Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mariordo/Archive

20 January 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

This is not a case of "suspected sockpuppets", but of "suspected meatpuppets" because there is no dedicated "suspected meatpuppets" channel (per Sock puppetry: "If you believe someone is using sock puppets (or meat puppets), you should create a report at Sockpuppet investigations.")

I suspect that Mariordo has exploited his friendships with influential bloggers by emailing them and asking them to create articles viewed by thousands of people everyday urging them to come to Wikipedia to skew the results of community discussions. These websites include, but may not be limited to:
 * GreenAutoblog (archived version); and
 * Miss Electric (archived version)

The discussions (there are several) are outlined at:
 * Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles; and
 * Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles

The effort to remain anonymous at GreenAutoblog means that he would be aware that what he is doing is against policy and wrong (that is of course assuming our suspicions are true). We have picked up a few SPA votes already. As other editors have noted as well, the style of language among other give-aways means that two other editors at least, along with my self are highly suspect that Mariordo is the "anonymous friend". At Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles, the use of the term "gilder" is used no less than six times by Mariordo, and is used once more by the anonymous tipster. No other editor has used that term, and the correct definition of a "gilder" is a person who plates objects in gold, not the body panels of a car. It is highly unlikely that two different people would both come up with the same incorrect understanding of a term relating to the same subject within a couple of days of each other.

Secondly, the argument that electric and hybrid-electric vehicles "reduce dependence on imported oil" has been an argument that has been exclusively pushed by Mariordo (there are about three separate references to this argument). None of the other opposing voters have used this argument, they have argued on different grounds.

American spelling again points to an American author, and Mariordo claims to reside in the United States (weak evidence, but it is still contributing evidence).

Lastly (and this is the strongest evidence yet), the anonymous tipster writes, "I consult Wikipedia often and a few years ago did my bit in trying to upgrade the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plug-in_hybrid". Well guess who attempted to clean up the plug-in hybrid article "a few years ago"? It was Mariordo, who began significant editing to that article in March 2009. OSX (talk • contributions) 04:41, 20 January 2011 (UTC)


 * See also: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles. OSX (talk • contributions) 01:25, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Evidence
 * At GreenAutoblog (archived version) the anonymous tipster writes, "I consult Wikipedia often and a few years ago did my bit in trying to upgrade the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plug-in_hybrid". Coincidently, Mariordo attempted to clean up the plug-in hybrid after beginning significant editing to that page in March 2009, which is a "few years ago" now. The anonymous tipster clearly wrote that they attempted to upgrade an existing article that at a point in the past was a featured article, but no longer is. No other editor has made significant edits to this article after 2009 besides Mariordo and the confirmed sock puppet Nopetro who has many similarities with Mariordo (not making any allegations here, just pointing out some similarities, of which many exist). On the topic of sock puppets, BenB4 was the editor who originally promoted the plug-in hybrid article to FA (it is now delisted). BenB4 is a confirmed sock puppet of Nrcprm2026. So we currently have two separate confirmed sets of sock puppets that have edited the same article extensively, and now another user (Mariordo), a user who has a history of completely disregarding WP:Canvass (see below). If these are the same users (again I am not making any allegations, just pointing out potential links), it is possible to come to the conclusion that sock puppetry was previously the preferred method of garnering increased support in discussions, and canvassing is now the preferred means of doing so. The editing patterns of all these users are very similar, and at least one of the confirmed group of sock puppets claimed that English was not their first language, and have a Spanish connection. Mariordo also claims that English is not his first language, and he too speaks Spanish as a first language. There are very few other editors with such a strong interest in hybrids and electric vehicles. Both Nopetro and Mac (also a sock puppet) have made significant edits to the same pages that Mariordo edits prior to his arrival at this project, for example flexible-fuel vehicle, which is one of Mariordo's good articles. There are others, but I need time to go through the contributions of all these editors for comparison.


 * In the discussions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles, Mariordo uses the obscure term "glider" no less than six times, and is used twice more by the anonymous tipster. No other editor has used that term in any discussion pertaining to these mergers. As pointed out to me by another user, this term was a favourite of Mac, a confirmed sock puppet.


 * Other GreenAutoblog terminology and syntax used by the tipster is verbatim to Mariordo's, but not of other editors. For example, "environmental performance", "environmental and social impacts", "green fancruft", "contributing to reduce dependence on imported oil", "mainstream", et cetera. The argument that electric and hybrid-electric vehicles "reduce dependence on imported oil" has been an argument that has been exclusively pushed by Mariordo (there are about three separate references to this argument). None of the other opposing voters have used this argument, they have argued on different grounds.


