Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Elena Tsaranova/Archive

03 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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


 * Editing interests coincide 100% in topics they edit - Peter Dauvergne and adding mentions and citations of Dauvergne to articles (literally all they do); Sally.reay account also worked on Liu Institute for Global Issues where Dauvergne is director.
 * Master and Sock1 account names are very parallel.
 * Editing time pattern of Pedros Zesteran and Elena Tsaranova is exactly parallel - both were active in Dec 2013 then vanished until this month and have become active again, editing on the same topics
 * Noting that Sally.reay is a bit less likely here and is definitely stale so I know you cannot checkuser it; please do the other three though.


 * Some details and time-frames of their activities on the Peter Dauvergne article:
 * Sept 2011 Sally.reay created the article with no sourcing and apparently with some copyvio content from the Institute's website.


 * Dec 2013 activity
 * Dec 4 Pablos account (Sockmaster) added slew of promo content and removed COI tag in Dec 2013;
 * Dec 4 content was toned down and citation-needed tagged in subsequent edit by 3rd party that day
 * Dec 5 Elena Tsaranova account replaces cn tags with citations and then vanishes


 * 2015 activity
 * March 2015 Pedros Zesteran makes first appearance and notes "Minor; page in decent shape."
 * Sept-Nov Pedros makes three edits, the biggest adding a new award for him


 * Today
 * Elena stopped by to change an error in a quote.


 * Elsewhere in the 'pedia just today (am not doing the past as what happened today is enough, I think)
 * Today Elena
 * added citation of Dauvergne book, Shadows in the Forest, to Deforestation in Indonesia article.
 * added citation of Dauvergne book, "Eco-Business", to Corporate social responsibility article
 * added citation of Dauvergne book, "Protest Inc." to Protest article
 * added citation of Dauvergne articles, "Big Brand Sustainability" and "The Prospects and Limits of Eco-Consumerism" to Environmental certification article
 * added citation of Dauvergne article, "The Rise of Brazil as a Global Development Power" to Economy of Brazil article


 * Today Pedro
 * added citation of Dauvergne book, "Eco-Business" in one spot, and of articles, "Big Brand Sustainability" and "The Prospects and Limits of Eco-Consumerism" to another spot in Sustainability article (the latter, the same exact edit as Elena above)
 * added citation of Dauvergne article, "The Global South in Environmental Negotiations" to Reducing emissions from deforestation and forest degradation article
 * added citations of Dauvergne article, "The Changing North-South and South-South Political Economy of Biofuels", "Forest, Food, and Fuel in the Tropics", and "Biofuels and the Politics of Mapmaking" to Biofuel article.
 * did the same thing to three other articles, Seal hunting, Sustainable coffee, and Lumber (sorry, I am getting bored)


 * Today Pablo:
 * added citation of Dauvergne article, "The Problem of Consumption" to Consumerism article
 * added citation of Dauvergne article, "The Prospects and Limits of Eco-Consumerism" used also be Elena to Consumer activism article
 * added citation of Dauvergne book, "The Corporatization of Activism", to Anti-consumerism

I think that makes pretty clear what is going on yes? Jytdog (talk) 03:18, 3 February 2016 (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

 * Sally.reay is stale. All other accounts, as well as and  are ✅. NativeForeigner Talk 15:40, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Moved here from Sockpuppet investigations/Pablos Quirious, blocked and tagged. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:17, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

07 March 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

At the start of last month we identified and blocked a set of socks here to promote Peter Dauvergne. See the archive. Per its contribs, this account was created on Feb 4, the day after the socks and masters were blocked. Their edits have been almost all in the topics that interested the prior socks (and Dauvergne himself per our article on him), namely forestry, ecology, chess, conservation, not to mention Peter Dauvergne. The sock doodled around other topics until it arrived at the Dauvergne article yesterday and made this edit which from a high level did clean up some of the PROMO that was still there from the last socks.

But it also had a giveaway in that they slipped a "2016" into the entry about his publications in the journal "Global Environmental Politics" - signifying that this editor knows that Dauvergne published in that journal just this year. Which indeed he did.

I went through the article again and cleaned it further, including leaving citations-needed tags.

The Solomons123 account came back today and added citations, with edit note referring to Dauvergne as "this guy" (hm). In that dif they included this link to proquest, which shows the editor is at the University of British Columbia, where Dauvergne is; the editor removed that link in their next edit. In that initial dif, all they did was stick citations on - not a single edit to the content. This is not an effort to create content supported by sources, but rather just to remove tags. I fixed that.

Please CU this account; it is pretty clearly a sock to me. It is not relentlessly promoting Dauvergne as the last ones did. The edit just adding sources was pretty bad-faith, but this account is not adding biased content now; at least not yet. I have opened a discussion with them to see if they will disclose and follow the COI guideline this time around, but I am not hopeful and wanted to get the CU done before the former socks become stale. Jytdog (talk) 01:51, 7 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the CU report. Behaviorally they are right in line with past socks. No reply from them on their Talk page since I asked them to disclose any COI; they stopped editing altogether after I tried to open the discussion.  Jytdog (talk) 21:12, 15 March 2016 (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

 * The account is between and .--Bbb23 (talk) 22:58, 7 March 2016 (UTC)


 * With the somewhat negative CheckUser result, I don't see anywhere near enough behavioural evidence to justify blocking, so I am closing this investigation. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 11:10, 31 March 2016 (UTC)