Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/WorkerBee74

''The following discussion is preserved as an archive of a Request for checkuser. Please do not modify it .''

WorkerBee74

 * Suspected sockpuppeteer


 * Suspected sockpuppets

Code Letter: DEF

LotLE × talk
 * Report submission by

Mostly copied from a report by User:Clubjuggle at Suspected sock puppets/WorkerBee74. Apologies if I have failed to adjust the report format correctly (let me know, I'll try to remedy errors).

Apparent !vote-stacking at Talk:Barack Obama and general abuse of process.
 * Evidence

A RFCU turned up a "possible" link between User:WorkerBee74 and the 1st three IP addresses; the last two were not included in the request. The possible match was based on a common ISP (Sprint PCS). Though there was no direct IP match, it was noted that IPs were known to change rapidly on this ISP, probably due to its nature as a cellular service provider. Most devices on this network would be cellular phones with WAP-enabled Internet access. The 4th IP address on the list is also owned by Sprint PCS but was not included in the RFCU.

The final IP address on the list is registered to Comcast Business. An edit yesterday from 74.94.99.17 added "arbitrary section breaks" to a long discussion section with an edit summary of "Arbitrary section breaks are necessary for people using laptops or other devices with limited RAM". Reality is that arbitrary section breaks would be useless in improving page-rendering for laptops, but based on my own experience (which includes experience with Sprint/Nextel), most WAP-enabled cell phones Blackberries and the like are incapable of displaying very long sections of text without headers that can be rendered by the wireless carrier's proxy server as page breaks. A similar edit without explanation was made by WorkerBee74 on 22 June. Again, I know of no purpose for such arbitrary section breaks besides aiding rendering of pages on a cellular phone or Blackberry.

In this edit WorkerBee74 claimed an 'inability to cut and paste'. Given his apparent ability to understand complex concepts as evidenced by his ability to use and cite various Wikipedia policies, this is far more likely to be a question of device limitations than of technical ability. The user did not respond to a query asking him why he couldn't cut and paste.

At WorkerBee74 asserts that the IP !votes came from other users on his ISP; however the probabiliity that 3 different anon-users all showed up on the same day, all on Sprint PCS phones, all to vote on the same question in the same article, and oh, by the way, all happened to vote the same way, conveniently after someone was kind enough to add arbitrary section breaks in case someone surfing Wikipedia from a cell phone should happen by the talk page, probably satisfies WP:SNOW.


 * Comments

While "wiggle room" might normally be allowed for dynamic IPs, Clubjuggle's timing and "section break" evidence is pretty conclusive. I found WorkerBee's behavior suspicious from the get-go, when he created his user page with "So how do I get started?" then immediately dove into the fray using wiki markup and citing Wikipedia protocol. This guy looks to be an experienced editor using new accounts and IP addresses to distort the consensus-building process solely on Barack Obama-related articles.

Someone give Clubjuggle a Detective's barnstar. Shem(talk) 01:25, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Although I am convinced of sockpuppetry here, and have filed a report at Suspected sock puppets/WorkerBee74 (from which this RFCU was cut and pasted by another user), I believe this checkuser is unnecessary, at least regarding the first 4 IP address since Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Kossack4Truth2 already returned "possible". I also believe there is sufficient evidence in the existing SSP report to reach a conclusion on the existing evidence, and that a RFCU is therefore premature with regard to the final IP. I therefore recommend that the administrators decline this report but expressly reserve the right to resubmit, should it become necessary. --Clubjuggle T / C  14:35, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

This has already been addressed at Requests for checkuser/Case/Kossack4Truth. WorkerBee has not used those exact IPs but they are consisent with his IPs and method of connection, so possible/likely that he is editing while logged out. I believe there is a strong likelihood this is deliberate, otherwise I would not be willing to explicity connect a user to an IP address. Thatcher 22:38, 26 June 2008 (UTC) ''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the Request for checkuser. Please do not modify it. Subsequent requests related to this user should be made above, in a new section.''
 * Conclusions