Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/DungeonSiegeAddict510/Archive

10 March 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

DungeonSiegeAddict510 was given a 30 day ban for breach of a Gamergate topic ban. He commented that he would use a sockpuppet to edit articles he wished to edit until this had expired, specifically KDE ones. These KDE articles have since been edited by an account created shortly after this statement called A Missing Semicolon. , as well as other articles DungeonSiegeAddict510 recently contributed to. A Missing Semicolon has also made statements on the Gamergate talk page, claiming that the article is biased (a position DungeonSiegeAddict510 held.) I believe that A Missing Semicolon is a sockpuppet of DungeonSiegeAddict510. PeterTheFourth (talk) 21:35, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

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

I'm going to be honest, I don't know how to deal with sock puppetry accusations. I have to admit that the whole "I'll stick to my KDE articles" is peculiar, but I am firmly in denial of being a puppet. Is there any sort of procedure where you will look into this, or is questioning Wikipedia integrity completely out of the question unless one is some sort of malicious troll? A Missing Semicolon (talk) 22:03, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Reading through their Talk page, I can't help but notice the user wants to distance themself from the whole subject because they were harassed because of it. The user also said they would stick to editing KDE articles with their own account, it would make no sense to set up a puppet to challenge (in a neutral way, mind) Wikipedia bias on a subject which they claim they want no involvement in whilst at the same time editing the articles they wanted to preserve their account for. I am very interested in seeing the outcome of this. A Missing Semicolon (talk) 22:37, 10 March 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Requesting checkuser. From the evidence presented, it's possible but not conclusive. Technical evidence may shed more light on things, though of course that can be obfuscated. HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  23:22, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
 * - Based on provided evidence.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  00:14, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
 * This is an easy one - both accounts ❌. - Mailer Diablo 08:23, 12 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Closing with no action taken. Mike V • Talk 19:06, 12 March 2015 (UTC)