Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Frid.antonia-arlon/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

The user Frid.antonia-arlon made several sweeping revisions to several pages on Azorean historical figures of Flemish origin, which I challenged on the basis of their only using one source to rewrite one article's narrative (Willem van der Haegen). When I brought this matter up several times with the user (like here or here), they seemed to disregard the argument that an the identity of a biographical article's subject cannot be so blatantly challenged and rewritten on the basis of one source, to which they replied with "It DOES NOT matter it is a single source" and claimed that "Furthermore, as I said André L. Fr. Claeys' research is endorsed by the government of the Azores", while also conveniently claiming that evidence of the source or a governmental endorsement "unfortunately has been offline and unavailable at even the way back machine". The identity which they claim to have proven has no scholarly sources which corroborate this outside the single source they claim that proves everything. Frid seemingly "accepted" my complaints on rewriting the whole article and "backed down", until today when another user Matheus2740 came into the discussion to support Frid's edits and reinstated frid's edits. I have followed this page for several years and its lucky to get a couple edits per year, let alone the attention of a recently created user (Matheus2740) whose only edits are reinstating Frid's Willem van der Haegen changes and supporting Frid in the talk page. Frid is similarly a recently created user whose only edits concern a couple of Flemish-Azorean figures. In the context of our disagreement, I find it highly suspicious that Frid would attract a person to create an account for the sole purpose of supporting her argument and edits, especially on such a non significant article and believe Frid to have merely created a sockpuppet to support their initial arguments and actions on the article. Cristiano Tomás (talk) 02:17, 22 May 2019 (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
— Berean Hunter   (talk)  14:55, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
 * - Please check whether this is meatpuppetry or socking. Thanks, GABgab 17:04, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
 * ✅. Blocking the master for 72 hours and indeffing the sock.
 * Closing per findings/comments. The SandDoctor  Talk 05:09, 24 May 2019 (UTC)