Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Newpoesia/Archive

10 July 2010

 * Suspected sockpuppets

User:Newpoesia created the article Mohsen Emadi on 7/6/2010. Much of the content of the article appeared to be the same content that was contributed by User:Transcelan in his/her last edit to the article on 2/23/2009 (check deleted history). I understand that Newpoesia could have picked up the content from cache somewhere, but if that was not the case, it is odd that the content is almost identical (I'm inferring that Transcelan has a local copy of the article he/she created).
 * Evidence submitted by -- Mufka (u) (t) (c)

The article has been nominated for deletion and Transcelan has come out of a 17 month editing hiatus to make his/her first edit to the AfD discussion.

The included IP address has been involved in editing the article since its recreation and would appear to be the IP used by Newpoesia (or Transcelan if they are distinct users). The IP also has similar interests with Transcelan as can be seen here and here, but this could just be coincidence.

It is also an interesting coincidence that Newpoesia's first edit as a new user was to create a fully baked, referenced article. Obviously, this could indicate a history as an anon user, but I feel it is relevant to the discussion.

If it is found that these are the same user, the issue mostly lies in the attempt to impact the AfD discussion. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 15:20, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

I am a member of Mohsen Emadi's fan page on facebook. I recenlly came back from Iran after studying Persian literature and politics in Tehran. I was writing a report when I found out that Emadi's page does not exist anymore on wikipedia, therefore I copied the content from Facebook fan page and created a new page. I am not familiar with editing on wikipedia so I might have done some mistakes, however I am sure the discussion about the notability of this writer is not relevant. Everybody who studied a bit on the modern Persian literature knows the influence of Mohsen Emadi, especially his translations, as number of his own works could not be published in Iran due to its regime after 2009. --Newpoesia (talk) 16:19, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.

I am waiting for discussion to continue; I hope descriptions above are sufficient enough for closing this sub-discussion and coming back to the main discussion.--Newpoesia (talk) 11:45, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

I did not check Wikipedia for a long time. Last year I decided to come through editing and helping Wikipedia in subjects related to Persian literature but unfortunately I could not continue because of all the masses and works around me. I noticed the discussion about one of my favorite authors quite accidentally. If I was noticing it before, certainly I was participating in discussion when someone nominated the article created by me for deletion. I think Newpoesia did a pretty job in finding the appropriate references that I did not. Also one can easily guess the reason for the mentioned common interests in Ahmad Shamlou: He is the most famous Iranian contemporary poet and it is important to mention that the subject of the article,Mohsen Emadi, has the monopolistic right in Digital publishing of all the works of Ahmad Shamlou including Ketab Kuche which was so problematic during last year. .--Transcelan (talk) 17:10, 11 July 2010 (UTC) The above comment by Newpoesia provides a plausible explanation for the concern about the source of a complete article. Normally the copy/paste activity would bring up copyvio concerns, but since the source on Facebook was the article on Wikipedia, that isn't an issue. I will say that, for a new user, Newpoesia did pretty good job of putting the article together from a Facebook copy. My concern about the coincidental appearance of Transcelan still stands. I suppose he/she could just have been a sleeper, watching over his/her favorite article. -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 16:35, 10 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments by other users

–MuZemike 18:52, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

. The technical evidence for one of the users suggests they're using proxies but I wasn't able to prove this suspicion. --Deskana (talk) 21:29, 14 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Closing per CU results. –MuZemike 19:48, 15 July 2010 (UTC)