Misplaced Pages

:Sockpuppet investigations/Attleboro - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by DrFleischman (talk | contribs) at 17:31, 6 November 2013 (→Comments by other users). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 17:31, 6 November 2013 by DrFleischman (talk | contribs) (→Comments by other users)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Attleboro

Attleboro (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

For archived investigations, see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Attleboro/Archive.


05 November 2013

– A checkuser has completed a check on relevant users in this case, and it is now awaiting administration and close.

Suspected sockpuppets

(Added after Reaper's Attleboro-Orthogonius CU:)

I've laid out Orthogonius's disruptive behavior on his/her user talk. This came directly on the heels of my edit warring report against Attleboro. Orthogonius has a precocious edit history, with first few edits being reversions and the fourth edit being the addition of a main template. If you compare the two users' edit histories, I believe every single revert Orthogonius has ever done (and there are a lot in his/her short editing history) was done in tandem with Attleboro's reversions (see Attleboro's history here), and the two editors' POV are identically aligned. I could go on but I think that's sufficient. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 00:52, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

P.S. I could notify the accused users of this SPI but I'd rather not, since I don't want to inflame tensions if I'm somehow mistaken. If an admin would prefer that I notify, however, then let me know and I will. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 00:54, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Update 11/5/2013

This goes much deeper than I had thought. If you look at Attleboro's early edit history you'll see similar and even more precocious behavior -- including this critical revert of a sockpuppet accusation by 108.120.179.135. Look at 108.120.179.135's edit history and you'll see alleged (alleged) links among Attleboro, Mbhiii, Welhaven, Trift, 98.69.193.71, and "a long list of others." I think a comparison of the edit histories of Attleboro and these other editors bears out 108.120.179.135's claims. You'll see very similar modus operandi to Attleboro-Orthogonious in similarly intense edit wars. (Redistribution of income and wealth was particularly brutal.) In addition there are accusations of links with Dawakin. To top it all off Mbhiii, Dawakin, and Welhaven were blocked indefinitely for sockpuppetry and disruption back in 2010-2011. Before being blocked Mbhiii had a pretty consistent interest in health care legislation and a similar POV to Attleboro. In sum, this may be a lengthy, elaborate, and extremely disruptive pattern of WP:BE. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 22:09, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

A list of other suspected socks of Mbhiii can be found here. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 22:49, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

And here's Mbhiii's SPI page, which hasn't had an active investigation since February 2012. And I see at the bottom a CU was done comparing Attleboro to Mbhiii and it came up negative. However Attleboro's early edit history clearly shows behavior evidence of a link with some other user. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 23:11, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Now they're back to tandem edit warring. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 17:31, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Categories: