The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

Suspected sockpuppeteer

Arrowoftime (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Handc (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
NewborneBaebe (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Mdsummermsw (talk) 13:29, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence

Castle of Mirrors, created by Arrowoftime, defies all attempts at verification. In the AfD, Arrowoftime makes no appearance, arguing on the talk page instead. Two SPA accounts, Handc and NewborneBaebe appear to support the case, both from unverifiable personal experiences.[1][2]

Arrowoftime previously created several other hoax articles Paradox of the Purse, Kolika, Hold On To My Button and Prince of Jellies. Handc was also flagged for creating Kolika, Hold On To My Button and Prince of Jellies.

Arrowoftime has a history of extensive edits to articles related to Stanford University, but has never said anything about being from Stanford (though I mention that fact in the AfD). Newbornebaebe says, "I'm also a student at Stanford University,"[3]. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 13:29, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest new account User:Elmerfike be added to the suspected socks, following this edit and this edit to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Castle of Mirrors. T L Miles (talk) 20:13, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Hey guys, I don't get it. I've made all sorts of contributions to wikipedia. Can we all just agree to disagree? I have no idea who these other users are by the way, however I'll make you all a deal. And I have to admit: this is a really crackerjack deal. For every ten real articles I write, I get to write one fake one. Guys, this is a really good deal for everyone. Arrowoftime (talk) 22:23, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would need to see deleted edits to make a better evaluation. It looks like these accounts are either sockpuppets or off-wiki friends; I'm not sure which. I would stop short of blocking the sock/SPAs, but maybe an admin will disagree and block them anyway.

I would emphasize to Arrowoftime that it is totally unacceptable to create hoax articles no matter how many good articles you write. I have created about 300 good articles, and that doesn't give me the right to create hoaxes. It's just not allowed. Yechiel (Shalom) 20:27, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Maybe they're socks used to support the (now admittedly) hoax articles. Maybe they're meatpuppets used to support the (now admittedly) hoax articles. Maybe they're meatheads making up stuff to support hoax articles. Are any of those not good reasons to block them? Is it really so horrible to do the right thing for the wrong reason?

At the very least, Arrowoftime is an admitted, repeated and unrepentant hoaxer in need of a nice, long block. The alleged socks are vandalism-only accounts that justify permenant blocks. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 13:01, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And as a note, Arrowoftime has not created one hoax for every ten articles. He's created at least four elaborate hoax articles, vandalised Scientology, and created TWO stubs for Juicebox and one of his professors at Stanford. T L Miles (talk) 13:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

Arrowoftime blocked for sockpuppetry and disruption, NewborneBaebe, Elmerfike, and Handc all blocked as disruptive sockpuppets (based on the edits to their userpages, the AFD, and their deleted edits). Mr.Z-man 17:29, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

---