Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Alex West/Archive

Report date July 1 2009, 03:33 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Evidence submitted by Delicious carbuncle

All named accounts primarily edit film or model related articles, the vast majority of which are relevant to Scott Shaw. A number of dynamic IPs (Verizon) which geolocate to Los Angeles, USA, also seem to be involved. There are literally hundreds of articles linking to Scott Shaw which seems oddly out of proportion to his status or achievements. I included the IP in this report to show the addition of Shaw to a template listing modern Dharmic writers. Scott Shaw · Alan Watts · Thich Nhat Hanh ...which one of these things is not like the others?

Both and  have !voted in the AfD for Zen filmmaking, an article about Scott Shaw. Although the two accounts have different editing and commenting styles, they share some features which should be apparent to anyone used to dealing with sockpuppets. There are obvious similarities in these recent responses to questions on their talk pages - Alex West: &, Filmbotboy:  &. This seems to me to be a clear case vote stacking with sockpuppets, and very probable long-term COI editing. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 03:33, 1 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.

I've looked over this case quite closely, and call it a "gut feeling", but after reviewing a poor man's checkuser, it seems more likely that these users simply have similar interests. The style of editing of demonstrates a knowledge of Wikipedia's policies, for example, adding a fair use rationale that wasn't provided by Bigharley, and detailed rationales at AFD. The user comes across as someone who has knowledge of Wikipedia policy, and seems to me to be a user in their own right. I feel it's highly unlikely that any of the above "socks" belong to. Whether or not they are a sock of someone else is another matter, but, in the unlikely case they are socks, I see no abuse, so no administrative action required. You may wish to refer this to the Conflict of interest noticeboard, however. They may be able to help you there. That said, this looks like a case of separate users, with similar interests, editing similar articles, rather than the same user creating a sockfarm. Best, Steve Crossin    The clock is ticking.... 01:42, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments by other users
 * Steve, I'm not sure why you assume that knowledge of wikipedia policy has any relationship with sockpuppetry - it doesn't. Did you look at the talk page discussions I linked for Alex West and Filmbotboy? Another user has provided an additional clue here, if the actual words weren't enough. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 03:24, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Right, but demonstrating a clear knowledge of how Wikipedia works, and it's policies, is a way to rule out that they are not another user, who has a clear different editing style. The fact that they edit similar topics doesn't make them the same user. I've taken another look at the evidence and user contribs, and there just isn't enough evidence to come up with any other answer other than the one I've provided. I've asked for the opinion of another clerk, and they have come to the same resolution. It's an unusual case, but from what I can see, it appears to be more than anything, two or more users that have a common interest in the same topic. Best, Steve Crossin    The clock is ticking.... 03:39, 5 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * This is a bit of a tricky case. That said, the connection between and  is obvious enough to warrant a block, and as such I have issued one. As for the rest, I am still discussing this with some other clerks, as well as reviewing evidence (which this case could use a bit more of). So for right now, lets call this  .  Tiptoety  talk 21:24, 7 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Conclusions
 * I have decided that all these accounts are related and have blocked them all. Tiptoety  talk 21:44, 7 July 2009 (UTC)