Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dwarm12345/Archive

01 June 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Sockpuppet charges were raised at Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents. Apparently almost identical editing habits between Mattyjacky and Dwarm, in particular a unique editing feature of typing over other user comments and replacing them with their own. . Dwarm also appears to be pretty much a single purpose account created for editing the Chinaman article. The first edits this "new" user engaged in were to pick up in a serious dispute and edit war with another user to which Mattyjacky had also corresponded. OberRanks (talk) 16:21, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

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

Please also compare


 * User:Respecteveryone
 * User talk:Chinamanissue

and the various creators and edit warriors (deleted diffs unavailable to me) involved in the below articles from this ANI documenting the off-wiki campaign at mitbbs.com to manipulate the relevant articles:


 * UCSD Kubiak "chinaman" issue
 * Clifford Kubiak
 * Clifford Kubiak's Lab Rules
 * UCSD Kubiak Lab Rules Incident
 * University of California Anti-Chinese racism

μηδείς (talk) 16:58, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I see the checkuser has found these accounts to be unrelated. I am a little surprised at this, given the very similar editing ticks such as inserting ALL CAPS words, the occasional grammar slips, the overwriting of comments, and the consecutive edit history. But this whole thing was likely a reaction to the posting on the Chinese BBS, and that has given the issue some publicity among Chinese speakers of English, so that could explain the grammar slips. The other things, I'm not so sure about. Dwarm12345 has said that they are good with computers, so it might just be that they switched IPs/ISPs and changed account at the same time. In the end, I'm not sure it matters as so far Dwarm12345 has not come back after the thread at ANI, and it looked like they were starting to understand the policies and guidelines anyway.  — Mr. Stradivarius  ♫ 10:11, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Respect your right for speculation. But this SPI (assuming its fairness and accuracy) will not lead to it because it is simply not true. Truth to be told, I became aware of the discussion here after reading a mitbbs post, maybe by the other two users you speculate being me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dwarm12345 (talk • contribs) 19:32, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, maybe everyone was reading too much into this. Maybe the overwrites can be explained by a feature of that BBS software? I was never 100% sure there was a relationship between the accounts, though, and as I said, I don't think it matters too much anyway. It is when one person abuses multiple accounts that we have real problems, which doesn't seem like the case here.  — Mr. Stradivarius  ♫ 21:05, 2 June 2011 (UTC)


 * So we do have a confession of meatpuppetry, if not sock puppetry. I'd like a bit more time to investigate and comment, given such parallels as the overwriting of posts as a means of filing complaints.  Let me assure Mr Stradivarius that no software issue could cause that.  I have some threads to read and I will comment again. μηδείς (talk) 00:40, 3 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Stradivarius, I am not aware of the BBS software you mentioned. There is nothing else I want to say.Dwarm12345 (talk) 14:09, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - T. Canens (talk) 16:34, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

❌ –MuZemike 22:42, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I have re-opened this, so that a couple other users can take a look at this. I mean, CU can only say so much. –MuZemike 06:19, 2 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I see several significant differences which indicates a strong likelihood that the "unrelated" result is appropriate. I make no comment to WP:MEAT beyond that of there is no "vote-like activity" such as an AFD here, so allegations of meatpuppetry are irrelevant if not unwarranted. Having been absolved of both items here, I'm going to close this case with . -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 01:00, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I am fairly certain that creating and recreating repeatedly deleted articles when called upon to do so at mitbbs.com (and not to mention the mitbbs recruitment) is a vioaltion of the wording at WP:MEAT: ""Do not recruit your friends, family members, or communities of people who agree with you for the purpose of coming to Wikipedia and supporting your side of a debate" but I will address this further at the ANI. μηδείς (talk) 02:15, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Shirik. I believe people should focus on topics under discussion rather than trying to silencing different voices using off-topic tactics. If people are not allowed to become interested in a discussion here, then all TVs, radio talk shows, news papers, ,,, should all be shutdown.Dwarm12345 (talk) 14:07, 4 June 2011 (UTC)