Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/RaymondCHedges/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets

 * ( original case name)
 * ( original case name)


 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

MetaTracker has been active since 16 June 2020. Since that time, the editor has exhibited editing patterns that are very similar to those of Winkelvi, an editor who was banned in 2018: (i) The two editors share an overlap in interests: singers, cinema, conservative political shows and conservative figures. Both editors have edited the page of John McAfee, a Libertarian Party candidate, with MetaTracker also editing the pages of other Libertarian Party figures. (ii) The two editors have some overlap in edits. (iii) Both have edited the pages of various Fox News shows, which is not exactly common: both have edited "The Five", Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity. MetaTracker has also edited "Red Eye" and "Tucker Carlson Tonight", and Winkelvi has edited Mike Huckabee (who had a show at the time), Jeanine Pirro, and the Ingraham Angle. (iv) Metatracker shows a familiarity with Wikipedia policies and editing from the get-go. (v) Both have extensively edited "critical reception" sections of films (just ctrl+F "recept" in MetaTracker's contributions and see similar edits by Winkelvi (vi) Both editors have a history of wanting to water down descriptions of racist language, (vii) Both editors have edited pages related to the musical TV show Glee (although they are careful not to edit the same ones) which ended five years ago. Here is Winkelvi editing Dianna Agron (the lead actress in Glee) and here is MetaTracker editing the main Glee article and Glee actress Naya Rivera. I am not familiar enough with Glee to spot more overlaps, but I'm sure there is more. I think the small number of edits by MetaTracker coupled with the similarities to Winkelvi warrant a closer examination. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 14:30, 12 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the check. I can look into the other accounts to see if they connect to Winkelvi in terms of behavior and overlap. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 23:29, 12 July 2020 (UTC)


 * When you say an account is "stale", what does that mean precisely? That you're not permitted to do that checkuser thing? Snooganssnoogans (talk) 23:32, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Comment. As an editor familiar with Winkelvi, I do believe he is behind these accounts. The editor interaction tool shows a lot of overlap between WV and the sock accounts, too much overlap for it to be a coincidence. They also have a similar writing style, particularly on talk pages. But the smoking gun for me is this edit . It might seem innocuous, but WV had just been indefinitely blocked one month prior for violating an interaction ban with  for this edit  to Meghan Trainor and WV has a long history of swooping in to "correct" MaranoFan's edits to Trainor and related pages.   Calidum   02:21, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Winkelvi could be the master. There are 30 articles that are common to Winkelvi and at least one of the socks. Winkelvi and three of the socks have edited The Social Network. Winkelvi shows a preoccupation with the movie, Winkelvi presumably being the (pseudo-)plural of Winklevoss, as in Winklevoss twins. - MrX 🖋 12:07, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The following accounts are ✅ to one another:
 * Winkelvi is so . Confirmed accounts . A clerk can figure out if its Winkelvi (I also think  was pretty familiar with Wink.) Once its sorted out what to call the master here, could a clerk please move to the correct page if needed and then tag. Thanks . TonyBallioni (talk) 23:08, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , stale means the CU data has nothing within 90 days for that account, so I can’t see it. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:37, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Winkelvi is so . Confirmed accounts . A clerk can figure out if its Winkelvi (I also think  was pretty familiar with Wink.) Once its sorted out what to call the master here, could a clerk please move to the correct page if needed and then tag. Thanks . TonyBallioni (talk) 23:08, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , stale means the CU data has nothing within 90 days for that account, so I can’t see it. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:37, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Winkelvi is so . Confirmed accounts . A clerk can figure out if its Winkelvi (I also think  was pretty familiar with Wink.) Once its sorted out what to call the master here, could a clerk please move to the correct page if needed and then tag. Thanks . TonyBallioni (talk) 23:08, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , stale means the CU data has nothing within 90 days for that account, so I can’t see it. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:37, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
 * , stale means the CU data has nothing within 90 days for that account, so I can’t see it. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:37, 12 July 2020 (UTC)


 * The overlap in political articles can be written off as political POV, but there are enough other articles overlapping here (esp. The Social Network) that I'm pretty convinced. Tagged the socks, closing. GeneralNotability (talk) 17:19, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Evidence: (1) The editor O.Goethe was created in 2018 (the same time when Winkelvi was creating and running multiple sockpuppets) but only started to make substantive edits on 20 July 2020. (2) A large number of Winkelvi sockpuppets were busted on 12-13 July 2020, one week before O.Goethe began editing. (3) Despite being new, this editor shows familiarity with Wikpiedia's rules. (4) This editor has stalked me to obscure pages, such as Lawrence Mead, Roland Fryer and Larry Krasner in their few edits. I was the editor who busted Winkelvi's sockpuppetry. (5) Despite only 44 edits, O.Goethe edits in the same areas as Winkelvi and their socks did: tv-shows, cinema, landmarks (in particular, bridges), right-wing media figures. Both editors have edited the page for the Godfather, as well as NFL-related pages. (6) O.Goethe uses edit summaries that Winkelvi also used, including "redundant" or "redundancy, "removing per" and "concise" (just ctrl-F Winkelvi's contributions for those words). There is not a lot to go on because O.Goethe only has 44 edits but I think this is sufficient to warrant a check. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 16:42, 30 July 2020 (UTC) Snooganssnoogans (talk) 16:42, 30 July 2020 (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

 * ❌ to the recent sock farm. But this is probably, and I've blocked him as such. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:20, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

No socks - adding a case to make comments for the record. GeneralNotability (talk) 12:30, 4 August 2020 (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

 * Per at Special:Permalink/971142311, Winklevi is ❌ to the rest of the group. See the link for further discussion. GeneralNotability (talk) 12:38, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Case renamed, known socks retagged, untagged Winklevi. Closing. GeneralNotability (talk) 12:44, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

This editor edits: (i) academics, (ii) British people (academics and cinema people), (iii) US pundits and talk show hosts, (iv) law, (v) US and British politics pages, and (vi) cinema. Those are the same pages that the accounts RaymondCHedges and MetaTracker used to edit. The three accounts were not extraordinarily prolific so there is limited content to go on. The account "Lord Law Law" popped up less than a month after MetaTracker was blocked. The edit summaries for the three accounts are similar: "added", "fixed", "not necessary", "entry". I think there's enough to justify a CheckUser analysis. Snooganssnoogans (talk) 01:00, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users

 * I edit similar topics (which many editors edit) and use words like "added" and "fixed" (which many editors use). This is not a good foundation to accuse someone of sockpuppetry. I come on here to de-stress and add to the Wiki. I do not get into edit wars or bad faith disputes. I don't really understand why this accusation has come about. I could see if I were using idiosyncratic phrases, but not off "added" or "fixed". Lord Law Law (talk) 02:24, 22 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I don't see the banned user covering any British topics, beyond internationally famous figures (e.g. Christopher Nolan and Emilia Clarke). Whereas the majority of my edits are niche British figures. Clearly, the topics covered are not the same. Other than I edited a handful of cinema figures' articles and some US conservative pundits. My edits are about law and academics, whereas the banned user's legal contribution is saying someone no longer practises law. Lord Law Law (talk) 03:31, 22 October 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * ❌. But  is probably RaymondCHedges. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 11:19, 22 October 2020 (UTC)