Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MickMacNee/Archive

29 March 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

A new user registered yesterday, Neetandtidy and immediately has become involved in heated discussions at articles which has seen another editor (Gravyring) blocked. The user has already confirmed that they have previously edited here using a different account. On seeing that this new user was spelling my username incorrectly some alarm bells starting ringing and after a quick search I came across this edit of one of the very few people who has gotten my username wrong. I then had a look at this new users contribution today for other signs of MMN MO (policy and swearing) and it wasn't hard to come up with...

Mention of policy: TPO OSE

Swearing:


 * Of course I may be wrong but I would request that admin action is taken immediately to investigate this user. Bjmullan (talk) 08:08, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

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

Are we now penalizing users for familiarizing themselves with wiki policy? This is hardly a qualifying trait of sockpuppetry and nor is swearing. It may be a tad uncivil but then so is this edit summary. 212.183.128.82 (talk) 09:00, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * In this case it's not just the swearing and not just the fact that he is familiar with policy. It's also his general tone and his use of walls of text. Everything about this account, including the username, screams MickMacNee. Either this is him or someone is doing a damn good Joe job on him in order to get his 1 year ban reset. (now there's a scary thought) --Ron Ritzman (talk) 12:30, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * As a final note, having read over Neet's user talk page, if this is a Joe job it's the best one ever done in this dimension. - The Bushranger One ping only 09:11, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
I'm not sure who this is, but the following accounts are the same:
 * I've blocked them all (and an IP to boot). Mick is as far as checkuser evidence goes. My gut feeling is that this is an unrelated troll pulling a fast one.  TN X Man  13:21, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * For the record, all of these are Neetandtidy too:
 * TN X Man 18:27, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * All blocked up already. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  06:59, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I've blocked them all (and an IP to boot). Mick is as far as checkuser evidence goes. My gut feeling is that this is an unrelated troll pulling a fast one.  TN X Man  13:21, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * For the record, all of these are Neetandtidy too:
 * TN X Man 18:27, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * All blocked up already. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  06:59, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I've blocked them all (and an IP to boot). Mick is as far as checkuser evidence goes. My gut feeling is that this is an unrelated troll pulling a fast one.  TN X Man  13:21, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * For the record, all of these are Neetandtidy too:
 * TN X Man 18:27, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * All blocked up already. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  06:59, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I've blocked them all (and an IP to boot). Mick is as far as checkuser evidence goes. My gut feeling is that this is an unrelated troll pulling a fast one.  TN X Man  13:21, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * For the record, all of these are Neetandtidy too:
 * TN X Man 18:27, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * All blocked up already. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  06:59, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 18:27, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * All blocked up already. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  06:59, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 18:27, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
 * All blocked up already. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  06:59, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * All blocked up already. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  06:59, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

02 April 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets
 * this case was originally opened at /Factocop, but developments have since linked Wp aide to MickMacNee.
 * this case was originally opened at /Factocop, but developments have since linked Wp aide to MickMacNee.




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Over recent weeks, two serial block evading sock abusers MickMacnee and Factocop have been disrupting article covered by The Troubles Arbitration. The most recent CU uncovered quite a list of socks. Two other accounts were also blocked as a result of their disruptive edits, Gravyring and Hackneyhound, with both accounts being linked together. Hackneyhound was blocked by Elen of the Roads for blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet, outlining the rational here. A number of unblock requests have been declined, by Tnxman307 here, followed by The Blade of the Northern Lights here who found the behavioral evidence rather convincing and also by [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hackneyhound&diff=484922463&oldid=484914052 Boing! said Zebedee here]. The editor has had to be told a number of times not to use their talk page to attack other editors, with me being one of them I should note. These editors have been linked to Factocop. Here are some of the edits of the most active socks:


 * Gravyring
 * 1)
 * 2)
 * 3)
 * 4)
 * 5)
 * 6)
 * 7)
 * 8)

IP confirmed in talk page posts. 
 * Gravyring's IP's edits
 * 1)
 * 2)


 * Hackneyhound
 * 1) Note that this will be the same article targeted by Wp aide
 * 2) Edit with misleading summery.
 * 3)
 * 4) Wp aide edit.
 * 5)
 * 6)
 * 7)
 * 8)


 * Wp aide
 * 1)
 * 2)
 * 3)
 * 4)

Small selection to give you the idea.
 * Factocop
 * 1)
 * 2)
 * 3)
 * 4)

As a result of the constant sock abuse one of the target articles has had to be page protected on three occasions.
 * 1)
 * 2)
 * 3)

I was compiling a list of the number of socks on this article when this latest editor showed up. I would be grateful if you could have a look. The only concern I have with this latest sock is that it is blindly obvious, if you know what I mean. Possibly too obvious. Thanks in advance,

Regards, <strong style="color:#009900;">Domer48 <sub style="color:#006600;">'fenian'  20:54, 2 April 2012 (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

 * Wpaide is Gravyring, and with behavioural evidence the link is essentially confirmed. It's  Wpaide is Factocop based on geography but proper data for that master is long since . Obviously this is more of the same from the sock-ring around Northern Irish lochs, but we are  as to what else is going on. Your submission was inaccurate in one respect: it was never proven that MickMacNee was behind any of these accounts, and the likely conclusion (with which I agree) is that they were an abusive imitation. In any case, I blocked this latest sock (and some IPs too).  AGK  [•] 23:26, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Clerk Request Please merge this with Sockpuppet investigations/MickMacNee/Archive as more of the same from User:Neetandtidy et al. Thanks, AGK  [•] 23:43, 4 April 2012 (UTC)