Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Arcang7/Archive

13 September 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

1. The suspected sockmaster, Arcang7, reverted an edit to the CrossFit article that I had removed. This article promoted and referenced a publication in the LA Weekly Blog from July of this year. The author of this publication was a writer named Jonathan Maseng.

2. I then looked at Arcang7’s contributions, and found that they were almost exclusively on articles about members of Jonanthan Maseng’s family, and the Temple Israel of Hollywood, where Jonathan Maseng’s father, Danny Maseng, is the cantor. I decided there was a very high probability that Arcang7 was Jonathan Maseng promoting his own article and suggested such. This was before I was aware that this sort of call-out is against Conflict of interest policy.

3. I was then engaged in discussion by suspected sock TruthLeague, who supported Arcang7 and reverted to his version. This user account was created minutes before it posted in this discussion.(http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=CrossFit&diff=512047521&oldid=511885581)

4. I was then engaged by suspected sock JMWriterLA, who claimed that he was the real Jonathan Maseng and argued in support of TruthLeague. This account was also created minutes before it posted in this discussion. (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:CrossFit&diff=512084551&oldid=512077444)

5. Arcang7 then deleted his original comments in the talk page as if to try to erase the evidence that he was involved. (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:CrossFit&diff=512093124&oldid=512089059)


 * In summary, I believe that there is significant harm in Arcang7 using multiple accounts for the following reasons:
 * He is able to create the appearance of consensus by arguing for the same conclusions with multiple user accounts.
 * He is able to revert edits to the CrossFit article without concern for the 3R policy.
 * He is able to revert edits to the talk page without concern for the 3R policy.

AMRAP23 (talk) 03:25, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

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

1. I am Jonathan Maseng's brother, hence the editing history. 2. There was no conflict of interest involved, as my brother's article appeared in a major American newspaper, and related to Crossfit. 3. User AMRAP23 clearly works for CrossFit and has been deleting criticism of the company from Wikipedia. 4. User AMRAP23 falsely accused my brother of a conflict of interest when he wasn't even involved. Arcang7 (talk) 05:21, 13 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I also realized that I should provide some reasoning behind my accusation that AMRAP23 is a CrossFit employee, and therefor guilty of the same conflict of interest which he falsely accused my brother of being guilty of. AMRAP23's name refers to a CrossFit exercise.  AMRAP means As Many Reps as Possible.  AMRAP23 is a particular CrossFit Exercise sequence.  Since joining Wikipedia, AMRAP23 has edited only 3 articles, all pertaining to CrossFit.  His edits have largely been to remove criticism of the company, or to remove the names of individuals who terminated their association with the company.  He has also updated the affiliate membership numbers of CrossFit several times, a number that changes constantly, and is not easy to obtain, though AMRAP23 always seems to know it, indicating that he has inside information on the subject.  He has also edited the page of Gavyn Davies, a partner in Anthos Capital, a firm with which CrossFit is currently involved in legal action.  The user who he cites in his second point is Technethalesian, an account created two days after AMRAP23 was created, which curiously, also edited Gavyn Davies' page, only two days after AMRAP23 did so.  The bulk of their edits appeared to involve tying Davies to the Hutton Inquiry Scandal in England, and tying him to Anthos Capital, the firm with which CrossFit is engaged in litigation.   It is therefore my strong suspicion that if AMRAP23 and Technethalesian are not the same person, they either work directly for CrossFit HQ, or are at least very likely CrossFit affiliate owners or trainers, and are attempting to use this forum, and this charge of sock puppetry to silence criticism of CrossFit, and that is much more against the spirit of Wikipedia than anything he's falsely accused me and my brother of. Arcang7 (talk) 06:47, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

All I know is that my named popped up on google alert, and I saw someone was accusing me of lying. I saw that the username of the person they were accusing me of being was a variant on a username my brother uses. I created a Wikipedia account to refute that it was me making edits on the article, and I was pretty pissed off. I'm annoyed my name's being dragged into this. I'm annoyed at my brother for inserting himself into CrossFit business, because people affiliated with them sent me threats after I wrote a negative article about them. I don't want anything further to do with CrossFit. And reading over my brother's suspicion that AMRAP23 and Technethalesian are CrossFit employees, I have to agree, and wouldn't be surprised. Their employees have a history of wading into comment board discussions, and forums to aggressively defend the company from criticism. I hope this investigation is shut, quickly, because I really don't want to be involved in it and have my name smeared. Thanks. JMWriterLA (talk) 08:21, 13 September 2012 (UTC)


 * User:JMWriterLA, If you are innocent of socking, I apologize in advance, but I hope you can see my reason for concern and the value in investigating the issue to prevent abuse of wikipedia policy.


