Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Riathamus/Archive

19 September 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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


 * History of promotion COI and SPAs
 * 1) Please see comments at Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard/Archive_87 by and.
 * 2) noted on the conflict of interest board that books about how to promote oneself on the Internet featured WP:COI from multiple WP:SPAs.
 * 3) May be related to blocked account.
 * 4) Quite possibly might be able to find other WP:SPAs in the history of the related articles. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 18:39, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * , who admits himself to be a sock, edited exclusively the article for which TriJean lists themselves as a paid editor.  DGG ( talk ) 00:47, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your consideration and reevaluation of this matter, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:01, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Additional information as requested by
 * 1) Oldest account by creation =
 * 2)  DIFF LINK = first edit to add spam link, to article about Adsense
 * 3)  DIFF LINK = adds spam link to The AdSense Code article
 * 4)  DIFF LINK = 2nd edit ever is to article about Joel Comm
 * 5)  DIFF LINK = first edit ever is to article about Joel Comm
 * 6)  DIFF LINK = adds spam link to The AdSense Code
 * 7)  DIFF LINK = first edit ever is to create article page for Joel Comm
 * 8)  DIFF LINK = first edit every is to page blank vandalism and promote self in someone else article -- Mike Filsaime
 * 9)  DIFF LINK = first edit ever is to page -- Mike Filsaime
 * 10)  DIFF LINK = notes client is Morgan James Publishing, publisher of book by Joel Comm
 * 11)  BLOCK LOG LINK = blocked as spam advertising only account  No explanation about the connection.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  22:51, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * 12)  DIFF LINK = promo editing at page Mike Filsaime
 * 13)  comment from DGG about this account: "The Man against the Sky, who admits himself to be a sock, edited exclusively the article for which TriJean lists themselves as a paid editor."

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

There is off-wiki evidence published by a real-world internet marketer that links the personas "Riathamus" and "Emongami" to that same real-world person. More than this I can not state here, but a cursory Internet search makes it pretty clear. — Brianhe (talk) 16:57, 20 September 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I've declined the CU request as this report is not workable as it stands. First, most of the accounts are . Second, you didn't bother to list the correct master (the oldest-created account). Finally, without explanation or comment, you threw in another master, BiH., you need to sort this out so it can be properly reviewed.--Bbb23 (talk) 04:22, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
 * , from my past experience, Checkusers have informed me that they like to have the most recent account as the sockmaster. That is why I did that. It was not of my own decision making but from prior instruction. Please understand this. Any help you could give me on how to sort this out would be most appreciated, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:28, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I know you to be a good-faith honest person, but you must have misunderstood. I can't imagine any CheckUser saying such a thing. If you have a diff ... Putting that aside, find the oldest account by creation date, not by oldest edit date. Identify that account here (you can't fix the SPI yourself - it has to be moved properly). Provide evidence for each account you list, diffs of that account and diffs of the master, or at least diffs of another suspected sock that is tied to the master. When you've done all that, either I or a clerk will let you know if it can proceed or if more is needed.--Bbb23 (talk) 04:34, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Why name the sockmaster by the oldest account, if that one is the most stale? I'm confused,, and I thought I showed from the WP:COIN archive that there is significant concern here from multiple editors from before I even saw any of this. Can you help me out here, please? &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:41, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
 * You pretty much have to do what I said or I'll decline the case. Staleness has nothing to do with who is the master. It affects only whether there is any CU data for that account. Evidence is required that is more than just a pointer to COIN with a list of accounts and a couple of comments. I'm sorry, but the burden is on you as the filer to do all this. This is my last comment for today. If you want to post yet another question, go ahead, but I don't promise to answer it. Certainly not tonight but I may simply leave it in the hands of a clerk.--Bbb23 (talk) 04:51, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
 * . Thank you, I have followed your helpful advice. I identified the oldest account. I added evidence in the form of individual DIFF LINKs for each of the named accounts, above. Please see DIFF. Hopefully this is now satisfactory. Thank you, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 05:02, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Note to clerk. I verified that the master identified by Cirt is indeed the oldest account. However, I would not move the SPI until analysis of the case's merits is done. Despite Cirt's efforts, there are still several problems. For example, there appear to be diffs that tie sets of accounts together, but not necessarily the other accounts. The basis for including BiH is of no value. Many of the accounts aren't just stale from a CU perspective but haven't edited at all in years. That doesn't mean there may not be sock puppetry by one or more accounts, but I'd focus on accounts that have reasonable evidence and recent editing in an effort to make this case more focused and manageable.--Bbb23 (talk) 10:48, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you,, I agree with your analysis that there could indeed be multiple different sets of socks in there. Thanks very much for your helpful input. &mdash; Cirt (talk) 15:08, 20 September 2015 (UTC)
 * My evidence for the possible TriJenn-The Man against the Sky connection:, that The Man against the Sky a sock: . The article is Sally Hogshead--see his user contributions page & edit history for that article. That TriJean is a paid editor for that article: edit summary. I note she does not list it on her user page, which I therefore assume might be  incomplete in other respects also.    DGG ( talk ) 04:23, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
 * TriJenn removed a lot of material from your talk page, but you didn't revert him. Why?  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:54, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Iwill check it.  DGG ( talk ) 03:50, 4 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Any news?  Vanjagenije  (talk)  11:45, 2 January 2016 (UTC)


 * All accounts are . I blocked three Riathamus accounts, which are obvious spamming socks. That would be all. Closing the case.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  22:50, 11 February 2016 (UTC)