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

Suspected sockpuppets

• Leaptsumo (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Boneywoulded (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Utterhivedr (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Cyptjame (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

• User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
• Editor interaction utility

Please see the evidence I have placed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gluegolgier/Secret evidence. (Note: User:Soap has kindly deleted that page for me, so you must be an admin to see its content.)

Please also do a CheckUser: I would be surprised if there were are no other sockpuppets.

Cheers, —Unforgettableid (talk) 04:23, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

@Risker: If you haven't seen Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mr RD/Secret evidence, I suggest you do so. ekips39 07:33, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @Ekips39: Did you mean to link to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gluegolgier/Secret evidence instead? —Unforgettableid (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 21:35, 25 January 2015

(Didn't notice this until now; the ping must not have worked -- due to the missing timestamp, maybe?) @Unforgettableid: No, as you had already linked that and I was addressing Risker's statement that Mr RD was not related. Separately, is it really a good idea to comment on the archive page? I'm not sure what the optimal place for your questions is, though (hence why I'm also replying here). Also pinging an alternate account of mine (Ekips3a) to determine whether the archived nature of the page is inhibiting pings. ekips39 (talk) 02:59, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• I only checked a couple but CU isn't going to be any help, it does stink of WP:MEAT paid editing though (somewhat like Morning277). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:01, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Dear @Callanecc, do you mean to suggest that several real live human beings:
  1. each registered an account,
  2. each learned how to do markup and referencing,
  3. each wrote one single article, and
  4. each disappeared from Wikipedia, never to edit again? :-)

Kind regards, —Unforgettableid (talk) 01:50, 26 December 2014 (UTC) (original reporter; not a clerk, CheckUser, or admin)[reply]

@Unforgettableid: Yep, that's how they've done it in the past. The other option is that one person has written the articles (etc) and sent it to other people to post or complete other tasks. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:56, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Callanecc: I guess it's possible that one person wrote each article and sent it to others together with detailed instructions on how and when to complete each of the intricate steps I've listed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gluegolgier/Secret evidence. But I think it's more likely that it's one person using some sort of proxy setup which lets him switch his IP address to one of a selected set of IP addresses at will. Agreed? —Unforgettableid (talk) 21:31, 25 January 2015 (UTC) (original reporter; not a clerk, CheckUser, or admin)[reply]

• Checkuser comments: These accounts are, for the most part,  Stale, so can't be checked. I concur with the initiator, though, that there does seem to be organized activity aimed at promotional editing. I'd suggest considering serious review for all of the articles marked by Gluegolgier, whom I have blocked, though I suspect all of the relevant accounts have been abandoned. Incidentally, there's no reason to think that there is any relationship between Gluegolgier and User:Mr RD, so it would be considerate to remove that tag from Gluegolgier's page. Risker (talk) 01:12, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Ekips39, I have seen the "secret evidence". First off, if someone's going to be accused of socking, they should be able to confront the accusation; this secret evidence stuff is not helpful at all, and is a breach of WP:AGF. Secondly, Mr RD has been doing new page patrol for a very long time, including a complete overlap of the period where Gluegolgier was editing; during the past year he has patrolled thousands of pages in a wide area of topics, only some of which are related to businesses. Third, Mr RD has right on his user page that he's a member of Wikiproject Companies, so it is not surprising that he is editing in that topic area. No, I still think that tag should come off Gluegolgier's page; I'll note that nobody bothered to include Mr RD in this SPI, so there's no justification in having it on Gluegolgier's talk page now. Risker (talk) 08:25, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear @Risker: Mr RD is a paid editor. He says so right in the lead section of his user page. IIRC he only admitted it in late 2014, after the Terms of Use were changed and after someone advised him to admit it. Was all his new page patrolling good, or was it malicious? I'm not sure. Why did I not include Mr RD in this SPI? I had a hunch, but not enough concrete evidence. Why did I use secret evidence to prosecute Gluegolgier? Because I don't want to teach serial meatpuppeteers (like him) how to avoid getting caught. Fair enough? —Unforgettableid (talk) 21:32, 25 January 2015 (UTC) (original reporter; not a clerk, CheckUser, or admin)[reply]

• After reviewing the contributions of the contributions, I think it's likely this is a case of meatpuppetry. Though the accounts haven't made an edit in a number of months, I have blocked them as a precaution in case they were to return later on. Mike V • Talk 19:48, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
•  Clerk note: Per the above suggestion by Risker, I've removed the sockpuppet tag from Gluegolgier's talk page. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 05:37, 20 January 2015 (UTC) 08:16, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]