Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Pitcroft/Archive

07 November 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

An hour after Pitcrift was blocked for disruptive editing on the Spectre talk page, SolentMan began on the same topic. When the similarity was mentioned at the Pitcroft ANI thread (where was in agreement with the probability of socking), it took no time for this new and novice editor to find their way to the thread to join in the discussion, again along the same lines as Pitcrofts comments. We are, I think, deep into DUCK territory here. SchroCat (talk) 20:27, 7 November 2015 (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

 * - In order to facilitate and expedite your request, please provide diffs to support your case. Please give two or more diffs meeting the following format:
 * 1) At least one diff is from the sockmaster (or an account already blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet of the sockmaster), showing the behaviour characteristic of the sockmaster.
 * 2) At least one diff per suspected sockpuppet, showing the suspected sockpuppet emulating the behaviour of the sockmaster given in the first diff.
 * 3) In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided. Around one sentence is enough for this.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  22:04, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

A few bits to consider on this duck:
 * 1) An hour after Pitcroft (a UK user) is blocked, SolentMan (a UK user) posts the same argument in the same thread
 * 2) How does this "entirely new user" then find a tangentially connected thread at ANI?
 * 3) Its very suspicious that this "very new and inexperienced user" defends the master at that ANI thread.
 * 4) We can wait around for more WP:ROPE to see how it plays out, but there has been enough disruption from them already to at least justify an SPI check. – SchroCat (talk) 23:33, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, I understand. But, please, also provide diffs by Pitcroft to show how his and SolentMan's arguments are "same".  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:59, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Vanjagenije, your comment above stated that "In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided": that has been provided in what I have written above. Pitcroft has been indefinitely blocked for being disruptive for a series of comments around one theme (such as this); the diffs above show SolentMan in the same theme, and then moving round to an ANI thread like an experienced user. This is a sock. The duck is very quacking loudly here! – SchroCat (talk) 00:08, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * - OK, those diffs now really show similar behavior. I'm endorsing the CU to compare two accounts.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  00:14, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * The accounts are ✅ plus:
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:56, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:56, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

08 November 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Following Sockpuppet investigations/Pitcroft/Archive, RowlandsCastle, a new user posting in the same thread on the same lines as master and first sock. SchroCat (talk) 12:22, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * A subsequent comment is straight along the lines of the previous poster as well. Behaviourally this is very close to the others. – SchroCat (talk) 13:39, 8 November 2015 (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

 * - Compare RowlandsCastle to previous socks and the master (see: and ).  Vanjagenije   (talk)  13:06, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅, blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:00, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

09 March 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Back in November we had fun and games with Pitcroft and a couple of his socks: SolentMan, FreshwaterIOW and RowlandsCastle. After RowlandsCastle was blocked, there was another new editor on the same thread who I nearly reported at the time: Shanklin1914. (They only made one comment and I—assuming good faith—wanted more justification before filing, but they have only just returned to editing). That person has now returned in a different thread, but on the exact same topic as before and using the same arguments as the blocked accounts.

One point to note is that the editor is working logged out (as IP 86.169.39.111), but then signing his name Shanklin1914.


 * Shanklin1914: "My sources for SPECTRE instead of 'Spectre' are the Bond books"
 * RowlandsCastle: "My point is the films are based on the books and the origin of the films are in the books"
 * SolentMan: "I am new to this, but why is there no recognition that SPECTRE comes from the novels"
 * Pitcroft: "Any body who knows anything about the James Bond canon from the books knows that SPECTRE is an acronym"

This new user is also savvy enough to accuse people of making a POV Railroad (a concept a few us have never even come across before, despite being active for several years!)

We can wait around for more WP:ROPE to see how it plays out, but there has been enough disruption from them already to at least justify an SPI check. – SchroCat (talk) 10:41, 9 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Shanklin1914 has also edited while logged in, although this was to delete the talk page thread – SchroCat (talk) 15:27, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Comment: the POV railroad comment is what sold me as Shaklin being a sock, though I wasn't sure who the master account was. In retrospect, I should have made the connection to Pitcroft/Rowlands/Freshwater; arguing that there is a conscious effort to deliberately misrepresent the content is right up his alley. His "POV railroad" is little more than an attempt to circumvent an established consensus. And one slight amendment to SchroCat's comment about posting from an IP; he posts from an IP, then when SineBot adds his signature in, he edits it so that parts of it are missing&mdash;I saw him post one comment as "Shanklinl1914". Prisonermonkeys (talk) 11:22, 9 March 2016 (UTC)


 * Diff of first IP signing himself Shanklin1914:
 * Diff of second IP signing himself Shanklin1914:  -Elektrik Fanne (talk) 16:38, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The account is very . Blocked and tagged. .--Bbb23 (talk) 16:12, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocking IPs for two days and closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  17:36, 10 March 2016 (UTC)