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

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

Suspected sockpuppets

Crevaner (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
OldRightist (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
AmeriCan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Deaniack (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Thefreemarket (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Cenarium ^Talk 15:19, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence

Most of them have similar userpages and userboxes, none of them have voted in a mfd before and have literally jumped on this mfd: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] . They also have similar center of interests as shown by the subpages of Voldemore, userbowes and contributions. Cenarium ^Talk 15:19, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note also that two users had problems signing, see these diffs: [7] and [8]. Cenarium ^Talk 15:27, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Additional evidence, albeit circumstantial; with the exception of that bundle of edits, have not actually contributed since. Ironholds 15:28, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Additional: Look at the timing for their edits: 0:17, 0:50, 0:57, 1:12 and then 3:39 and 3:49 respectively. Ironholds 15:33, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

I'd advise asking someone with the Checkuser ability to find if they've been editing from the same/similar IP addresses. Ironholds 15:28, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deaniack's userpage is not similar at all with the others. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 15:32, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Per the recommendations from WP:RCU, posting a CU request would be premature now. Indeed, the profile of Deaniack is not that similar, and the user has no deleted contributions. Note the creation log however, 1 may 2007, while 30 April 2007 for the FreeMarket and 29 April 2007 for Voldemore. Cenarium ^Talk 15:39, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The contributions are similar, for example, some are related to MSNBC, diffs: [9], [10], [11], or Fox news, diffs: [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], etc. Cenarium ^Talk 15:59, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• This is ridiculous! OldRighist, Voldemore, Thefreemarket, Deaniack, and AmeriCan are all friends of mine. I introduced them to Wikipedia. A few of them tell each other about articles that need some editing that's all. Voldemore emailed us about the userpage/subpage issue and asked for some help. -- Crevaner (talk) 18:08, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

if that's true it's still a no-no; you've all posted edits biased by your friendship with Voldemore, posting a particular viewpoint regardless of its validity and thereby disrupted a wikipedia procedure. Ironholds 18:12, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Hmm. I for one didn't know that was a violation of rules. OK, I'll tell the others. We won't do something like that again. At least, I won't be a part of it. -- Crevaner (talk) 18:30, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• It's common sense! Articles for Deletion is based on people with neutral points of view debating it. If anyone was allowed to call in all their friends with a wiki account to vote nothing would ever be done fairly. Ironholds 18:33, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Suggestion: Assuming Crevaner is telling the truth (and not just Voldemore trying not to be banned) i suggest a formal warning to the accounts involved about neutrality and so on, and the dismissal of the case. I'll be keeping an eye on the accounts involved for a few months just to check, and i've also requested their votes be discounted from the deletion since they obviously cant be trusted as even having read the page involved. Ironholds 18:36, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• I can't speak for the others. But I did read the userpage involved and I genuinely believe it is not a violation of policy. Just out of curiosity, is there an official policy on collaborations with regard to deletion votes? -- Deaniack (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 19:08, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: I'm posting on WP:AN/I about this, as admins should sort this out (and it will get more attention there). The discussion may be found here. 5:15 19:12, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant pages are WP:MEAT and WP:CANVAS. In this case, since the users weren't recruited specifically to stack the votes, it's not a particularly egregious violation, but canvassing your wikifriends for extra votes is not that cool, especially if you know them IRL. Since the matter has already resolved itself, and since I think the users in question really didn't realize they were doing anything inappropriate, I'm inclined to just let them know this sort of thing is frowned upon, and leave it at that. --Jaysweet (talk) 19:25, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I also don't think any further measure is needed at this point, but the users are warned. Using stealth canvassing in an attempt to sway consensus in a community debate is against our policies. Cenarium ^Talk 23:02, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• It's not appropriate to talk of meatpupetry in this case, the users are not new, but have edited for a while. The possibility of sockpuppetry cannot be definitely discarded but assuming good faith, the explanation given is acceptable, so I'm probably going to close this after a reasonable period of time. Cenarium ^Talk 23:15, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Its probably a good idea for an admin to warn them on their talk pages. 5:15 00:26, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• I, or another admin, may warn them at some point, but in lights of new information, assuming good faith is not an option any more. It doesn't seem to be an isolated incident, so a checkuser will be filled soon. Cenarium ^Talk 01:51, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• If the users are seperate meatpuppets who have been warned before rather than suspected sockpuppets will checkuser help? After all, they could be posting from completely different IP ranges. Ironholds 02:36, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• User:Cenarium has filed a checkuser case at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Voldemore. EdJohnston (talk) 18:22, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

Checkuser confirmed that the users have the same IP, as well as Trojanian (talk · contribs) and Reid1967 (talk · contribs). All users have been bocked indefinitely. Cenarium ^Talk 13:01, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

---