Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/GAP220/Archive

15 May 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Both are WP:SPA who are entering blatantly erroneous numbers (2,500,000,000) for the number of members of the African Methodist Episcopal Church. GAP220 has also been entering information contradicted by the citations on at least one other page related to the African Methodist Episcopal Church (Metropolitan African Methodist Episcopal Church). The GAP1220 account was created 6 minutes after I placed level 4 warnings on User talk:GAP220 in order to avoid being blocked/reported.


 * Edits by GAP220:
 * Edits by GAP1220:

The erroneous information in the first diff is the identically wrong number of members 2.5B, and number of congregations (7M for GAP220, 15K for GAP1220). The erroneous information in the second diff is that Obama is a member of the church (near identical wording for both users). The reference at Metropolitan African Methodist Episcopal Church explicitly states that Obama has not joined a church in D.C. That reference has now been copied to African Methodist Episcopal Church and a reference added for the long standing members and congregation numbers. &mdash; Makyen (talk) 02:46, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
 * When first making this page I failed to complete the process by informing the users on their talk pages. That has now been done. I apologize for my failure to do this. I have also apologized to the users for this delay.
 * In the intervening time, has written on my talk page. My hope is that the user is willing to engage in useful conversation and that the editor's use of two accounts was just a misunderstanding of Wikipedia policies about multiple accounts, that it was a legitimate desire to change their user name and that it was not just to avoid issues arising from their repeated entry of erroneous information in the African Methodist Episcopal Church article and the warnings I have placed on their user pages. &mdash; Makyen (talk) 18:49, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
 * It appears my hope that the editor would be willing to engage in useful conversation will not be fulfilled. &mdash; Makyen (talk) 20:26, 15 May 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
It is perfectly clear that this is the same person using two accounts. Whether there has been abuse of two accounts is less obvious. The one account stopped editing before the other account was created, so there is no overlap. It very much as though this may have been an attempt to avoid being blocked, as the new account was created six minutes after the old one had been given a final warning, in which case it certainly was abuse of multiple accounts. However, the new account is currently blocked, and the old one has not returned to editing, so there does not seem any point in taking any action now. Obviously, if there is any further abuse of multiple accounts, either with the present pair of accounts or with one or more other accounts, that conclusion will be open to review. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 09:12, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

15 September 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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


 * Name appears to be of similar form to prior names and prior sock. Prior sock, now indef. blocked (blocked prior to sock investigation getting going):GAP1220
 * Edits are all to the same articles, or articles associated with African Methodist Episcopal Church
 * Primary edits center around unsourced changes to cited numerical values for the number of members, pastors, and congregations for this church. Current changes are at least in the realm of the possible.
 * Edits by GAP1220 (current sock):
 * Edits by GAP1220 (old sock, blocked):
 * Edits by GAP220 (master):

One of the prohibited purposes for which the sock is being used is the avoidance of a block. &mdash; Makyen (talk) 19:58, 15 September 2014 (UTC); add mention of a prohibited purpose. 20:09, 15 September 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

 * Blocked per duck. Mike V  •  Talk  00:50, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * What's your opinion on taking action (warning, temp or indef block) on the master? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:20, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I think an indef block is too harsh for only a couple of socks and this isn't the user's first instance of creating alternate accounts, so a warning is too nice. I've blocked the account for a week. Mike V  •  Talk  16:44, 17 September 2014 (UTC)