Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Object404/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Hi, i got in an edit dispute with User:Object404. The 3rd revert to my edit was made by an account JMR raggster with that sole edit in its history. The edit dispute went as follows :
 * 1) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ferdinand_Marcos&diff=818443831&oldid=817622333
 * 2) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ferdinand_Marcos&diff=819274458&oldid=819233181
 * 3) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ferdinand_Marcos&diff=821187443&oldid=820001647
 * 4) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ferdinand_Marcos&diff=821250869&oldid=821187443
 * 5) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ferdinand_Marcos&diff=821263830&oldid=821251709
 * 6) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ferdinand_Marcos&diff=next&oldid=821263830
 * 7) Special:Contributions/JMR raggster Jerome Potts (talk) 00:52, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

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

Sorry, that account is definitely not mine. You can discuss this at the above person's talk page. I invite admins to investigate the IP address if that's even possible. Thanks for your concern. -Object404 (talk) 01:54, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Of course, IP addresses are not a surefire way of detecting sockpuppets, but let me put it this way. I work in IT and have been a Wikipedia editor for years. If I were to perform Wikipedia sockpuppetry, do you really think I'd do it from a fresh account with no other edits to its name? -Object404 (talk) 02:07, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

I’d be more than happy to provide verifiable documents of identification should the administrators deem it necessary. - JMR_raggster (talk) 02:09, 20 January 2018 (UTC)


 * I warned JMR of abusing multiple accounts, on the evidence that the user had only one edit, which was made 3 minutes after account creation, and was a reversion of contentious material within the Ferdinand Marcos article. Now the user's only edits are the original reversion; the above host, claiming to establish identity; and a post on his user page, claiming to establish identity. There is long-term abuse on the Marcos page, and I'm not accusing Object404. I am accusing JMR however, because the user's behavior is nothing if not suspicious. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia  ᐐT₳LKᐬ  03:38, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

How is sending a warning of sockpuppetry proof of sockpuppetry? Besides, didn't an earlier user specifically advise Object404 to let someone else perform the edit? So I did.

If you're going to revert an edit, at least do it because the edit warranted reverting for lack of supporting citations, and not over an unproven allegation of being an alter account. --JMR raggster (talk) 04:01, 20 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Disclosure - I am friends with JMR raggster. I pointed out Jerome Charles Potts deletion of contents and JMR raggster reverted it out of his own volition with his own solid reasons. Jerome Charles Potts's deletions though done in good faith have been tantamount to whitewashing Marcos's legacy (an ongoing problem) and is a disservice to Philippine history and future readers unfamiliar with the subject. -Object404 (talk) 12:20, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - I agree the new account is suspicious, but that one edit isn't sufficient enough evidence for a duck block, so please compare. Sro23 (talk) 03:46, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I would say between the accounts and, it is  there is a relationship. - Mailer Diablo 11:16, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I took a look at this case before logging off last night and came to the same conclusion as . However, I was too tired to post my findings, so I let it go until this morning. I have blocked the master for one week and indeffed/tagged the sock. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:50, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Hi, and . Apologies for being blunt, but this has been concluded in great error and both users should be unblocked. I know the user in question personally and in a Wikipedia event here in Manila today, I met his alleged sock. I assure the both of you that they are two very different people who happen to have the same topic interests. Here in the Philippines, it is very plausible that multiple editors will edit from the same IP address, so the IP alone is insufficient to prove that there is sock puppetry going on. --Sky Harbor (talk) 14:24, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * You should counsel the two users to be more forthcoming after being accused. Object404 did not disclose the relationship between him and JMR raggster until after Mailer diablo posted his findings. If he hadn't made a misleading denial at the get-go, I probably wouldn't have blocked him for a week. Both of them behaved poorly in this situation, which justifies the sanctions I imposed. Finally, CheckUsers see more technical data than just the IPs used by different users/accounts.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:02, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't see how he was being misleading with his denial. He denied that was his sock. If anything, this means that the only thing he didn't do is disclose that he knows him, which I agree he should've done earlier. Nonetheless, that doesn't explain why JMR should be blocked indefinitely, since the burden to prove the relationship was put on them and they offered to prove that they were different people. That said, I agree that  should've been more forthcoming. --Sky Harbor (talk) 15:21, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Meatpuppetry is also against policy. You cannot recruit people in real life to come revert an edit on your behalf so that you can avoid the 3RR/edit-warring. The troubling thing is that they also recruited you to come defend them here, which is also Meatpuppetry. Coordinating edits off-Wiki is something that should be avoided. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia  ᐐT₳LKᐬ  14:47, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Okay, hold up. My understanding of WP:MEATPUPPET is that the master account is in effective control of the meatpuppet, which if you ask me, is not the case here. There is a project going on in the Philippines to edit articles in order to prevent the furthering of a political agenda: a project that would necessarily entail several people and one where the master account plays a role, though he is not the only one leading the charge. Is that considered meatpuppetry now?


 * If anything, perhaps it was a mistake that they coordinated their edits to beat 3RR. That of course they shouldn't have done. But that said, I'm doubtful in this case that it could be construed as meatpuppetry just because it happened.


 * Finally, I'm appalled that you would accuse me of being their meatpuppet. Yes, I met the two (and know one personally). But that hardly qualifies me as being "recruited" to defend them here, when in my mind this was an error in judgement that affects the work they're doing to clean up articles related to Marcos. (Full disclosure: I was informed of the block, but in no way was I encouraged to defend them on their part. I offered to help them on my own.) --Sky Harbor (talk) 15:06, 20 January 2018 (UTC)