Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mostreal/Archive

Evidence submitted by Pgallert
is fighting for the life of the Criminal_creology article; he might not use fair methods. Has removed the AfD template twice, now suddenly half his institute comes to his help. See the goings-on at Articles_for_deletion/Criminal_creology and the discussion on my talk page. The chronology here is: user X comments, user Y created, user Y comments, user Z created, and so on. All with one edit, except (4), and the suspected main account from whom the article under discussion, Criminal_creology, was written. Looks (smells) more like sock than meat. --Pgallert (talk) 14:11, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users
This morning I noticed a sequence of new "keep" comments being added to that AfD, and I noticed that in the first five instances the new comment was added at the top, with the signature on a line of its own. After Pgallert moved these to the bottom, the next two comments were added at the bottom, but again with the signature on a new line. It appeared to be a pattern, so I then checked the user creation log for six of the seven (Mostreal excepted, being the creator and primary editor of Criminal creology), and noticed that each of these six was created after (sometimes only just after) the previous one had last commented at the AfD, and decided it could not be a coincidence. -- Red rose64 (talk) 15:39, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Never actually commented on such investigations before, but I think I'd better because I have already left comment at User talk:Pgallert/Archive2012 1. Basically, I have Criminal creology watchlisted because I placed on it. When I saw the  go on that page, I watchlisted Articles for deletion/Criminal creology as well.


 * I've added and  to the list.  Exact same MO as the others.  Not even a very inventive user name. Favonian (talk) 18:20, 24 February 2010 (UTC)


 * As the editor who nominated the article in question for deletion, I just wanted to chime in as well. While this could potentially be a series of meatpuppets, the timing and writing style would seem to argue against it. I'm just slightly puzzled that Mostreal is so willing to communicate in an AfD, but nowhere else. (By which I mean the lack of any edit summaries ever, and the unwillingness to respond to talk or article talk queries ). --  B figura  (talk) 18:58, 24 February 2010 (UTC)


 * The sudden appearance of new accounts in the AfD of an article about a "subject" with zero hits on any search engine could be explained by meatpuppetry, but the similarity in style (especially "Mr/Mrs" and "Sir/Madam": compare, , , , , , and  with ) the decreasing intervals (first ~1 hour, later ~10 minutes), the megalomania and often making the same grammatical errors looks like classic sockpuppetry.  seems not as similar as the rest, but even if she's just a meatpuppet: she is obviously also sockpuppeting as . They're either sockpuppets or a cult ("You may join us": ) devoted to worshipping a single researcher who seems to have invented everything from the mass–energy equivalence  to a "revolution in the history of criminal sciences"  . It's simultaneously hilarious and disconcerting. Smocking (talk) 19:20, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I've taken part in many AfDs now, and a few SPIs too. I am also a writer and editor who has to be sensitive to the form and flow of both prose and verse. I can see no reason why these SPAs could not be from the same hand. That isn't saying they are, but as a birdwatcher I am fairly used to the appearance of ducks, not to mention WP:DUCKs. Peridon (talk) 12:01, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I just added another highly probably sock from the same drawer, User:Learn enough, same pattern as other alleged socks. – ukexpat (talk) 16:56, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
ducks, suggest just handing out free blocks on SPAs at Articles_for_deletion/Criminal_creology, SpitfireTally-ho! 14:51, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

OK, this is obvious enough that even I can make this decision. I am blocking all socks indefinitely, and blocking User:Mostreal for 1 week, in the eternal hope that they will want to contribute productively and non-disruptively after the block expires. I'll do the blocking and tagging, but this is my first time, so it might take a while to do. Leave it to me, though, I need the practice. --Floquenbeam (talk) 21:58, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Conclusions