Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mcspeedey/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

All of these accounts were created within a short amount of time. Four of them are making the exact same edits to the exact same article - removing the "motto" from the Zeta Psi page.


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zeta_Psi&diff=prev&oldid=1004423230
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zeta_Psi&diff=prev&oldid=1004424181
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zeta_Psi&diff=prev&oldid=1004404788

Some IP addresses were also used to make the exact same edit, one example here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Zeta_Psi&diff=1004281039&oldid=1004280995

Another account, QuietMedian, was created after the page was protected. It immediately asked for an edit to a protected page - the same edit.

The final account I listed, Volteer1, made the edit requested, and is also relatively new. I would like to say that I am not sure if this is a sockpuppet - it may well be a legitimate user. However, given the number of somewhat-new and really-new accounts that descended on the page, I thought I would include that account just in case. If this was in error, I apologize. This is my first time using twinkle and reporting socks myself. Wes sideman (talk) 16:55, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Noting this ANEW discussion, in which the reporter was warned; this pattern is suspicious. was created in 2011, however their sole edit is to Zeta Psi in January 2021. The other 4 accounts were created within 24 hours to carry out remarkably similar edits to, or about, Zeta Psi. I hear quacking. I will note that 's contributions look very different to those of the other accounts, to the point that I am quite confident that they are unrelated to these other accounts. : To establish the connection between  and also shake the sock drawer to see what else might fall out. Jack Frost (talk) 09:53, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, that was not a result which I was expecting. The question then, are these sockpuppets, meatpuppets, or entirely unrelated? I do not include in this, as mentioned above.
 * Firstly, I think we can pretty conclusively rule out that these accounts are entirely unrelated; 5 accounts all editing about the same topic, at the same times (see timecards), and being created at very similar times; nope, I don't buy it.
 * It then comes down to whether these are the same person, or different people editing about the same topic? Whilst User103214 and Phippap removed the same information, User103214 used an edit summary at 12:47, whereas Phippap did not 2 hours later. focused on edit requests and an ANEW complaint, whilst  only removed the motto from the infobox. Whilst they're ducky, I actually think there are enough differences to say there's a mix of sock- and meat-puppetry here.
 * The question then, is what to do about it. The article has been semi-protected for another 10 hours, the editing of these accounts has ceased, and the contested information is not currently in the article, as it lacks appropriate sourcing.
 * I find the various forms of puppetry quite reprehensible, as they entirely subvert the democratic systems of Wikipedia; however in this case the various accounts seem to have been somewhat correct in removing unsourced information from the article which was being repeatedly inserted. Therefore, I think a reasonable course of action is to: (1) leave the motto out of the article until a reliable source is located to support its' inclusion, (2) monitor for further disruption by these accounts, or of the article, and (3) close this SPI with no action at present, with a low threshold for reopening it to deal with these accounts should they become disruptive. Jack Frost (talk) 11:38, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I find the various forms of puppetry quite reprehensible, as they entirely subvert the democratic systems of Wikipedia; however in this case the various accounts seem to have been somewhat correct in removing unsourced information from the article which was being repeatedly inserted. Therefore, I think a reasonable course of action is to: (1) leave the motto out of the article until a reliable source is located to support its' inclusion, (2) monitor for further disruption by these accounts, or of the article, and (3) close this SPI with no action at present, with a low threshold for reopening it to deal with these accounts should they become disruptive. Jack Frost (talk) 11:38, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Unless VPNs or proxies are involved, these users are ❌ as far as checkuser evidence goes...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   10:16, 12 February 2021 (UTC)
 * There could be some kind of off-wiki coordination going on here, which would likely be a violation of MEAT. The SPAs have stopped editing though, so closing with no further action. Can be readdressed if it starts up again.  Girth Summit  (blether)  13:25, 6 March 2021 (UTC)