Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Danielray15/Archive

02 April 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

An IP removed referenced, but quite negative, material from the lead of Davison Design & Development, an edit then repeated by new user  on three occasions. I and reverted him and I posted a 3RR template after the third removal.

Shortly after the warning, another new user removed that same material from the lead, copying it verbatim into the body of the article

I believe this is a pretty clear sockpuppet case. Haven't requested a checkuser, but admin may consider it necessary. GDallimore (Talk) 18:40, 2 April 2014 (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
This seems pretty obvious to me. The chain of events seems to be as follows... The IP removed negative information from the article. They were reverted. They created an account the next day (Danielray15), possibly in the hope that edits from a registered account would be accepted. They were mistaken, and were warned after 3 reverts that they could be blocked. So they created a second account (JohnSmith3131) to avoid being caught violating 3RR. What I'll do is this... Block the sockpuppet, then block the master for 24 hours (which is standard for a first time 3RR violation]]. If they create more sockpuppets or continue to revert after the block expires, we can consider blocking them for a longer period of time. They may have a legitimate concern at that article, or may not, but either way that should be settled by a discussion not an edit war. --  At am a  頭 22:31, 2 April 2014 (UTC)