 * On GreenAutoblog, the tipster confuses the "Honda Accord Hybrid" for the "Toyota Accord Hybrid", and Mariordo made the exact same mistake here.


 * The tipster also links to the exact discussions with hash tags linking to the exact section headings. Not that many people follow WikiProject discussions except editors of the encyclopaedia themselves. There is a very limited number of potential people who would have done this, and all other evidence points to Mariodo (especially the admission to making significant edits to the plug-in hybrid article).


 * American spelling again points to an American author, and Mariordo claims to reside in the United States.


 * Mariordo has a strong history of canvassing votes on Wikipedia in these discussions. During the Talk:Toyota Camry Hybrid merger in mid-2010 he was warned about this. In the second proposal in late-2010 at Talk:Hyundai Elantra he again resorted to canvassing to gain an unfair advantage (soliciting only those who supported his view in the previous Camry discussion). Then in the current merger discussions he sneakily asked a couple of other users to join in. Since he now knows that he can't really get away with canvassing in the way he has done so before (I've always reported it), I suspect this off-site canvassing is the latest attempt of doing so. OSX (talk • contributions) 22:35, 26 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Wrong! Mariordo has "a strong history" of OSX harassing him by accusing him of canvassing, while investigations into these accusations have demonstrated conclusively that Mariordo has never canvassed at all. Once again, OSX's baseless accusations constitute distinct and intentional harassment and Wikihounding of Mariordo.  The "evidence" he presents here is both ridiculous and irrelevant to the accusation of sockpuppetry.  Why would Mariordo, who is an active, engaged editor, describe his relationship with Wikipedia by saying he merely "consults" Wikipedia frequently?  OSX's attempts to link Mariordo to sockpuppets who have edited the same articles he has edited are equally absurd, especially since Mariordo has demonstrated that the IP addresses of these sockpuppets indicates that they did their editing in countries in which he has never set foot.  The list of absurd "evidence" goes on: Mariordo now lives in the USA, so the use of "American spelling" in Autoblog Green links him to "the leak" (for goodness sake!  English is not even Mariordo's mother tongue!), Mariordo used the term "glider" which OSX, a supposed car-enthusiast, insists is "obscure" even though it is a common term used frequently in EV and other automotive circles, the article refers to "fancruft," and Mariordo has used that term WHEN HE WAS ACCUSED of inserting "EXCESSIVELY CRUFTY" tables into article by another editor.


