Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MDSanker/Archive

26 December 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Editor has been joined by multiple single-purpose accounts (above listed suspected socks/IPs) in advocating "keep" in a deletion request (here: []) involving a fairly obvious WP:HOAX that has created an extensive series of interconnected entries attempting to establish the history of a non-existent band/musician. No persons other than editor and single purpose accounts have advocated "keep." Further suspect behavior by editor is evident on Wikicommons. Editor has uploaded a staggering number of photos to Wikicommons licensed as "own work." When questioned, user has stated they aren't actually his own work but the photographer "told" him he could have them. The volume of images uploaded by user precludes filing deletion requests on all, however, these are three active ones:, , DocumentError (talk) 10:58, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

I have had my one and only account with Wikipedia for a long time, the person accusing me of this has a new account and the only thing they have contributed on the deletion page against the Jeff Cullen page that I started. I have mad thousands of edits from sports to music. I am sure that the people that voted to keep the page are new or even fans of Jeff Cullen.  MDSanker 15:31, 26 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment While editor is correct that I've only been on WP a few weeks, less than 4% of my edits have been made to contribute to the various deletion requests that are currently active against the Jeff Cullen hoax pages, and all within the last 2 days; hardly "the only thing" I've contributed. DocumentError (talk) 19:02, 26 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I've added three SPAs which have behaved in an identical manner to the accounts already listed., ŞůṜīΣĻ ¹98¹ Speak 17:51, 26 December 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't know who the other accounts are, I have not asked anyone to write anything, for or against the JC page. I have not edited anything new to the JC page do to fact that it maybe a wast of my time. The person accusing me maybe a Sockpuppet them-self they wrote on my talk page (listed below) note there saying Merry Christmas, like a smart comment.


 * From my talk page: Sockpuppet Investigation

Hello! You have been named in a sockpuppet investigation: []. Merry Christmas - DocumentError (talk) 11:00, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

I maybe lowering myself to this persons standards since I am saying that DocumentError maybe the sockpuppet, but it seems funny that a person that has over 3,500 edits is be accused of being something he is not by another that is supposed to be new to the site. I have even posted a real photo of myself and use my real name.  MDSanker 18:52, 26 December 2013 (UTC)  MDSanker 19:17, 26 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment - Note that when I wrote on editor's Talk page it was to inform him of this investigation, which is required by Wikipedia. As for "merry Christmas" - it was, in fact, Christmas (in my time zone) when I posted the notice. I apologize if my attempt at congeniality was misconstrued by editor. DocumentError (talk) 19:12, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - Most probably just a case of canvassing, not sockpuppetry. SPI is also not a place to air general "suspect behaviour" unrelated to whether a user has used multiple accounts abusively. L Faraone  17:54, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Closing. Canvassing editors to the discussion, if it occurred, is unwanted but not sock puppetry. Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:55, 27 December 2013 (UTC)