Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Claremont Lincoln University/Archive

17 June 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

On the article Claremont Lincoln University, the article had built up promotional material over some time. However, another user came by and reverted the article back to a non-promotional state.

However, the sockmaster, who clearly is affiliated with the subject of the article, restored the promotional material, alleging that someone with opposition to the article's subject "hijacked" the page and made it more negative in tone (but IMO, it's neutral). I reverted his edits, and warned him about his username and COI policies. As such, he was uw-softerblocked.

Now, this sock comes by, and the only edit on its account is adding back that promotional material that I reverted earlier. His style of edit summary is very similar to that of the master. Though the sockmaster was allowed to create a new account, I think that even though its username meets policy, it violates the "promotional editing is not acceptable regardless of the username you choose" clause of uw-softerblock. Gparyani (talk) 16:37, 17 June 2015 (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
— Berean Hunter   (talk)  17:04, 17 June 2015 (UTC) — Berean Hunter   (talk)  18:56, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Copyvio in addition to promoting. semi'd the article for one month and closing.
 * No action against the users, then? Gparyani (talk) 17:45, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
 * The master account was already blocked and yes, I blocked the sock, Sorry that I did not mention that before.