 * User:Arcang7, My nitch interest in CrossFit is not promotional or designed to protect the article from criticism, and you haven’t shown my edits to be so. The record of my contributions will show that I’ve made no attempt to address criticisms on this page until now, and I’ve addressed only this specific entry. Furthermore, I did so with thorough and well-reasoned discussion that you appear to agree with, as you never challenged my points and conceded most of them in subsequent edits. Note that User:TruthLeague (suspected sock) and I also came to some agreement on additional criticisms in the end. I cannot speak for other editors on this page. Also note that 5 of the top 10 contributors to the CrossFit Article appear to be single-purpose accounts. This may speak to a larger problem with the CrossFit article that may need to be addressed, but I highly doubt these accounts own Affiliate gyms or CrossFit company stock either:


 * Qwertman
 * 99.232.19.189
 * Florian47
 * 74.12.85.133
 * Technethalesian

AMRAP23 (talk) 17:03, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

User AMRAP23 you again use roundabout arguments to disguise the fact that you are a liar. If you look up "Jonathan Maseng Wikipedia Crossfit" in google, the talk page is the second thing that pops up, so stop accusing people of lying. Try google searching for this: "en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3ACrossFit" and see what comes up. You assumed I was my brother because of my previous edits, and you even said it could be a relative. When my brother defended himself, you then accused him of lying. The problem here is that you've made assumptions over and over again, based on faulty logic, because you have a clear agenda. I note that you don't deny that you work for CrossFit. You merely deny owning an affiliate or stock. Since there are only two CrossFit stockholders, one being Greg Glassman and the other being Lauren Jennai, we've ruled out that you're one of them. You also did not address the fact that the account Technethalesian was created two days after yours and has edited the exact same CrossFit related articles you've edited, sometimes within a day of your edits, and always seems to back you up and agree with you. I hope whatever moderator checks this complaint will realize that you are attempting to silence criticism of a company you clearly work for, by threatening people with investigations. This is not about sock puppetry, this is about you controlling what is written about a company that cuts your paycheck.

Also, this section is for "other users," not for you. You made your case, this space is for defense. Arcang7 (talk) 22:50, 13 September 2012 (UTC)


 * It looks like you are right that there is a possibility that JMWriterLA received a google alert to the page. I've removed that from the evidence above. It also looks like I might have violated Conflict of interest by calling you out for being Jonathan Maseng, I didn't realize this was a policy until now so I agree with your decision to remove this from the talk section of the CrossFit article on the basis that it could be considered harassment (not my intention). Regardless, I doubt either of these policy issues, nor your claim that I "work for CrossFit" are going to be considered relevant on this page, as it exists solely to determine whether or not you are a sockmaster, so If you are insistent that I have a COI, I would go here. I still hold that the suspicious appearance of the account TruthLeague and the account JMWriterLA, both of which seemed created to make the same arguments warrants a wikipedia investigation. Even if there is a family relationship between Arcan7 and JMWriterLA, the TruthLeague account must be taken into consideration.
 * Let's hope this is resolved soon.
 * AMRAP23 (talk) 23:45, 13 September 2012 (UTC)\

I think there's enough evidence that AMRAP23, who it seems very likely works for CrossFit, jumped to very hasty conclusions and violated Wikipedia policy in the process of trying to deflect criticism from a company he would appear to work for. I think considering his several previous errors, and admissions of errors, that this doesn't rise to the level warranting such an invasive procedure as check user, which Wikipedia says should only be used in extreme cases. Regarding his claim of sock puppetry, there's also sufficient evidence that Technethalesian is a sockpuppet of AMRAP23, considering they were created two days apart, have edited almost the exact same articles, often within days or hours of each other, and both were involved in this incident, and that one account was used to back up the other. But the evidence, like here, is circumstantial at best and doesn't warrant an investigation. This is harassment, plain and simple, intended to dissuade people from editing an article. And I got dragged into it, and had my real name used. Which personally ticks me off. JMWriterLA (talk) 00:15, 14 September 2012 (UTC)


 * User:JMWriterLA, This section of this case is for you to defend yourself, not for you to distract from the case I've presented by making claims against me. If you feel that I might be a Sockmaster, or you feel that I have a COI, I suggest you post to the COIN, or open a sockmaster case. I have absolutely nothing to hide. Likewise, if you feel an investigation into your potential socking would only vindicate you, you should welcome it rather than discouraging it. I believe the latter only makes you look guilty.
 * AMRAP23 (talk) 24:47, 14 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Here's my defense, you, by breaking Wikipedia rules and bringing my real name into the discussion, have invalidated your claim for an investigation into sock puppetry. My concern is that the investigation will come back inconclusive because my brother often stays with me in LA, and has been here for the last several weeks, which means there is likely to be IP Address overlap on his account and the one I created.  Because you broke Wikipedia rules and brought my real name into this, anything but a full vindication makes me personally look bad.  My privacy, which you violated, is more important than a sock puppet investigation, and my right to it, which you took away, invalidates your claim. JMWriterLA (talk) 02:20, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

