Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dublin1994/Archive

Report date August 23 2009, 23:39 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Evidence submitted by ListenerX

On June 16, 2009, user "Dublin1994" made several edits to the Apollo article, appending several references to Greek gods with the gods' Roman names. These edits were reverted, but Dublin1994 continued to edit-war on the page, as may be seen in the several edits following those diff-linked.

Meanwhile, Dublin1994 made a complaint on the talk-page concerning the reverts of his/her edits. This complaint was answered; Dublin1994 then stated his/her emphatic disagreement with the answer.

The following day, Dublin1994 was blocked indefinitely for vandalism. Following the block, two anonymous edits were made on the Apollo talk-page that were remarkably similar in both prose style and position to that of Dublin1994's. Then user "Ireland1994," who also has a similar prose style and position to Dublin1994's, announced on the talk-page that he/she was reintroducing Dublin1994's changes. Ireland1994 then did so.

I became aware of the situation when Ireland1994's edits conflicted with some of mine, and reverted them, suspecting sockpuppetry. Ireland1994 has reverted my reversion, claiming a complete ignorance of who Dublin1994 is, despite having read the talk-page where Dublin1994 made the complaints.

ᛟ ListenerXTalkerX 23:39, 23 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users
 * On the basis of their edits to Apollo and its talk page, I suspect that and  (both self-identified as Irish users), belong in this group as well. Both are probably stale for CU purposes, but I suggest that a checkuser be run on Dublin1994 and Ireland1994 to flush out any other socks that may be lurking about. (Also, shouldn't this case be logged under the name of Dublin1994, as the older account?) Deor (talk) 23:50, 23 August 2009 (UTC)
 * This is my first time logging a sockpuppetry case, and I made a mistake with the case name (I thought it was supposed to be under the name of the currently offending account). Can this easily be corrected? ᛟ  ListenerXTalkerX 00:06, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I think we can leave it to the SSI clerk to decide if it's necessary. Deor (talk) 00:41, 24 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

Accounts blocked indef; IPs for 72 hours. — Jake   Wartenberg  11:26, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Conclusions