this. They arnt going to get banned, in order for them to lose their tools it would need to go to ARBCOM who have already 'dealt' with it, and being forced to revisit it because another admin didnt like how they dealt with it isnt really going to make them any more disposed to doing what Tamzin wants.

All Tamzin has really done is make a bunch of enemies and out a couple who acted pretty much like many other couples do on wikipedia. Quietly supporting each other and not telling anyone about it. Tarantino probably has a list....

[Boing! said Zebedee]

Not sure what Tamzin's end game is for this. They arnt going to get banned, in order for them to lose their tools it would need to go to ARBCOM who have already 'dealt' with it, and being forced to revisit it because another admin didnt like how they dealt with it isnt really going to make them any more disposed to doing what Tamzin wants.

It depends on what Arbcom has actually already dealt with. If it's just the shared IP thing (which it sounds like it might be) and they haven't examined the collusion/involved allegations, then that might warrant a case.

[Anroth]

Not sure what Tamzin's end game is for this. They arnt going to get banned, in order for them to lose their tools it would need to go to ARBCOM who have already 'dealt' with it, and being forced to revisit it because another admin didnt like how they dealt with it isnt really going to make them any more disposed to doing what Tamzin wants.

It depends on what Arbcom has actually already dealt with. If it's just the shared IP thing (which it sounds like it might be) and they haven't examined the collusion/involved allegations, then that might warrant a case.

Which would require them to state exactly what they looked into and why they didnt address it (if they didnt). And if they did, explain themselves. Thats not going to make them happy either. Except maybe Beeb. Perverse that he is.

And secondly, this isnt anything involving admin tools, so to have them removed would require arbcom effectively going the conduct unbecoming of an admin route. And I dont think there is anything in either editors history that rises to that level (beyond the obvious meatpuppting).

And if we are going with 'obvious meatpuppeting should be grounds for removing tools by itself', I am pretty sure I can scrounge up a list of off-wiki canvassing by admins for their pet subjects. Discord and IRC logs would more than suffice. Dont think any admin wants that box opened.

[eppur si muove]

[Not sure what Tamzin's end game is for this. They arnt going to get banned, in order for them to lose their tools it would need to go to ARBCOM who have already 'dealt' with it, and being forced to revisit it because another admin didnt like how they dealt with it isnt really going to make them any more disposed to doing what Tamzin wants.

There was a pretty clear attempt in the thread to ignore ADMINACCT.

[Anroth]

[Not sure what Tamzin's end game is for this. They arnt going to get banned, in order for them to lose their tools it would need to go to ARBCOM who have already 'dealt' with it, and being forced to revisit it because another admin didnt like how they dealt with it isnt really going to make them any more disposed to doing what Tamzin wants.

There was a pretty clear attempt in the thread to ignore ADMINACCT.

Using revdel inappropriately? Big whoop. But they didnt ignore adminacct, they just didnt give an answer people liked. That is not the same thing. Adminacct (despite my wish otherwise) isnt a "you must explain to my satisfaction why you did something, in detail" its "you need to respond promptly and justify your actions" which they did. Doesnt matter that the justification is a shit one.

-edit- Just to be clear, I dont think they should have tools, I just dont think this is going to result in them losing them.

[Boing! said Zebedee]

And secondly, this isnt anything involving admin tools...

In the AN thread, there are allegations that one or both have used admin tools in disputes in which the other is involved, and that would be a misuse of tools. (I can't see what the alleged tool use is, mind, but I haven't read all the lengthy linked discussions).

PS: No, I don't think they're likely to lose the tools either... contrition, won't do it again, that kind of thing should save them.

[Zoloft]

And secondly, this isnt anything involving admin tools...

In the AN thread, there are allegations that one or both have used admin tools in disputes in which the other is involved, and that would be a misuse of tools. (I can't see what the alleged tool use is, mind, but I haven't read all the lengthy linked discussions).

PS: No, I don't think they're likely to lose the tools either... contrition, won't do it again, that kind of thing should save them.

Let's see if their egos get in the way of that.

[Boing! said Zebedee]

And secondly, this isnt anything involving admin tools...

In the AN thread, there are allegations that one or both have used admin tools in disputes in which the other is involved, and that would be a misuse of tools. (I can't see what the alleged tool use is, mind, but I haven't read all the lengthy linked discussions).

