Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Eddievega/Archive

28 April 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

The violation first occurs in a talk page discussion, when Aerolit is engaged in a "conversation" with Eddievega. If you look at the edit histories of both accounts, you'll see that they're both editing articles and talk pages that are related to Amanda_Filipacchi and her novels. The idea behind the sock puppetry is to create the illusion of consensus for the ensuing edits. For example, Eddievega expresses a concern on the talk page for a novel and then Aerolit makes the edit to the article. The exact same thing happens with another Filipacchi novel: Eddievega notes a concern on the talk page and then Aerolit edits the article. The IP, 24.105.131.218, is also involved, claiming here to be Eddievega, and then proceeding to vandalize a maintenance tag on the Amanda_Filipacchi talk page that's related to Eddievega. There is an obvious collusion between these three accounts to make "false consensus" edits to articles and talk pages related to Amanda Filipacchi and her novels. I request a checkuser and appropriate blocks. Thank you. Qworty (talk) 11:25, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Given that Filipacchi has been in the news today, it's not inconceivable that Aerolit is a genuine new user. If checkuser comes back with a hit, by all means proceed accordingly, but I don't think this one can go by WP:DUCK.  Nomoskedasticity (talk) 14:06, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
 * 'I have no skin in this game, and only saw this because Qworty's TP is on my watch list due to past vandalism.  The message on his TP sounds like quacking to me.   little green rosetta $central scrutinizer (talk)$ 16:20, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I am the Wikipedia editor that (talk) is accusing of employing a sock puppet. I post under my own handle and no one else's. I do not use sock puppets. I do not know anything about Aerolit or who it might be. It sounds to me like someone who is merely looking into the accusations against Wikipedia for sexism and censorship. However, Qworty has been engaging in questionable editing practices on Amanda Filipaachi's articles and has been called on it by more than one editor. Thanks for pointing out that Qworty is on a vandalism watchlist. EddieVega (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:21, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Don't be confused by what LGR said. Qworty's user and user talk pages are on LGR's personal watchlist because Qworty's pages have been vandalized.-- The Devil's Advocate tlk.  cntrb. 21:15, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * per Nomoskedasticity, above. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  09:32, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Aerolit is not close to the IP mentioned above that has removed the tag claiming to be the accused master. With only two small pieces of evidence, and no other indications of abuse, I am declining to check the master based on this new evidence. Aerolit is obviously not new though, but CU can not find the master that is connected to this account at this time. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  17:04, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Not enough evidence to continue, closing. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 13:45, 1 May 2013 (UTC)