Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Researchamerica/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

In December 2017 editor User:Researchamerica created Draft:Mary Woolley (President and CEO) and submitted said draft to AfC. It failed to pass, and the editor was softblocked for violating username policy and for having a clear conflict of interest (Woolley is the CEO of Research!America). Yesterday I came across a new article Draft:Mary Woolley (CEO) while patrolling new pages. My suspicions were raised by the article's original name (Mary Woolley (President and CEO of Research!America)) and so I searched for existing articles, thus finding the first article. I moved second article to the draftspace (on the basis it was similar in terms of content to the first article and contained an improperly used image), but today it was moved back to the mainspace. I found this to be suspicious, and so I launched into an investigation of the three editors and one IP whom have been editing the article. Per their contributions, all four have mostly edited the Woolley Draft. To begin, User:Izzycom's only major edit was to create the second Woolley draft, which contains much of the same content (prior to revisions after my movement to draft) as the first Woolley draft. User:Spec22202's only contributions have been to remove some content and a COI tag from the second Woolley draft. User:HlthRes241's only notable edit was their moving of the second draft to the main space. User:Custis2025's only edit (as of this writing) has been to the second draft. The same goes for both IP addresses. The best evidence for sockpuppetry however is User talk:HlthRes241, which has warnings indicating they contested the deletion of the first Woolley back in December 2017. This draws a clear connection between User:Researchamerica and User:HlthRes241. How any of these 'new' editors found their way to an obscure draft is beyond me, and when considering the COI present for the first incarnation of the subject draft, I feel sock and/or meat puppetry is taking place. SamHolt6 (talk) 23:35, 25 April 2018 (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

 * The master is . The puppet accounts are ✅ + . Blocked without tags.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:24, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Tagging and closing. Sir Sputnik (talk) 02:34, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

New editor Jacketz2017 joined the project with a large edit to Draft:Mary Woolley (CEO). Note this draft was edited by at least three sock accounts of the suspected sockmaster. How a new and ostensibly uninvolved editor made it to an obscure draft article is unknown, but seems suspicious.--SamHolt6 (talk) 23:51, 5 June 2018 (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

 * as they're editing from the same ISP and geolocation as previous blocked socks. Given that the account is an SPA editing an article that appears to be a UPE target, at the very least it's WP:MEAT. I've blocked the account and added semi-protection to the draft article. Closing.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 18:30, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

This user first appeared in a May and June of 2019, where it made a handful of innocuous edits before disappearing. It returned a month later and immediately displayed an interest in Draft:Mary Woolley (CEO), someone how finding an obscure draft that has repeatedly attracted sockpuppets in the past. It has repeatedly claimed to definitely not be paid or in any way connected to the subject, yet has only expanded the draft by adding additional credentials, effectively treating it like a resume. (Apparently, credentials are all that matters to this person, given they are also the goal of his editing.) He simultaneously removed the COI templates, claiming to have cleaned it up by making "significant changes" to what was there, despite having altered essentially none of the text already present in the article, and then promptly mainspaced it. Seems exceptionally motivated to distance himself from COI accusations with actually addressing the article's COI problems. His connection to the subject is obvious, and thus he seems very likely to be connected to previously connected accounts as well. —Compassionate727 (T·C) 17:34, 10 July 2019 (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
❌.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:47, 10 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Closing per the above. The SandDoctor  Talk 18:46, 11 August 2019 (UTC)