Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Milram2010/Archive

16 March 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Creation of same article under different disambiguation with same grammatical, referencing and formatting errors. Several IPs also used Kevin McE (talk) 19:21, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

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

Without knowing of Milram2010, I have username-blocked Milramteam as a role account - see Team Milram. JohnCD (talk) 10:50, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Edits by Milram2010/Milramteam did not attempt to represent either the company Milram, or the now defunct Team Milram cycling team. Both accounts, and a number of IPs, have had only one interest: to post claims about a cyclist/triathlete called Robert Young, with a total disregard for requests that these claims have some verification.  Some of the claims have been demonstrably false, some have been plausible but totally unverified, some have been highly POV.  Kevin McE (talk) 11:10, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
I'm going to mark this for close -one account is blocked and the other hasn't edited in a week. If there are further issues, please feel free to repost. TN X Man 14:40, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

28 March 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Impossible to present evidence as a non-admin, as edits of all except today's incarnation as Cyclingnews (a blatant breach of WP:Groupname) were on now deleted articles about the same sportsman. Several IPs have also been used, but I cannot access them for the same reason. Previous discussion at Sockpuppet investigations/Milram2010/Archive Kevin McE (talk) 17:40, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

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

Edits of puppeteer and SPs so far have consisted of nothing but identical promotional articles for a cyclist and triathlete who falls well below notability guidelines, using inflated claims of winning races where references given and all evidence online shows that he placed very far down in the results. Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Robert Young (triathlete) from Nov. 2011, Robert young (1982) 12 Mar. 2012, Robert Young (pro-cyclist) 17 Mar. 2012. The latest attempt at Robert Young (Pro Cyclist & Triathlete) 28 Mar. 2012 is now in AFD. User:Cyclingnews and anonymous editor at 78.146.213.180 have this morning been repeatedly trying to blank the article and bring the AFD to an early end. Scopecreep (talk) 10:02, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - I was unaware of this case until after I blocked Cyclingnews and reblocked Milramteam while doing some investigating around Robert Young (Pro Cyclist & Triathlete) and the previous incarnations of the article. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:16, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Additional IP disruption
Surely the same user, 188.28.207.179, has today 5 times deleted all or part of the discussion at Articles for deletion/Robert Young (Pro Cyclist & Triathlete), apparently trying to prevent use of CSD4 when the article is attempted again. This individual clearly has no qualms about how disruptive they are to Wikipedia in the pursuit of this goal of publicising a sportsman whose notability has never been established. Kevin McE (talk) 07:53, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

01 December 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Also User:Milramteam, User:Babyjaguar2, User:Cyclingnews and probably others.

All have had no interest other than to create articles about Robert Young, a triathlete who fails notability levels, by exagerrated and sometimes blatantly untrue claims. All have relied on the same references, from a local newspaper in Hertfordshire, and have shown the same orthographic tendency to misuse capital letters and mis-use citation templates Kevin McE (talk) 11:39, 1 December 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

 * . Blocked. The Cavalry (Message me) 00:14, 3 December 2012 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Same interest in only one person, same cavalier attitude to capitalisation and punctuation, same self aggrandisement, same unverifiable claims to previous exploits. Kevin McE (talk) 13:46, 10 December 2016 (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

 * The listed suspected puppet hasn't edited in over a year. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 14:43, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Must be sock of Runultratalk, as this user posted speedy deletion request that only Runultratalk could have had grounds to post. Same monointerest, same lack of understanding of categories (and reality) Kevin McE (talk) 14:11, 10 December 2016 (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
Account already blocked a while ago (this shouldn't have been brought). Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:44, 10 December 2016 (UTC)