Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Eggloff/Archive

11 March 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Two brand new editors appear within two days of each with the same agenda (removing criticism) on the same article. Wildtypemonkey has been edit warring to include off-topic material into the article. &mdash; goethean 23:34, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Sock indef'd and master warned. Closing now. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:30, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

13 March 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

As soon as User:Wildtypemonkey was warned about his sockpuppetry, he abandoned the User:Wildtypemonkey account. At that point in time, User:Defensor1956 aggressively took over the exact same edits at Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute, and edits in the same POV at Southern Poverty Law Center. Additionally, one of User:Defensor1956's previous topics was Homophile, a term closely associated with CFAM president Austin Ruse. There had been an apparent conflict of interest on the part of User:Wildtypemonkey which I documented here. &mdash; goethean 16:13, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Defensor has denied it, but I think it's clear that he's affiliated with Ruse or with CFAM in some way. His edits to Homophile (to add a coinage by Ruse), to CFAM (to remove negative information about the organization and add promotional information), to SPLC (to add poorly sourced negative information after they labeled CFAM a hate group), to University of Dallas (Ruse's wife is one of the governors of a school that separated from UD, and Defensor's edits relate to that split) clearly indicate this. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 16:28, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - - Looks likely but not enough for me to block, requesting CU evidence. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:09, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Nothing Conslusive. ❌ -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  00:35, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Closing case with no action per CU result. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:31, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

09 May 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Wildtypemonkey has abused multiple accounts in the past. There is currently an AFD on Catholic Family and Human Rights Institute, upon which three of these new users have descended, two !voting to keep. They are clearly either sockpuppets or meatpuppets &mdash; I am extremely skeptical that all of these new users have coincidentally happened upon the same AFD debate simultaneously and unanimously. &mdash; goethean 19:04, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

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


 * I've added another one. These accounts have in common that they have been around for a long while but are rarely or never active except to promote or defend this group; pretty much the definition of a sleeper. Regardless of the CU result, I agree with goethan that we have to consider the possibility that these are meatpuppets, given their obvious coordination to promote/defend the same subject. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 21:25, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Very clearly there is an rather unprofessional vendetta against the C-FAM group and anyone who steps in the edit the article in anything other than a defamatory way. For the record, I do not know the others I am accused of associating with. I had thought that one of the underlying rules of Wikipedia was accepting the good faith of editors. I feel that Roscelese has some kind of vendetta against this C-FAM group and it is coloring her approach. She really ought to stop. Eggloff (talk) 13:12, 19 May 2014 (UTC)EggloffEggloff (talk) 13:12, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * &mdash;Darkwind (talk) 10:46, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
 * As anticipated, you are likely dealing with some outside canvassing/WP:MEAT. The CU results show the following:
 * and have edited the same topic from the same IP.
 * , and  are editing from the same geolocations as  using a variety of devices.
 * is to be specifically related to the accounts above, but again WP:MEAT is a possibility.
 * is.


 * If any sock blocks are made based on these results I suggest that the report be moved to reflect Eggloff as the master.--Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 18:50, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Re-filed under Eggloff. AGK  [•] 19:01, 20 May 2014 (UTC)


 * I have blocked some of the accounts as probable or confirmed sock puppets. I took no action against Colchester121891, but in the event that account continues to cause concern an investigation may be re-opened; much more compelling behavioural evidence would have to be offered in that event. Localemediamonitor is behaviourally and technically stale, so I have also left that account be. All are tagged accordingly, so this is . AGK  [•] 19:04, 20 May 2014 (UTC)