Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Enanews/Archive

12 June 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

The alleged puppet master has been blocked for their user name. 122.102.32.106 appears to be being used for block evasion, though only checkuser can say for sure. SpokesManBD appears to be no longer used, but also was used for block evasion.

These users appear to lack WP:COMPETENCE so this may be an honest mistake. Even so, they have tag team edited Draft:Eastern News Agency.

With regard to supplying diffs, I feel there is no need. Instead I point you to Draft:Eastern News Agency and all the edits therein. A great deal of quacking is apparent here.

I have chosen not to notify these editors. I feel there is little point in view of their bewildering inability to take advice, even simple advice to sign their posts on talk pages! Your mileage may vary. Fiddle  Faddle  06:52, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

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

I'd like to ask Fiddle  if he can provide more clear evidences on how Draft:Eastern News Agency edit history is an evidence. Mhhossein (talk) 08:20, 12 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Certainly. Each editor is concerned and only concerned with this draft on one of its many forms in this and prior incarnations. Each, if they are independent accounts, is an SPA, and each show strong indication of being sock or meat puppets. Each shows or appears to show the same inability to take advice. Fiddle   Faddle  08:23, 12 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I'd say that this is very likely the same person or at least people in the same office. The strongest evidence (other than what has already been stated) is a now deleted edit at the talk page of Draft talk:Eastern News Agency where Enanews created the talk page with content that mentions there were no copyright issues. This was a major point of contention with SpokesManBD on his talk page, if I remember correctly. Now something to note is that SpokesManBD is the earlier of the two accounts, so Enanews would be the sockpuppet here. I don't think that this was bad faith sockpuppetry per se in that I don't think that SpokesManBD did this with the intent to hide his edits or to make it seem like there was a large consensus. It's more likely that this account was created as the "official" account to edit the article and the biggest issue here is that this wasn't disclosed on either account. The biggest reason for concern with SpokesManBD is pretty much that they're willfully ignorant of policy and when people try to give suggestions or advice that go against what he wants, he gets incredibly upset and says that everyone else other than him is wrong. I do see where they appear to be trying somewhat, but exceedingly begrudgingly and the progress isn't really enough to truly make conversations like the ones on his talk page and on FiddleFaddle's really worthwhile. In other words the biggest problem here isn't the sockpuppetry but whether or not SpokesManBD will ever properly follow policy. He's kind of exhausted a large amount of the people who have tried to help them. However that said, I don't know that so far this is really enough to fully block SpokesManBD for since they have limited themselves to AfC since the mainspace article was deleted and I don't think that the second account was really done out of truly bad faith. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  09:57, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Mike V • Talk 16:48, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Mike V • Talk 16:48, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Mike V • Talk 16:48, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Mike V • Talk 16:48, 12 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Named sock indef blocked and IP blocked for a week. I'm not going to tag at this juncture given there are is only one sock. Tiptoety  talk 06:40, 13 June 2015 (UTC)