Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Old Shadow/Archive

Evidence submitted by Claritas
KingOfTheLynn created the article about a plumber called Mark Bywater on the 26th of May. The article was nominated for deletion by myself on the same day - the discussion is still open at Articles for deletion/Mark Bywater. User:DevDevDevon was created on the 27th, and made his/her first edit to the deletion discussion -. The style of DevDevDevon's comment is very similar to that of KIngOfTheLynn's - "KEEP" all in capitals, and demonstrates a good understanding of basic formatting, which is unusual for a new user. Furthermore, User:DevDevDevon has recently been actively editing Mark Bywater, while KingOfTheLynn has ceased. User:DevDevDevon's contributions also reflect considerable knowledge of Wikipedia which would be unusual for a beginner - see. I therefore conclude that there's a strong case that abuse of multiple accounts is going on here.

I had exactly the same suspicions which is why I tagged the discussion with SPA. I also believe the article in question is autobiographical, although that is not strictly relevant to this SPI. --Simple Bob (talk) 12:54, 27 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Note - I have notified User:KingOfTheLynn of this investigation on his talk page. Claritas (talk) 13:03, 27 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Further Evidence - the recent edits by both accounts at Template:Marham weatherbox are further signs of possible abuse. Claritas (talk) 16:35, 27 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Note - extremely important - User:Old Shadow is also a likely sockpuppet. See this diff - took credit for uploading an image which User:KingOfTheLynn had done -, File:Louise Bourgeois.jpg. Certainly not AGF. Claritas § 22:24, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims. I share my computer and internet connection with KingOfTheLynn. I saw the article he created and having experience in the plumbing industry, I decided to comment. I have been a regular editor of Wikipedia for a few years, but have never felt it need to create an account, but felt it would help when commenting on the discussion if I posted from an account and not use my IP address. I do not see a problem with both of us stating reasons on the page as it is not a vote. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DevDevDevon (talk • contribs) 15:15, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: I will probable revert back to using my IP address as the account was only created because I felt it would resolve this sort of issue from happening. If anyone has taken offence or feel that the comments are unnecessary then could they not simple be merged to resolve the issue? – DevDevDevon (talk) 15:22, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
I am inclined to AGF that this is two separate people who participated in the AFD (though via canvassing). It may not make a difference as the consensus seems to be leaning towards deletion anyways. –MuZemike 00:24, 2 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Correction, I was inclined to AGF until I was informed about the Old Shadow account. Look at the last three edits by KingOfTheLynn on Louise Bourgeois, , and . Then look at two edits made by Shadow which initiated a peer review and . This looks like someone requested the peer review with the wrong account accidentally – a classic sock error. KingOfTheLynn and DevDevDevon indefinitely blocked and tagged (autoblock disabled) as socks of Old Shadow; Shadow has been warned not to sock again in this manner. –MuZemike 16:07, 4 June 2010 (UTC)