Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dead Goldfish/Archive

15 October 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Both accounts have shown a narrow focus on the James McGibney article or related topics (Editing material related to Bullyville, James' organization).

Inserting negatively slanted content:

Dead Goldfish:1, 2, 3, 4 - note edit summary, 5

Unholyrollerz: 1, 2, 3, 4

Dead Goldfish was blocked on February 14, 2014 for continued BLP violations. A week later, Dead Goldfish was unblocked by JzG (the blocking admin) with the condition that Dead Goldfish would not edit or comment on James McGibney. I believe the second account, Unholyrollerz, was created to evade this restriction.

The Unholyrollerz account was created on June 30, 2014 and began with an edit to the article's talk page. This edit attempts to discredit the award in a similar fashion as Dead Goldfish did for the degree. Unholyrollerz also has an interest in challenging the same content as Dead Goldfish.

Both users have a tendency to claim their edits represent consensus, when one has not been reached:

Dead Goldfish: 1    Talk page

Unholyrollerz: 1    2 Talk page

Both users also tend to refer to material in a similar vernacular:

Dead Goldfish
 * "Thank you for trying to remove the bogus material."
 * "I wasn't the one who added information regarding a BOGUS claim of having a Harvard Business School Executive Education."

Unholyrollerz
 * "the ONLY sources of this medal claim is this completely bogus Bloomberg biography"
 * "it was the very same Bloomberg source that had the claim about the bogus Chadwick University degrees"
 * "There is a huge incentive for people to make such bogus claims and we should be watchful for them"

Dead Goldfish and Unholyrollerz often use bold font to emphasize points:

Dead Goldfish
 * "I would URGE you to please read the following"
 * "I wasn't the one who added information regarding a BOGUS claim of having a Harvard Business School Executive Education."
 * "the truth is that I have edited on MANY different articles seems to have escaped him" ... "But the fact remains is that I edited articles LONG before the McGibney article came into question"
 * "Undid revision 594654219 by GB fan (talk)how about YOU do it instead, since ur the one who thinks that everything is fake. the pic is what it is."
 * "the vast majority of the 7.7 BILLION people on this planet would take it to mean"
 * "added yet a THIRD source for all the whitewashers out there who keep trying to claim McGibney didn't go to Chadwick"
 * "There is ZERO hint of unreliability with ANY of Business Week's reporting."
 * "Added "claims to attend" since this info is NOT verified. Specifically Harvard says they have NEVER heard of McGibney and there is no PROOF he attended ANY Harvard classes. its only McGibney who claims this."

Unholyrollerz
 * "the ONLY sources of this medal claim is this completely bogus Bloomberg biography"
 * "Dude, the guy has his own Wikipedia page and has published HUNDREDS of articles"
 * "Why do you keep changing the article when the version that is there is as a result of discussions between THREE editors."
 * "The claim McGibney has made (that he was awarded this medal for providing computer security for ALL US Embassies WORLDWIDE) is a VERY extraordinary claim. He claims not to have provided computer security for just one embassy or two embassies, but for ALL embassies all over the world"
 * "Keep in point, the ONLY sources of this medal claim is this completely bogus Bloomberg biography which is user generated content. There is absolutely NO INDEPENDANT verification done by Bloomberg."
 * "In my opinion, it is absolutely clear from the military record that James McGibney did NOT receive a medal for providing computer security for US embassies."

Unfortunately Dead Goldfish's account is stale for checkuser, but I feel that the behavior evidence is more than sufficient. Mike V •  Talk  00:14, 15 October 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

 * Thank you, Mike V for that very full account. Comparing editing histories, I also found several more similarities, leaving no room for doubt. Both accounts indef-blocked. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:57, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

26 February 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

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

 * Posting just for the record. I've blocked the account per these obvious edits: The devil in the sun (1, 2) Unholyrollerz (1, 2, 3, 4) Mike V • Talk 00:05, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

09 January 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

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

 * Noting that I've blocked Daisychained as a suspected sock of Dead Goldfish. This account has continued with similar edits on the James McGibney article and the technical evidence shows the account geolocates to a similar location as past socks. Mike V • Talk 19:32, 9 January 2016 (UTC)