Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MooshiePorkFace/Archive

21 November 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

-- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  17:44, 21 November 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



 * WilliamH blocked Roberteditorwriter as, but I haven't looked into any CU connections or behavioral connections. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  17:50, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Behavior is very similar between MooshiePorkFace with his retinue of spammy socks and all the editing accounts in this group. (The top three have not edited.) Accordingly, I've blocked them all as socks. I'd normally merge the case with MooshiePorkFace's, but that one has been deleted per WP:BEANS. Anyway, the age of the accounts makes Rodwinoloresisimo the actual master of the farm, and that MooshiePorkFace was his sock. Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:24, 21 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Moved the page under the correct master and retagged the accounts listed above. Should all MooshiePorkFace socks also be moved to Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Rodwinoloresisimo? Jafeluv (talk) 09:54, 22 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I would advise against it, and would prefer to see this and the accounts moved to MooshiePorkFace. Previous investigations and findings of other CUs against this user have indicated an overlap with this SPI case, which in itself is another crapload of obscurity, and all ANI discussions and this user's ban proposal was discussed under MooshiePorkFace. The only thing we'd gain from moving our administrative goalposts on this individual is confusion. WilliamH (talk) 01:20, 23 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I've moved it back under the MooshiePorkFace case and retagged all the sockpuppets. Closed. Reaper Eternal (talk) 13:31, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

07 March 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Behavioural evidence: their first edits were a string of minor punctuation/phrasing changes in various articles, many of which in fact made the edited text ungrammatical. Previous socks have also started with this type of minor wording changes which often don't change anything at all in the articles. This is circumstantial and doesn't prove anything in itself - the relevant piece of information is, however, that they proceeded to create User:Probusiness/sandbox which appears to be a copy of ReviewBoost, an article created by a MooshiePorkFace sock in the past. bonadea contributions talk 15:55, 7 March 2013 (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 and tagged. Closing. Someguy1221 (talk) 10:18, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

25 June 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

These two accounts (note similar names) created three articles Disque Foundation, Karl Disque, and National Health Care Provider Solutions that were commissioned on Elance to paid editor Legalmorning who is already associated with blocked editor Morning277. See for Elance job. Logical Cowboy (talk) 01:06, 25 June 2013 (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
✅ plus: These are actually socks of, but the two work together so it's fine for them to be tagged as Morning277. Articles G5d. Let's leave this open for a bit, I'm still checking a few more things. WilliamH (talk) 02:08, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Question: How do you know that Morning277 and MooshiePorkFace are not the same person? -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 03:36, 25 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Manually moved via /copy-paste, will clean up the rest. Closing. Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; © &#124; WER  16:57, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Being familiar with Morning, I trust the CU's reasoning on this. Closing.  Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; © &#124;  WER  16:58, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

09 July 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Two "new" accounts have similar pattern of edits. First, make several minor edits in unrelated articles. Then, a week later, create promotional article from scratch in user sandbox and move to article space. See and. The two articles, Patient Conversation Media and 1-800-Oncologist describe highly related companies. The articles have similar structures. The second article uses the first five references from the first article. It seems highly unlikely that two new, independent editors would each make their first edits this way. Also, from the name, MillerElance, it appears that second account is linked to paid editing, and may be using multiple accounts to mask extent of COI. Logical Cowboy (talk) 02:00, 9 July 2013 (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
Quacks like MooshiePorkFace and articles deleted accordingly. CU is not especially helpful, but it's self-evident these accounts are socks. WilliamH (talk) 13:20, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Per observations of WilliamH, investigated and concluded the same. Moved and hist merged case here.  Blocked and tagged socks.  Closing. Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124;  WER  14:12, 9 July 2013 (UTC)