Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AkankshaG/Archive

01 January 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every six hours.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Alison recently uncovered a bunch of socks, including one by the accused Sockmaster. Would like to check for more for inclusion for the ANI. Phearson (talk) 06:38, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users

 * Editing dispute with User:Cutno/User:Phearson at Vector Marketing and attempted WP:OUTING

I have been editing here since 2006, and have edited over 1,000 articles. I have no history of blocks or bans.

What User:Phearson has failed to disclose here is that he and I are in an editing dispute over at Vector Marketing, which is owned by Cutco Cutlery. If you click on User:Cutno, it resolves to User:Phearson. See this diff where he states: “Hello, I'm Phearson, I originally came to Wikipedia to patrol a very disputed article relating to the Cutco Corporation (formally Alcas) and its Marketing arm "Vector Marketing". Needless to say, if you understand what Multi-level marketing is, and what Scientology is. You probably will know what I'm talking about.” Phearson/Cutno provides in this diff: “I disagree, Vector marketing when I worked for them told me not to say that I worked for them and that I was an "independent contractor." User:Cutno|Cutno (User talk:Cutno|talk) 19:50, 17 June 2009 (UTC)”

Phearson/Cutno has apparently been locked in a fierce and protracted battle with the forces of evil over the Vector article, where one side wants a decidedly positive piece, and the other side apparently wants a decidedly negative piece. The primary contention seems to be the characterization of the company as a direct sales company vs. a characterization of them as a multi-level marketing company, and questions about whether the representatives are employees or contractors.

I’ve been watching the article for awhile, and left a message on the talk page Dec 11th indicating that I thought the article was unbalanced, and needed to look more like a regular company article does on Wikipedia, citing the Apple, Inc. article as one that contains historical, organizational, marketing, outside activities and critical information about the company. I didn’t get any response from Phearson/Cutno, so on December 27th I uploaded a new version of the article, which included a controversy and criticism section. I didn’t include the materials from the SAVE site or the Consumeraffairs sites, as that material is from the Anti-Cutco SAVE organization, which isn’t WP:RS. Rather than any discussion at all, Phearson/Cutno immediately reverted back to his version. On Dec 27th I asked Phearson/Cutno to revert to the draft plus add back the entire controversy and criticism section that he authored, which I again asked him to add back his version of the controversy & criticism section, and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Vector_Marketing&diff=next&oldid=404419797 again. Rather than respond to these requests and include his version of the controversy and criticism section, he reverted everything back to his previous negative version of the article. As I said in this comment, I think a complete article needs to have a controversy and criticism section, it just shouldn’t be the whole article. My last correspondence on the talk page was a request to Phearson to wait until the New Year’s weekend to allow me to address his issues, as I needed to do actual work work during the week and nut be futzing around with Wikipedia. Rather than trying to work through the editing issues with me and waiting for the weekend as I requested, Phearson/Cutno launched a series of attacks on me and articles I’ve edited, apparently believing that the best way to maintain his version of the article is to crush any editor who challenges it. And now we’re here.

As to the attempted WP:OUTING by Phearson, I’ve hesitated to respond to any of the allegations, as our policy recommends that you not respond to these allegations at all. I had hoped that someone with WP:Oversight would suppress these edits. Apparently that’s not happening, so I’ll respond now: I don’t work for mywikibiz, viziworks, ciplex, scientology, vector, or cutco (all theories offered by Phearson/Cutno at one time or another). I do work in the video game industry, beyond that, I’m not willing to say more, as I’m greatly concerned that there are some editors in our community who have lots of time on their hands and would take that information and track me down in RL. Our WP:OUTING policies are here for a reason, and that is to discourage intimidation tactics, and I hope you all will respect that and remove your theorized ruminations about my RL identity.

