Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jd.halpin/Archive

12 June 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Thirty minutes after the master was warned about COI editing on Karn Charuhas Chapman & Twohey (based on the similarity of the user's chosen User Name and a LinkedIn profile of KCCT's marketing manager), the sock account was created, and resumed COI editing, presumably under the new name to avoid COI scrutiny. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 18:27, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I had considered adding to the list, but, assuming good faith (perhaps wrongly so), I assumed that the change from Kcctmarketing to Jd.halpin was in response to the COI username warning given to Kcctmarketing -- in effect, a poorly executed attempt to change from an offending username to a conforming username.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 18:47, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * And perhaps the last name, ArchFan01 was again chosen to comply with naming requirements. This could be a case of blocking two names, allowing the third to remain, an usual outcome here but possibly proper, if we assume this was a sloppy way to change their names.  If it was solely to avoid scrutiny, that is a different case.  Here, it could go either way.  I'm one of those open to "different" solutions, if they aren't trying to help each other in a disruptive manner.  Would require some thought.   Dennis Brown  -  2&cent;   &copy;  18:50, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note I've left a message on ArchFan01's page. I'm trying to have good faith here, and maybe we can make short work of this.  If he was only trying to comply with UAA, I don't want to block him, only the two bad names as UAA, and let him edit, since I don't see disruption, per se. I would give him a day before we had to run CU, to see what he says.  Dennis Brown  -  2&cent;   &copy;  19:03, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't know that I agree with the hold in this case. Whereas the change from Kcctmarketing to Jd.halpin might have been a good faith effort to comply with username guidelines, and whereas the are legitimate reasons to request a username change from a real name to a pseudonym, this change appears not to be legitimate, as it appears to have been executed simply to avoid scrutiny while continuing a spate of COI edits.  WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 19:55, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * The Checkuser or any other clerk is free to override my decision with no hard feelings. This was a short term hold, not a long one.  The article in question appears to have been deleted, btw.  Sometimes waiting to see what they do next is informative.  Being "on hold" does not mean I am not watching very closely.   Dennis Brown  -  2&cent;   &copy;  20:02, 12 June 2012 (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

 * Might need to add Kcctmarketing (the SPA creator of the article in question) to list of socks, or as master Dennis Brown  -  2&cent;   &copy;  18:32, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I've put on hold, waiting to see how the editor answers, as this might be easier to solve this way, and better for everyone.  Dennis Brown  -  2&cent;   &copy;  19:05, 12 June 2012 (UTC)




 * . Tiptoety  talk 19:22, 14 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Master and socks tagged, closing. Dennis Brown  -  2&cent;   &copy;  00:09, 15 June 2012 (UTC)