PS: No, I don't think they're likely to lose the tools either... contrition, won't do it again, that kind of thing should save them.

Let's see if their egos get in the way of that.

You never know - it might be a first

[ArmasRebane]

The AN thread has brought up more clear breaches of INVOLVED, so I doubt this is going to die down with the apology.

[spp]

Why do I have "Super Mario" effect screaming in my brain right now? I can point to at least three other pairs/groups of people who were blocked for lesser evidence than this.

[Ron Lybonly]

It’s so much easier, efficient, insightful and pleasant to follow this sort of thing on Wikipediocracy than Wikipedia itself.

Especially easy and efficient.

[eppur si muove]

It’s so much easier, efficient, insightful and pleasant to follow this sort of thing on Wikipediocracy than Wikipedia itself.

Especially easy and efficient.

For a start you have to go to some lengths here before you have some hypocrite accusing you of making personal attacks or invading their privacy or some such crap. Most reference to civility rules on WP is just playing the MMORPG. Most of Corbie NameChanger's comments in the ANI thread have just been game plays for a start.

[Vigilant]

At first glance this all looks pretty bad. Given I can't even find a log entry for when CorbieVreccan was given +sysop, let alone an RfA, I imagine the explanation is yet again going to be that they started doing this a long time ago and haven't kept up with changing community norms since (whether that's an excuse, I don't know). However, I agree that we're very unlikely to reach any sort of conclusion here. This needs to go to ArbCom as a public case. – Joe (talk) 07:18, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

CorbieVreccan and Mark Ironie were both given adminship in November 2007, under different usernames. See WP:Requests for adminship/Kathryn NicDhàna and WP:Requests for adminship/Pigman. See also [9], [10], and [11] for the username change logs. Shells-shells (talk) 07:40, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

What the what what?!

lolol

Buy her book!
It's a bargain for $20 on Amazon!

The crazy here runs SO deep!!

Comedy Rhodium Strike!

Drink deep, folks!

All the links

[Arishok]

After a read of the threads both here and on WP, I find the odds of eventual desysop quite a bit higher than others here seem to.

[Vigilant]

There's some very inappropriate collaboration from years ago (mostly pre-2011) between the two of them under their original user names at Celtic reconstructionism and its talk pages, which has multiple COI problems. It's ancient history - mostly, although see 2022 RM on the talk page - but illustrates how longstanding this is. The comment in CV/Kathryn NicDhàna's RfA about that article is interesting: "At the time I began working on it [Celtic reconstructionism], I was not mentioned in the article, and it had not occurred to me that I ever would be. But as the article expanded I wound up being briefly mentioned, and some of my work in the field is now cited in the sources."[12]... given she added her name 6 weeks after MI/Pigman created the article. DeCausa (talk) 09:43, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

[Ron Lybonly]

Article by Mark Ironie (T-C-L) and edited by CorbieVreccan (T-C-L) has been nominated for deletion:

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Celtic reconstructionism (T-H-L)

[eppur si muove]

What the what what?!

lolol

I wonder how well evidenced the claim there to be descended from Gwenllian ferch Gruffydd (T-H-L) is. Obviously someone who gave birth to eight children roundabout 900 years ago could well have a lot of living descendants and wotsherface has a better chance of being her descendant than I do. But I'm content with being descended from Aaron (T-H-L)

[AndyTheGrump]

What the what what?!

lolol

I wonder how well evidenced the claim there to be descended from Gwenllian ferch Gruffydd (T-H-L) is. Obviously someone who gave birth to eight children roundabout 900 years ago could well have a lot of living descendants and wotsherface has a better chance of being her descendant than I do. But I'm content with being descended from Aaron (T-H-L)

I have it on very good authority that I'm descended from a fish with a poor sense of direction.

[redbaron]

Not sure what Tamzin's end game is for this. They arnt going to get banned, in order for them to lose their tools it would need to go to ARBCOM who have already 'dealt' with it, and being forced to revisit it because another admin didnt like how they dealt with it isnt really going to make them any more disposed to doing what Tamzin wants.

Now at ArbCom...

[The Garbage Scow]

Stuff like this infuriates me. Why do admins get to have their rulebreaking concealed and hidden away from criticism while the rest are dragged to the "drama boards"??? What a load of elitist horseshit.