As to sanfernandocourt, I do have a connection to that editor, which I explained offline to an oversight admin, and that editor is now blocked. Beyond that, I’m not willing to say publicly, because in light of the aggressive stalking exhibited recently, I am concerned for my personal safety and the safety of that editor, and hope that you will respect that. Incidentally, User:Sanfernandocourt removed the offending vote in the Afd, and incredibly, User:Phearson/Cutno put it back in!  I have no connection to sherry84, brittponsett, alharismagee, or thekohser.

Lastly, I’ll say this. Wikipedia has been mostly a happy and safe place for me over the years, someplace I can relax to and have fun with. Bizarre as it may seem to an outsider, I enjoy taking a craptastic article like Vector and completely redrafting it, tracking down every last little bit of information I can find and turning it into something worthy of an encyclopedia. Disagree with my approach to drafting or my edits, fine, let’s work it out on the talk page, but going after me personally: That’s just not cool. AkankshaG (talk) 00:24, 5 January 2011 (UTC) ''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''


 * To avoid issues of outing, I'll just say there has been clear WP:DUCK-type evidence of AkankshaG being involved with recent socking involving five SPAs. Hopefully there is no evidence linking AkankshaG, but running a checkuser would help confirm or deny this. tedder (talk) 08:16, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Two of AkankshaG's articles have recently been at AfD: Articles for deletion/CJ Environmental and Articles for deletion/Ken Goldstein (2nd nomination) and both attracted numerous spa's that flocked to !vote keep. The latest one has had confirmed sockpuppetry. Aside from the diff provided by tedder above, Alison has already confirmed a sockpuppet of AkankshaG. I think a CU should go through the fishy accounts at the first AfD as well to see if we can confirm any additional sockpuppetry going on.   Them  From  Space  22:31, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I've gone through the two AfDs and listed here a few accounts that I think could be socks. I've also endorsed the case to suss out if this is meatpuppetry. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 04:29, 2 January 2011 (UTC)


 * NOTE: I've proposed at ANI that the AfD's be checked for sockery in connection to AkankshaG. Mind keeping this open until then? Phearson (talk) 07:05, 2 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Here's the ultimate question- are these socks related to ? tedder (talk) 10:55, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Phearson should be able to provide the MyWikiBiz evidence, preferably via email. tedder (talk) 19:30, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Being that mywikibiz.com is unavailable (at such a convenient time), I only have evidence linking the Ciplex employee to AkankshaG through the photos uploaded for the puff article via license attained from mywikibiz.com. If CU wants current evidence, I'll be happy to provide it. Phearson (talk) 02:47, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Whatever about their links to MyWikiBiz, I can state that the accounts below are ❌ to, if that's what you're asking. Totally different geolocation - A l is o n  ❤ 02:57, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * AkankshaG and Sanfernandocourt are ✅, but I can't be sure of linking the others. I'd like a more experienced CU to double-check my findings, to see if the others are indeed related. Chase me ladies, I&#39;m the Cavalry (talk) 06:15, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I took another look, and would say that is . Also, I would say that  is  bordering on . Additionally, from simply a technical standpoint  appears ❌.  Tiptoety  talk 08:03, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Just to half answer Tedder's question, we can't determine that based on CU data, as everything is extremely stale for MyWikiBiz their socks (as far as I can tell, anyway). It'd have to be based on behavioral evidence, which I'm not really seeing. Or is there evidence here that's not apparent? —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 17:34, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * 5 days + most blocked. -- DQ  (t)   (e)  22:48, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

28 February 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

See the COIN, also, WP:DUCK due to similar article revisions to Vector Marketing. Phearson (talk) 07:12, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - It's possible; Akanksha seems to have been abandoned. CU to clarify. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 13:09, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * , I think the matter is moot . Note that I ran a quick check on and did not find any obvious sock there. I don't feel there is enough evidence to look further. --  Luk  talk 13:51, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Just looking at this now, I see no crossover in account timings either, so it could have been a lost password. Also Vector Marketing has only revisions by Chicago2011. I have to agree with Luk here. -- DQ  (t)   (e)  14:49, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Closing as taken. --  DQ  (t)   (e)  03:05, 2 March 2011 (UTC)