 * We could go through OSX's accusations one-by-one to show that each and every one of them is sketchy, at best, but that would take up time and space that is not necessary. Mariordo was clearly not "the leak."  Furthermore, it has been demonstrated in this investigation that whoever WAS "the leak" is not guilty of sockpuppetry.  OSX has no evidence whatsoever of sockpuppetry against Mariordo (because Mariordo has never engaged in sockpuppetry), so he instead comes up with a list of invalid evidence which unsuccessfully attempts to link Mariordo to actions that do not constitute sockpuppetry in any case.  Can we please end this witch hunt in a firm and convincing manner that may make OSX think twice before he again attempts to harass and intimidate a dedicated, conscientious editor whose position differs from his own?  Many thanks.  Ebikeguy (talk) 23:19, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' I await request from the admin(s) in charge of this investigation, and please, spare me replying to OSX typical lentghly discussions.--Mariordo (talk) 06:00, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Initial rebuttal by Mariordo
 * 1. First I would like a confirmation from an admin that I am being accused of WP:MEAT because here OSX accused me of Meat puppetry which I believe is just a failed proposal not a standing policy. The acussation has to be clear so I can read the corresponding policy to support my defense. Also, if my assumption is right, he is accusing me of being a whistle blower, but Wikipedia is so open to everybody and a history is kept of all edits for anybody to check, that I believe is quite an oxymoron to talk about a "Wikileak" or point the finger on anybody. But I will hold until my clarification question is answered.
 * 2. Second, for the record I believe it is important to bring upfront to the table the fact OSX has for several months behaving very aggressively against me (since the Toyota Camry Hybrid merger), with lack of civility, making threats and ultimatums, tracking my edits, particularly in user talk pages, getting very close to WP:Wikihounding. I already gave him my last warning before opening a process in this regard one month ago (see here). As a sample of his attacks on me see here his failed attempt to get me sanctioned for canvassing (according to his particular interpretation of canvassing).
 * 3. As for the "evidence" presented, I respectfully request hard evidence. There might be several explanations for the circumstancial evidence presented above, but the simplest I can think of is that both blog publications have a lot of content from the merger discussions, including specific quotes, from me, from OSX, and other editors. Wouldn't you think that there is possibility that the whistle blower was so lazy that simply did a cut and paste? I did not e-mailed nor telephoned or contacted anyone from either of the two involved blogs, nor I have any acquaintances there either.
 * 4. As for the most solid piece of evidence, the admitted attempted upgrade the plug-in hybrid article to FA, I checked the history and found that the article was created in March 2005, reached FA status in July, 25, 2007 (see ), I signed up for Wikipedia on July 26, 2007 (what a happy coincidence), but began making major article edits in the Project only in October 2007, and my first edit on the Plug-in hybrid article was on March 2009 (see ), when the article was already demoted from FA. Even though I have made significant improvements and updates (97 edits in total), I have never attempted to promote this or any other article to FA for a very simply reason. When I improved my first two articles to GA, I requested a peer review for one of them (Flex-fuel vehicle or Ethanol fuel in Brazil now I don't remember which), and I gave up because I learned that it has to be well-written, with engaging prose, and very nitpicking about other details. Since English is one of my second language I realized this would be a very difficult task for me. Since then, I had only promoted articles to GA (ten in total). So I do not have the slightest idea how OSX is extrapolating that it was me who attempted the improvement to FA. The Plug-in article has so much traffic and is so unstable that even an improvement to attempt a GA will be very difficult. So my guess is that the whistle blower is someone who participated in the original FA effort, when I not even was a Wikipedia editor.
 * 5. And as for the suspected sockpuppets, I do not have the slightest idea of who they are, from what country they are writing, but a simple IP address check would speedily clear that out. They were included just because they support the same POV as me I wrote after the two blog publications, there is no other reason I can think of.


 * I was the person who notified OSX about the article which I read earlier today. I would just like to note, even though it is slightly irrelevant, that many of the users who commented on AutoblogGreen's post were in favor of the merges, and they weren't even Wikipedia users. -- Pineapple Fez 04:32, 20 January 2011 (UTC)


 * On a supposedly green website, I counted eight comments explicitly in favour of the mergers, and three in opposition. And this is on a green vehicle website, so it speaks volumes. OSX (talk • contributions) 04:45, 20 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Actually, Mariordo uses the term "glider" (not gilder), as signifying an empty shell awaiting an engine. The word was first (and repeatedly) used by Mac, a blocked user with a self-professed love for electrical automobiles (on his/her userpage). Here is the first use, as far as I can tell. "Glider" pops up again in reference to the Mini E, right here: a mode of expression which I took notice of three days ago as unorthodox (at the risk of sounding all Sherlock Holmesy). It may very well be that Mariordo is Mac, I don't know and I don't accuse; what aggravates me is that what should be a simple debate has been turned into some sort of bizarre idea that if the plug-in Prius (et al) doesn't get to keep its own page then Wikipedia is against the environment. And seeing this idea being touted on some "green" blogs, engendering support from the woodworks, makes me very upset. Several brand new editors are an obvious result of these articles. If my only object was to gain support for the merge, I would post something on Jalopnik.com (full of anti-environmentalists, please don't read this) and easily gain numbers. In any case, I'm offended by this blatant effort (whether it's mariordo or Mac or someone else entirely) to disrupt the process of gaining consensus. See the blocking process for Mac HERE  ⊂&#124; Mr.choppers &#124;⊃   (talk) 07:18, 20 January 2011 (UTC)


 * FYI: "A glider kit is a term used in the United States for a kit used to restore or reconstruct a wrecked or dismantled vehicle. Glider kits include a chassis (frame), front axle, and body (cab)." according to Kit car. I cannot vouch for its accuracy but the article looks to be reasonably active (some active edits throughout the previous year) and it appears there is no significant dispute about its accuracy or fairness.


