Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JaniceMT/Archive

Report date May 22 2009, 19:05 (UTC)
Sorry, my bad, moving to checkuser section. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 20:16, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Report date May 22 2009, 20:17 (UTC)
Note - this request is based on this suggestion at ANI, and I'm not really sure how to go about it WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 19:05, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Evidence submitted by WLU


 * Ongoing POV-pushing to spam the Canadian Children's Rights Council across wikipedia, either directly, or indirectly through the inclusion of inappropriate convenience links. There has been obvious conflict of interest, edit warring, sockpuppeting,, possibly meatpuppeting, threats of outing, and a general mess.  The best evidence is to review the recent contribution history of these accounts - it's to the identical sets of pages with the identical purpose - POV-pushing and harrassment.  WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 20:28, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments from User:Slp1
 * Comments by other users
 * As per the ANI listing, all three of the registered editors have admitted links with the Canadian Children's Rights Council, (also 1 IP ) and all have been serially blocked for edit-warring on that page, Parental alienation and Parental alienation syndrome. All three articles are currently semi-protected because of IP edit warring, which continued during (and after) the blocks of the named accounts.
 * All the editors have in common a desire to promote the CCRC and causes they espouse, often by spammily linking to material on their website, and even changing links from the original sources (e.g. news organizations) to copyright infringement versions on their website. (see this mediawiki blacklist report for more details).  At least some of the editors also use similar phrasing suggesting they are the same person, cf this post edit by Smith Research  with this one by JaniceMT]; also this post by Janice, with [this one by one of the IPs] and one by S-Morris, all within minutes of each other
 * Note a sockpuppet listing for S-MorrisVP from last year.
 * May not be relevant but several of the editors and IPs listed have made attacks accusing other editors of supporting child abuse; and User:JaniceMT made a veiled outing threat ""We know who you are, by the way".this edit
 * New editor User:QPTD says the President of the CanCRC is proposing meatpuppetry help from wiki-savvy admins and editors.

Not sure where to put it, but there's also a conflict of interest issue that is now out in the open. WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 20:17, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * User:WLU again

Requested by WLU (t) (c) Wikipedia's rules: simple/complex 20:17, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * CheckUser requests

Icestorm815 •  Talk  20:59, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * ✅ to be the same person or a small group of people (2-3). I swept the ranges and found no obvious sleepers (some possible matches, but with divergent interests). The affected ranges are:


 * range: 67.55.0.0/18 : 67.55.0.0 - 67.55.63.255
 * range: 69.172.64.0/18 : 69.172.64.0 - 69.172.127.255
 * range: 67.204.0.0/18 : 67.204.0.0 - 67.204.63.255
 * range: 67.212.0.0/19 : 67.212.0.0 - 67.212.31.255
 * As usual range blocks (if any) must be carried with care, there are quite a few innocent users out there and they probably can switch to other ranges. If possible I'd opt for a semi protection. -- Luk  talk 09:48, 24 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Conclusions

No blocks done on the ranges. All articles involved have been semi-protected. Peter Symonds ( talk ) 11:12, 24 May 2009 (UTC)