Similarities in content
editWikiWoo:
Brampton 2006:
Issue: These are not actual issues of contention for the election, so why would separate individuals be dealing with both?
Unsourced assertions about local government nepotism
editWikiWoo:
- [4], from GST2006, a confirmed sockpuppet of WikiWoo
Brampton 2006:
Local newspaper is propaganda organ
editWikiWoo:
- I can understand this with Paid Media who are receiving hundreds of millions of dollarsr in ad revenues from the Region and must be careful not to be Blacklisted by Regional Government in Ontario, but I would expect that Wiki as a non-profit volunteer organization commited to truthfull expansion of knowledge would NOT be part of the political propaganda of Ontario Canada. from [6] (note that the heading "Blocked" occurs more than once on that page), to cite one of several examples of him saying this.
Brampton 2006:
Adds (and edit-wars over) content at beginning of article when this is obviously an inappropriate place for it
editWikiWoo:
Brampton 2006
Similarities in edit summaries
editWikiWoo:
Brampton 2006:
Weird logic
editThe type of confused logic behind these two edits (read edit summaries) is quite similar (which implies it relates to the same person's actions):
WikiWoo:
Brampton 2006:
Use of "Wiki" to refer to Wikipedia
editWikiWoo:
Brampton 2006:
Allegations of hiding information from the public
editWikiWoo:
Brampton 2006:
Calls local government information "interesting"
editWikiWoo:
Brampton 2006:
Allegations of an on-wiki conspiracy
editWikiWoo:
Brampton 2006:
Accusations of vandalism
editWikiWoo:
Brampton 2006:
Allegations of a "witch hunt"
editWikiWoo:
- [44], as GST2006
Brampton 2006:
Brampton 2006's first article
editTwo things should be noted about this article. First, the top "potential issue" is the disbanding of the Peel region, one of WikiWoo's favorite bugbears. See [47], User talk:WikiWoo, User talk:WikiWoo/Archive or Talk: Regional Municipality of Peel, Ontario In the real world, this does not appear to be an issue on the ballot (or one that is even widely talked about as an election issue). Second, it starts out with an edit summary asking that it not be deleted. This request would be quite unusual for a true new user, but would be consistent with a user who had WW's history of getting articles deleted.