 * Furthermore, there is a PDF title transfer form for "Glider kit/Assembled/Kit car" from the Office of Motor Vehicle of the State of Lousiana here--North wiki (talk) 08:32, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

To be honest, I have never before heard the term "glider" (correct spelling) used in the context of a vehicles sans the powertrain. I clearly misread the term as "gilder" (incorrect spelling) because in a way I could see how one could sort of distort the meaning of the word. When I first saw it, I paused reading for a second thinking about the "unorthodox" use of the term. As the definition of "gilder" is gold plated, I figured the term was misunderstood as some sort of covering; that is, the vehicle shell covers the powertrain. It doesn't really work, but that's the conclusion I came to.

I certainly wonder how many other editors are familiar with "glider" in the context used by Mariordo and Mac. Again I have no further evidence to suggest anything, and to the best of my knowledge have never encountered Mac in the past. The Spanish-language connection certainly raises eyebrows, but without any further evidence I refuse to make any allegations.

That said, the editing patterns of both users does look similar. On my talk page, you state that Mac was blocked long after Mariordo joined. Please note that CheckUser can only go so far at uncovering editor links—one could have regular cable-based internet at home and also have a wireless internet plan that they use (usually when away from home). Many people also have internet-enabled mobile phones that can easily be accessed via a computer through the use of internet tethering (or the mobile phone's browser itself if you are extremely patient). These separate internet connections would have different IP addresses and in many cases, the location would only show the suburb of the city that the ISP is located in. Different ISPs would further dilute the linkage. I will again reiterate the inclusive evidence, so I cannot make an informed judgement.

Like you Mr.choppers, I am also disappointed (to say the least) with what I am pretty sure are the actions of Mariordo. While I disagree with his position, he has made some great edits to this project. It was certainly not in his best interests to do this because I don't know if I can trust what he says ever again, especially now that he is flatly denying any involvement (yet at the same time is in full support of the anonymous tipster).

This denial I think tops it off, going as far as to dismiss the anonymous source as "laziness" on GreenAutoblog's behalf—a source that would be a respected, neutral and reliable one in any other circumstance. I am also trying to fathom where the whistle blower obtained the italicised text in the first place to "cut and paste" from.

But then it gets worse. When I cited the claim that the anonymous tipster wrote, "a few years ago did my bit in trying to upgrade the article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plug-in_hybrid, which at one point was a "Featured" article", Mariordo takes this claim completely out of context. He tries to manipulate what are most likely his own words in the hope that others won't notice the sudden change in syntax. The anonymous tipster clearly wrote that he/she attempted to upgrade an existing article that at a point in the past was a featured article, but no longer is. The anonymous source never claims that he/she is responsible for the featured article grading, just that he/she edited an article that was featured at one point in time.

As for Mariordo's fifth point, this is not a case of sock puppetry, but one of meat puppetry. Unfortunately, Wikipedia does not have a dedicated meat puppetry namespace, and WP:SOCK asks that such cases be brought up here. I do not believe that Mariordo is behind these other accounts, but I suspect that he contacted these bloggers for the sole purpose of canvassing additional "green" voters. Blame shifting to either myself or previous editors of the plug-in hybrid article will also not win you any votes. In fact the original nominator of the plug-in hybrid article was BenB4, a confirmed sock puppet of Nrcprm2026. All these sock puppets editing what is a relaitively small subject area of electric vehicle articles is becoming a little discomforting, but I will leave that for others to investigate. OSX (talk • contributions) 10:15, 20 January 2011 (UTC)


 * It's an obscure term, and if your definition is correct, it has again been taken out of context. Both Mac and Mariordo seem fond of this word... I will say no more. OSX (talk • contributions) 10:21, 20 January 2011 (UTC)


 * FYI: The usage amongst "car nuts" in the USA is moderately widespread and generally considered humorous or ironic. An airplane without an engine is a "glider" - and so, by analogy, is a car without an engine.  It doesn't matter whether it's a kit car or anything else.  Any car without an engine (even if temporarily) might be called a "glider".  eg "Let's pull out the engine and push the glider over to the other side of the garage while we work on it".  "gilder" is clearly either a typo or a misunderstanding that would be unique to a particular individual. SteveBaker (talk) 13:32, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * As Stevebaker indicates, the term "glider" is very common in amongst automotive fabrication people, so much so that it has its own Wikipedia article (as shown). It is perhaps even more common amongst electric vehicle fabricators, because the vast majority of EVs are built up on such gliders.  Anyone who dives into the world of EVs quickly becomes familiar with this term.  The attempt to link Mariordo to this issue through common use of the word "glider" is not plausible.  Ebikeguy (talk) 14:36, 20 January 2011 (UTC)


