Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Editdoctor/Archive

23 April 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 " ~ "''

There have now been three single purpose accounts who have edited the La Sierra University article since February. Suspiciously, these accounts make a total of one edit and leave. The content they have edited doesn't necessarily match up but I think its worth a check user. BelloWello (talk) 04:39, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

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

is obviously an experienced user with a new, single purpose account who has been very active in editing articles in a narrow field: colleges and universities belonging to the Seventh Day Adventists denomination. To make sure that this SPI is being made with clean hands, I'd request the editor to please contact whichever CU takes this case to reveal his other accounts.  Will Beback   talk    06:22, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Note: I have removed User:Editdoctor from the suspected sockpuppet list because that a user cannot be a sockpuppet of itself. EBE123 talkContribs 21:58, 23 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Followup - I have been in email contact with BelloWello and he has addressed my concerns satisfactorily.   Will Beback    talk    04:19, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Sorry, this case makes no sense. Xdvale removes the controversy section, and Editdoctor readds it. Why would an account do that? Further, Stephenu7 just made a standard vandalistic edit that doesn't match any of the others. Sorry, but unless there's actual evidence that makes sense, I'm not endorsing. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 12:27, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
 * So then, should you put the Clerk decline or the on-hold tag?  EBE123  talkContribs 19:46, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't see the connection and I'm tempted to close this. And to block one edit accounts is kinda iffy. But I'm not sure if will had second comments. -- DQ  (t)   (e)  20:39, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Done then. -- DQ  (t)   (e)  04:23, 25 April 2011 (UTC)