Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kazmandu2/Archive

22 December 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

I came across this editor via the article for Chris Williams (DJ), which was up for deletion as A7. There was enough notability for it to pass a speedy, so I took it to AfD. Kazmandu2 had several habits that marked them a very, very obvious paid editor and possibly a shared account. Their edits were promotional, they'd created a very spammy article for a marketing company at Draft:Rockstar Marketing, and they had made comments that used the term "we". You can see some of their comments at the AfD for Williams. They'd also uploaded the logo for Rockstar to Wikimedia Commons as fair use, indicating that they held the rights to to the logo. Now WC has a walkthrough process for uploads, so it's unlikely that they could go through everything without noticing the multiple disclaimers that they had to own the copyrights in order to upload things to the Commons. This gives off the impression that they're likely working for Rockstar Marketing, especially since it's unlikely that a marketing company would hire someone else to promote them elsewhere.

I'd brought this up to COI/N here and ended up blocking the editor for being a blatant undisclosed COI editor with concerns that it was a shared account. At some point prior to this block 2600 posted this to the editor's talk page. It looks like this is certainly Kazmandu2. They've claimed that they're not a paid editor, but I find it extremely unlikely that they're not a paid editor since everything about this screams WP:DUCK.

Recently 2602 started posting on Williams's AfD and on his article. They created Draft:Daswise, which is extremely promotional even with as little content as they currently have in the draft. They also posted to Seraphimblade's user and talk page here and also here. This is when other IPs began coming in as well, as well as the account Scottdaddy2222, which referred to the draft as "ours". I need to comment that a search for the name "Scott" with the name of Rockstar Marketing shows that this account is very likely the owner of Rockstar Marketing Bryan Scott. In their edits on Seraphim's page they make mention that they were editing the page, which I think also makes it likely that they're Kazmandu, since Scott didn't make any edits to the Rockstar draft.

This kind of proves that this is a case of socking or meating, at the very least. It's obvious that they are part of Rockstar Marketing and they're trying to hide that they're editing with a COI, which is probably one of the most unethical things they could have done on here. Since they're editing with the above IPs, I'm not sure if those can be tracked like some of the others are, but this does look like it's them trying to evade a block and not disclose their COI. I'd recommend blocking the lot since at this point there's no way that they couldn't be aware that they have to disclose their COI and they're deliberately trying to hide it. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  04:53, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I've blocked Scottdaddy22 for promotion and for block evasion. There's no way that they couldn't be aware of the reasons why the initial account was blocked and the way they wrote everything makes it seem extremely likely that they're the same person. (sighs) I wish we could send out a memo to every marketing company to tell them that they shouldn't be like WikiPR. Disclosure is mandatory. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  05:18, 22 December 2015 (UTC) Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  05:18, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Also, the creation of the new account gives me the impression that they might try to evade detection even if these are all blocked. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  05:20, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if a sweep for other socks is needed or not. I'll leave that up to the incoming checkers. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  07:02, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm adding a new name per the discussion at COI/N. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  08:20, 22 December 2015 (UTC)


 * This user has been editing Draft:Daswise. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  08:21, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Also adding an IP that edited the Rockstar Marketing draft. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  08:35, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * At this point I would recommend a sweep for socks, given that we have two new accounts that signed up and have deliberately not disclosed their COI. Seriously, if Kazmandu2 had just been honest about it I'd have just given them a warning. This is why lying about a COI status is pretty much one of the stupidest things you can do on here. Also a thought: there may be other accounts that were never detected, given that Kazmandu2 deliberately lied. It's possible that there are other accounts out there that edited in the past and never disclosed their status. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  08:37, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I was brought to this via WP:COIN#Chris Williams (DJ) concerns expressed there about socking. I believe based on off-wiki evidence that one or more figures in the Rockstar Marketing group are socking on Wikipedia, including another account who made these edits. The connection to USAF and certifications that a certain Rockstar Marketing person claims to have is the compelling thread. – Brianhe (talk) 07:59, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
 * The connection of user can only be described in general terms as I did above because of outing policy. But the off-wiki evidence was I'd say in the 80-90% confidence area that they are one of the Rockstar Marketing people. Brianhe (talk) 02:17, 17 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Looks like there's another account editing Draft:Daswise ‎, along with an IP. I'm tempted to delete the page but this is giving us a lot of evidence as to who is a sockpuppet or not so we can just nominate them as they come along, I guess. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  11:45, 24 December 2015 (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

 * - Please, compare those accounts to each other and also check for possible sleepers.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:41, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Other than in the list of accounts/IPs, I don't see where Computerhockey is mentioned in the report, and don't see where they crossed paths with the accounts above, so I did not check them. Please provide evidence if a check is still desired.
 * appears to be ❌. . ​—DoRD (talk)​ 23:28, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, now I see where that link goes. If you have private information that you wish for us to use in this investigation, you may email it to me. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:34, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Email(s) sent. - Brianhe (talk) 01:08, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Other than in the list of accounts/IPs, I don't see where Computerhockey is mentioned in the report, and don't see where they crossed paths with the accounts above, so I did not check them. Please provide evidence if a check is still desired.
 * appears to be ❌. . ​—DoRD (talk)​ 23:28, 16 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, now I see where that link goes. If you have private information that you wish for us to use in this investigation, you may email it to me. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:34, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Email(s) sent. - Brianhe (talk) 01:08, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Okay, now I see where that link goes. If you have private information that you wish for us to use in this investigation, you may email it to me. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:34, 17 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Email(s) sent. - Brianhe (talk) 01:08, 18 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the information. also appears to be ❌, but they also have an unused account,.
 * While these accounts appear to be technically unrelated, meatpuppetry can't be ruled out, of course. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 01:12, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Indeffing confirmed accounts, not blocking Scoobycookie as he has no edits. IPs are stale. Closing the case.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:17, 18 January 2016 (UTC)