I agree that you have a right to privacy, and I'll say again that we should remove my suggestion that you are Jonathan Maseng from the from the talk page of the CrossFit Article. This error, in my mind, does not free you from investigation. I'll take you on your word that you and your brother are sharing the same device, but that still leaves User:TruthLeauge, the user that was created minutes before joining Arcang7 in an attempt to tip the balance in our edit war. I hope you understand the value in at least checking to ensure that this is not a sock account.
 * AMRAP23 (talk) 02:34, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

There might have been some merit to that, had you not brought my REAL NAME into the discussion. Also, as far as I can see, TruthLeauge mainly removed your references to my name, for a pretty logical reason, particularly since you broke rules putting it there. And TruthLeauge didn't restore edits made by my brother, rather attempted to improve them. I'm not sure there's any conclusive evidence there that TruthLeague must be a sock puppet. JMWriterLA (talk) 02:47, 14 September 2012 (UTC)


 * TruthLeague was created minutes before posting in defense of Arcang7 and his edits. His arguments are strikingly similar to Arcang7, as both have accused me of being a CrossFit employee and a single-purpous account holder. You are right that there is no conclusive evidence he is a sock, that is why I opened this case- to get some. Again, I would encourage you to support this effort. If you have nothing to hide, a full investigation will only prove that you are correct and neither you or your brother created a sock to tip the balance in our edit war discussion. Do you not agree?
 * AMRAP23 (talk) 03:13, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

We'll have to agree to disagree. I move that this request be rejected because user AMRAP23 violated Wikipedia rules, made admitted misstatements, did not assume good faith, and has not proven either vandalism or abuse of Wikipedia took place. And that's all I have to say. JMWriterLA (talk) 03:54, 14 September 2012 (UTC)


 * OK. I think you are missing the point of my inquiry, which is not to prove vandalism but sockpuppetry. I am also trying hard to assume good faith but I must admit that this is challenging. For instance, It sounds like you have a good alibi as to how Arcang7 is not your account, but is the account of your brother who happens to be staying with you right now, which would explain any repeat use of the same IP address between Arcang7 and JMWriterLa. Could you offer an explanation for why your brother chose this username? I ask this because Arcang7 has been published as your contact on this website where your poetry is published. Arcang7 is also your username on FanNation.com.
 * AMRAP23 (talk) 04:11, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

You know what, honestly, fuck you, whoever you are. The fact that I'm having to explain that it's a reference to my dead uncle, ArchAngel #7, is beyond the pale. Fuck you, burn in hell, run the investigation, and I don't give a shit at this point, you're a son of a bitch. JMWriterLA (talk) 05:37, 14 September 2012 (UTC)


 * I apologize if you found my question offensive, but your brother promoting your article on wikipedia from your computer using your email username as his account name is a very unusual situation. Because you are obviously offended, I'm going to resign from this discussion. Remember also that it is not me running this investigation. I simply opened the case and wikipedia administrators will have to decide what to do with it.
 * AMRAP23 (talk) 20:26, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - There's enough overlap here in my mind to warrant a check, similar edits to a niche set of articles. It could be meat puppetry, but it looks likely to me. Steven   Zhang  Help resolve disputes! 22:10, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ all three users. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  23:14, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Per request, I am going to spill out the edit times to help determine the socking from brothers:
 * Before September 11, 2012 Anon edits (with UA#1) edits occur. or at what page these edits occurred at.
 * September 11, 2012, Arcang7 shows up after a three year break editing CrossFit via IP#1, and UA#1.
 * Sept 12th, 2012, 17:42 TruthLeague created a user account via IP#1, and UA#1 and edits till 18:44.
 * Sept 12th, 2012, 22:34 JMWriterLA created a user account via IP#1, and UA#1.
 * The following then occurs all via IP#1, and UA#1:


 * 5 hours later, Arcang7 edits via IP#1, UA#2 till 07:29.
 * JMWriterLA picks up editing at 08:21 and is the sole user to use IP#1 any further, using UA#1
 * From 22:50 to 22:57 on the 13th, Arcang7 picks up editing on IP#2, UA#2.
 * IF the geolocation is correct (by being so detailed, I doubt it) IP#1 and IP#2 are ~20 minutes away. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  00:14, 16 September 2012 (UTC)


 * These accounts are obviously being used disruptively and in tandem. I have blocked and tagged all three named accounts. AGK  [•] 12:28, 17 September 2012 (UTC)