Template talk:Mikeysock

This template shouldn’t exist

Leads to more drama (and it’s a but embarrassing) whenever there’s a misidentification, real or fabricated (I really don’t care if the most recent accounts are Mike or not). Clutters up recent changes more whenever Mike decides to make a bunch of accounts. Draws more attention to his usernames. Those are the downsides, and there really aren’t any upsides. Can’t easily delete the template as it’s got a bunch of transclusions, but we can blank it and forget about it. Christopher (talk) 12:44, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

I think it should be reserved if the user manages to more than a few edits in but, just as with the ken sock template, don't create the userpage if you can just note in the block log. --It's-a me, 🎄LeftyGreenMario!🎄 12:45, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Mike’s socks often don’t make any edits. Even if they do, I still think a note in the block log (maybe a link to his article) is sufficient. I don’t see the point in Ken’s either, but as false positives are lower (people assume anyone who uses a racial slur is Mike) and Ken doesn’t usually create lots of accounts in rapid succession it’s not as annoying. Christopher (talk) 12:53, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

The reason Coombs is protesting against the template is because he's under police investigation for malicious communications. He simply hates people identifying his accounts and prefers to be anonymous so he can get away with his deranged criminal online behaviour. Oenophyta (talk) 13:03, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

I don’t care. Of course he isn’t going to like the template, but that’s not a reason to keep it, it shouldn’t factor into it at all. I’ve always thought it was a stupid idea. Christopher (talk) 13:08, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

The number of misidentifications is very small and I noticed most of these are corrected anyway in block log. Regardless, Mikemikev lies all the time and is not likely to admit accounts are his (he even speaks in third person on a recent sock obviously his). Virtually all the accounts tagged as Michael Coombs are blatantly him based on behaviour. His claim he's "impersonated" is false, it's actually him who spends his life impersonating other's and using their names on fake accounts. There are around 50 socks relentlessly attacking John66 and Oliver Smith in past few weeks - it is only Coombs with an obsession with these two individuals.Oenophyta (talk) 13:18, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

I’ve seen a few obvious misidentifications, just random racist trolls, not anyone caught up in all this. Like I said I really don’t care, even if there were no misidentifications there’s no point in having it.

Who are you? Why do you care so much about this guy? You haven’t made yourself too obvious if you are someone or done anything banworthy, but I’m immediately suspicious of anyone who joins this site just to talk about Mike. Christopher (talk) 13:23, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

@LeftyGreenMario Even if an account gets in multiple edits, what does this template achieve? Mainspace edits of these accounts will be instantly reverted. What we end up with is a series of banned accounts, with no edits or edits that have been reverted, but which forever have a userpage with this template. Who is the message for? As it stands, the template is being used for users which have made essentially no impact, which would take some effort to change; is it really worth having? Serene (talk) 14:29, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Anyone willing to defend this stupid thing? Christopher (talk) 19:49, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

I want to keep it since we can use this as evidence to prove that he socks here like his page say that he does. Rockford the Roe ^{boop my snoot}_{praise Oscar Wilde} 16:10, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Unless you’re going to add the template to his hundreds of old socks, I don’t think it’d be a good idea to include a link on his page, same with Ken’s; to someone not familiar with the context it gives the wrong impression. It’s definitely not worth the hassle of adding it retroactively, and even if you somehow could I don’t really see the benefit. I know I won’t be able to convince you and it’s not worth afding, so I guess I’ll just have to put up with this thing existing. Christopher (talk) 16:36, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

'No "open mic" for Mike on RW' sums matters up.

Can an equivalent of [1] be developed? Anna Livia (talk) 16:44, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

I agree with Rockford. GeeJayK (talk) 16:48, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

There has been at least one currently somewhat active sysop who has repeatedly unblocked/shortened blocks of banned users or their renamed socks, because there hasn't been the {{banned}} template on their user page. It's been particularly obnoxious with Mikey's socks, since the original names have as a rule been racist as fuck and thus necessitated renaming. Since it's apparently too much effort for some sysoped folks to check the logs before unblocking, I think this should be kept around just like the {{ken}} one. Unless we want to create coop drama every time another dirty sock of Mikes gets renamed.

The wording could probably be improved though. It currently seems like just one of MS77's bitter rants over Mike trolling his troll wiki. Knight Commander^{In Service}_{To Her}^Goatness 18:44, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Both templates are dumb on multiple levels. Most notably:

1. Idiots who use them are permanently tagging bits of the wiki on the troll's behalf - in this case, "Mike wuz 'ere" recorded in perpetuity, with the added bonus of providing a greatest hits compilation via the what links here function.
2. They don't provide "evidence" or "prove" a goddamn thing. They're merely tokens of various people's opinion, and none of you have any way of telling how many false positives they might have been assigned to.
3. If they serve any meaningful function at all, it's as a final performative act of jizzing on the dead account of a supposed ideological foe. Better hobbies exist.

Helena Bonham Carter (talk) 19:36, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

I cannot believe I'm saying this, but I agree with HBC. Both of these templates should be removed or for simplicity's sake redirected to the sockpuppet template itself. This is giving idiots like Mike undue attention that they are literally looking for. Even though it's been a bit, I'm gonna be AfDing this and kensock. Techpriest ^{(I am Alpharius! / / / )} 17:57, 10 May 2021 (UTC)