Well its not just admins in this situation. The admin is a red herring here, as its nothing to with advanced tools. Its two users who live in the same household. In order to verify they are different people, there's a level of disclosure that requires arbcom-level oversight due to the personal information. It would be the same if they were not admins.

There are already documented processes in place to handle this situation, both users are treated as one person for the purposes of discussions (since you could never really be sure who was operating which account) the problem here is no one knew and they have never caused enough trouble for anyone to bother looking in the first place.

Not sure what Tamzin's end game is for this. They arnt going to get banned, in order for them to lose their tools it would need to go to ARBCOM who have already 'dealt' with it, and being forced to revisit it because another admin didnt like how they dealt with it isnt really going to make them any more disposed to doing what Tamzin wants.

All Tamzin has really done is make a bunch of enemies and out a couple who acted pretty much like many other couples do on wikipedia. Quietly supporting each other and not telling anyone about it. Tarantino probably has a list....

Understood, I was speaking more to the quoted policy in general than this situation specifically. Probably a digression, sorry about that.

[The Garbage Scow]

What the what what?!

lolol

I wonder how well evidenced the claim there to be descended from Gwenllian ferch Gruffydd (T-H-L) is. Obviously someone who gave birth to eight children roundabout 900 years ago could well have a lot of living descendants and wotsherface has a better chance of being her descendant than I do. But I'm content with being descended from Aaron (T-H-L)

Reminds me of this

https://www.theguardian.com/science/com ... rutherford

[Vigilant]

There appears to be no bottom or end to the whackadoodlery as I dig.

[Vigilant]

The CR FAQ: Credits

Who created this document? *

The CR FAQ was created collaboratively by regulars of the Celtic Reconstructionist / Restorationist LiveJournal Community (cr_r), using a CeltiWiki database created for the project. The majority of the first-draft writing was done by Kathryn Price NicDhàna and Erynn Rowan Laurie.

Additional edits, refinements, and content were added by C. Lee Vermeers, Kym Lambert ní Dhoireann, Paul Pigman, Bob Daverin, Brenda Daverin, and Raven nic Rhóisín. The document was reviewed and commented on by the members of the cr_r community before publication, and their feedback was incorporated.

The authors would like to extend thanks to the cr_r community as a whole, and in particular to Dr. Lisa Spangenberg for her academic corrections, Thomas Leigh for language assistance, Annelise Carson for additional book reviews, and Ogambear for his humor. Special thanks to Raven nic Rhóisín for hosting and managing the CeltiWiki.

Copyright Notice

“The CR FAQ — An Introduction to Celtic Reconstructionist Paganism” is Copyright ©2006 Kathryn Price NicDhàna, Erynn Rowan Laurie, C. Lee Vermeers and Kym Lambert ní Dhoireann. All copyrights are retained by the individual authors.

They've been in cahoots for at least 17 years on this dipshittery, which they then transferred to en.wp.

[Black Kite]

I'm going to be very interested as to why Skyerise (T-C-L) has been added to the case by ArbCom.

[Vigilant]

How long before we find out that every person on that CR FAQ page is also an admin on en.wp and has also been WPMEATing with their weirdo buddies?

[Vigilant]

Suggestion from Serial

...that Barkeep49 be careful what he wishes for; several editors at AN/I queried the recent role of the committee in this issue's previous incarnation. Should the committee list itself as a party?

At the same time, it is impossible that this case would not be accepted; the alleged issues—admin meat puppetry, wp:involved, misuse of blocks etc.—make ArbCom the only possibly fair venue for a hearing, let alone the only one with the remit to do so. But it's true: the committee's role was brought up several times at A/I, so that should be addressed somehow. If only to alleviate any underlying concerns the community may have. SN54129 20:01, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Impeach the judges as the first move!

How Trumpian!

@Serial Number 54129: I feel like be careful what he wishes for implies I wouldn't want ArbCom to examine its own decision making; far from it I have already posted onlist an examination of where I could have been more effective in expressing my opinions. And that's hardly unique; ArbCom regularly examines its own conduct and decisions. I would be very surprised if there isn't some of that assuming this becomes a case. I also think it appropriate for the community to give feedback on decisions, or potential decisions, which is one reason that I had felt this should be public all along. At the same time I am also mindful that we represent the entire enwiki community, not just the people we hear from who are angry with a decision (and thus far more motivated to offer feedback). Barkeep49 (talk) 20:10, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

ORLY!?

Throw down, boy!