 * This is insane I am a long-standing editor with a long record of edits, look at my edit history, it speaks for itself. I don't even know the accused user here, he simply posted on my talk page notifying me of a discussion on which I had weighed in before, and I jumped in because I happened to feel strongly about it.  Do some research before accusing people of being sockpuppets.  It takes two seconds to see that I have years of edits and have barely any interaction with the user in question here.  I am posting once, leave me out of this debate.  Cazort (talk) 14:49, 20 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I note that OSX has not notified any of the editors he has accused of being sockpuppets of this investigation. I believe that he is admonished to do so in Wikipedia's instructions for filing a sockpuppetry accusation.  This seems to be an act of bad-faith on his part.  Ebikeguy (talk) 14:52, 20 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I am a real editor I am a real editor - you can run a technical check on me to prove it. I am just an occasional editor - once in a week or so I can add news related to plug-in or hybrid vehicles. I am not a very experience Wikipedia editor so I do not know much about articles merges and talk pages. I did learn about Hybrid articles merges from AutoBlogGreen. I believe that it is totally wrong - Hybrid is not just another powertrain - it is a very expensive and risky enterprise for manufactures - look how few Hybrid models are available on the market!!! But it is a revolutionary technology in reducing oil consumption, air pollution and USA dependence on oil! So why do you want to make it difficult for people to learn about it? On contrary we have to make all the effort to make it easy for people to learn about. And yes, it is very important to reduce USA dependence on imported oil. Yegort (talk) 18:49, 20 January 2011 (UTC)


 * "it is very important to reduce USA dependence on imported oil" has nothing to do with the discussion here except the idea is associated with certain particpants who may be the same person. But this fevent belief does show some people are "on a mission" and such people generally let nothing get in the way, even behavior they wouldn't usually engage in.  Which support the idea something is wrong here.


 * Anyway, since you've brought it up, let me point you to a greater crisis, a serious US security risk. And that's banana dependence.  100% of bananas sold in the US are imported.  Oil is no where near that.  Bananas are the real crisis.  So drop the oil issue and fight banana dependence.  The US MUST become banana independent!!!!


 * Now, please drop the irrelevant, including oil dependence. Bradkay (talk) 23:47, 21 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Clarification by Mariordo: Regarding all the innuendo above about any connection with banned users, since I began collaborating in Wikipedia in 2007 until October 2009 I was living in Brazil (check the IPs) and ever since in the United States. As I found out in MAC's archived investigation his IP corresponds to Madrid, Spain, and just for the record I have not set foot in Spain ever. This is easy to check, so there is no need for more speculation.--Mariordo (talk) 19:37, 23 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I just became aware of this discussion. I seem to have made it my personal mission to follow and get Mac blocked through his various incarnations, and I've not seen anything to suggest that Mariordo is connected to him in anyway. His English skills are also well above Mac's and he has an ability to think and express himself cogently that Mac does not (had he, he would not have been blocked in the first place). Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:18, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
I reached this case after seeing discussion on WikiProject Environment and WikiProject Automobiles. OSX, please provide specific WP:DIFF. Behaviour-wise, the report shows their similarity in edit patterns are largely due to discussions on WikiProject pages. Their edit time is all over the map, suggesting that they have no prior knowledge to each other and there's no sockpuppetry or meatpuppetry involved. OhanaUnitedTalk page 17:18, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The meatpuppet accusations refer to what appears to be Mariordo's attempt to gain support by "leaking" to Autoblog Green, thus warping an ongoing discussion and undermining consensus building.  ⊂&#124; Mr.choppers &#124;⊃   (talk) 08:53, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The accusations against Mariordo as the one who "leaked" information to Autoblog Green are, at best, baseless to the point of being ridiculous. At worst, they constitute a organized effort to harass and Wikihound Mariordo into ceasing his efforts to preserve EV content on Wikipedia.  How do we shut down this witch hunt?  Ebikeguy (talk) 17:07, 26 January 2011 (UTC)


 * You have the project under environment. why don't you drop the issue? Bradkay (talk) 01:47, 27 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm closing this case as I don't think there's much else that can be done with regards to SPI. Yes, most of these accounts came here from an off-Wiki post. It's not enough to ban them, though, and SPA accounts can be taken care of in other ways. Just keeping this case open seems to be beating a dead horse. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 18:39, 27 January 2011 (UTC)