Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Magkantog/Archive

Report date March 2 2009, 14:39 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Evidence submitted by Lhakthong

Magkantog has admitted on my talk page that George sherman 34 is a colleague of his, and edit history shows is working in concert to achieve a specific end, stated below, even though prior to that George sherman 34 claimed on the discussion page to be from another university and presented himself as a third party trying to achieve consensus. After Magkantog was given a soft block for violating the 3RR, sock/"meat" puppet George sherman 34 reinserted the offending claim in order to be "fair to both parties".

Magkantog's first contribution to the Phi Kappa Phi page was to revert a delete (not made by me) so that a non-neutral and unverifiable phrase placed by 173.15.144.102 meant to diminish the reputation of Phi Kappa Phi could be reinserted. The original insert by 173.15.144.102 also had a statement regarding Golden Key Honor Society, another society Magkantog brings up repeatedly in the discussion page. Over the past 12 months, similar reverts trying to insert very similar, very specific statements meant to denigrate or dismiss the reputation of Phi Kappa Phi in relation to Phi Beta Kappa were made by:


 * Shelly wilson 3 5 November 2008
 * Shelly wilson 3 18 December 2008
 * Shelly wilson 3 16 January 2009
 * 173.15.144.102 10 February 2009
 * Magkantog at 16:14, 19 February 2009
 * 70.106.117.53 between 17:15 and 23:41, 22 February 2009 (edit notes)
 * George Sherman 34 at 18:43, 26 February 2009 (already found to be a sockpuppet of Magkantog on on March 4, 2009).

Plus the ensuing reversion edits by Magkantog, George sherman 34, and 70.106.117.53 made in concert since then. 70.106.117.53 appears on 22 Feb 2009 in the page edit history (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Phi_Kappa_Phi&diff=prev&oldid=272527934), and edits in the discussion page and on my talk page on 1 March 2009 will show edits made from this IP are in fact Magkantog. All of the above have short edit histories and all with the minor exception of Shelly wilson 3 seem related to the exclusive purpose of inserting the aforementioned offending claim. Angtitimo appeared the day after Magkantog's appeals for lifting his ban failed. He has a short edit history focused on the same discussion and making the same points. Angtitimo's comments on the talk page reflect the same intent (now it is for keeping the biased language, inserted by him as "George sherman 34" to evade a 3RR block, instead of allowing for its deletion), and although the account was 30 minutes old, Angtitimo seemed to understand the history of the debate. See, for example, this comment.

All of the above IP addresses are located in the NY/NJ area, where Magkantog claims to be from, with the exception of 74.178.93.137 (Alabama)

Given the above, I also feel that 74.178.93.137 and 166.214.16.81, if not real people, are also sockpuppets or "meatpuppets" of Magkantog being used to undermine the validity of my account in their use to imitate sockpuppets of mine. You can check them against me, too, if you like. Lhakthong (talk) 04:25, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Attempt at more concise, better supported evidence:

Since originally submitting this SPI, George sherman 34 was found to be a sockpuppet of Magkantog to insert language disputed under NPOV, "the most prestigious". Magkantog's last attempt to insert this language before 3RR bock is here and George Sherman 34's edit to do the same to evade the block is here. Similar edits to insert the same language were made by other editors:


 * Shelly wilson 3 5 November 2008
 * Shelly wilson 3 18 December 2008
 * Shelly wilson 3 16 January 2009
 * 173.15.144.102 10 February 2009
 * 70.106.117.53 between 17:15 and 23:41, 22 February 2009 (edit notes)

This diff shows 70.106.117.53 to be the same as Magkantog

These diff and this one indicate 173.15.144.102 and Magkantog are also the same person.

Magkantog's final appeal for an unblock failed on March 4. Angtitimo appears the next day. His short edit history is focused only on the NPOV debate of this page, and similarities in language can be found between this diff from Magkantog's, which claims Phi Kappa Phi imitated Phi Beta Kappa and that Phi Beta Kappa is "the most prestigious", and the following three from Angtitimo: this one, this one, and points one and two in this one. These diffs also indicate understanding of the previous debate (reference to previously disputed POV words, "previous debate", etc.). This diff also indicates such when he again makes passing reference to the offending POV words. --Lhakthong (talk) 17:35, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users

Note: Toddst1 (talk) 20:54, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I had originally transcribed this report verbatim from Lhakthong's talk page while the editor was blocked as a courtesy.
 * I have not compiled or reviewed this info.
 * I changed my name in the Evidence submitted by field to Lhakthong as it originally said Evidence submitted by Toddst1 (talk) on behalf of blocked Lhakthong (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) (see User talk:Lhakthong) and Lhakthong changed it to just Toddst1 which is misleading. I am abstaining from commenting on all of this, rather documenting for the record.
 * I also moved Lhakthong's evidence to the proper section above.
 * Lhakthong: All, I did not mean to be misleading. I've never filed one these before, and it wasn't all entirely clear to me how this all works (which is evident from my first try).  I didn't know if Toddst1 was submitting it for me because admins could only do it or if it was because of the block.  I did a lot of cut-and-paste from my talk page.  It was entirely unintentional.  Toddst1 is correct, all errors are mine.  Sorry.  Lhakthong (talk) 22:40, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Requested by Toddst1 (talk) 03:25, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * CheckUser requests


 * pending some evidence that makes sense. Mayalld (talk) 15:26, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Request re-filed by . Tiptoety  talk 20:26, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
 * CU not needed. Mayalld (talk) 11:52, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * according to this report, Lhakthong is attempting to report himself as a sock of Magkantog! That is about as far as I can make out anything from this case. Without prior knowledge of what is clearly a protracted dispute, the "evidence" above amounts to nothing more than a rant, and likewise for the comments by accused parties. If CU is needed, you will need to provide a clear summary of events, concentrating ONLY on the alleged socking, otherwise this case will be delisted. Mayalld (talk) 15:26, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I am not convinced that all the other accounts are socks. There may be some socking going on, but this case suffers from an overload of information. The reporter has simply listed every account that holds a similar view, in the hope that somebody else will uncover the socks. This case is also bound up in the ongoing editing dispute, and seems to be more about gaining an advantage in that dispute. I am closing this case now, and suggest that WP:MEDCAB may well prove to be the way forward. If somebody wants to submit a new, focussed, case, I would have no objection.Mayalld (talk) 13:15, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

without prejudice to a new more focussed case. Mayalld (talk) 13:15, 12 March 2009 (UTC) Mayalld (talk) 13:15, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Conclusions