Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Robertamukes/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

WP:DUCK; accounts were created a few days apart; each account is a WP:SPA with edits solely to Robert Allen Mukes; each account edited the article in 2015 and 2017, both times on the exact same day. Drm310 🍁 (talk) 05:01, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

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

I am so new to Wikipedia and it honestly makes little sense to me; I don't even know if this is the correct place to respond to this investigation.

Someone notified Robert Mukes, who I know, and pointed out that his Wikipedia says he's an "extra" (actor). He knew it didn't say that before, and it is also not true, as he hasn't been an extra since like 1997. After reviewing the page, he noticed that it had been like 90% changed (the prior day), in a malicious way, by someone who evidently has it out for him. So, he asked me to help him (he is not computer savvy), he logged in (and we clicked "undo" on all of the changes from that prior day.

I then took it upon myself (with MY own account) to update the page, as it was very outdated info. I updated it with only FACTS that anybody else could have easily found through the sources I cited, such as more film and TV work he has done and added further details to the bio.

I didn't know this was a crime. Like I said, I'm brand new to this, none of it makes any sense. Frankly, I'm shocked that an anonymous user was allowed to entirely change a Wikipedia page about a real person, fill it with straight out lies, and completely get away with it, and here I am trying to make honest updates and I'm being investigated. I understand that part of the controversy is that I know Robert Mukes, but it's not like I added nonfactual opinion-based information to the page. As stated, it's all facts that are available to anyone, anywhere at the citations I provided. 1974bug (talk) 21:59, 26 September 2017 (UTC)


 * That seems satisfactory to me. Given 's responses, I am satisfied that they are two separate individuals.
 * I'll also mention that there are legitimate vandalism issues with the article, so I've put in a request at WP:RPP. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 20:00, 27 September 2017 (UTC) Moved, Kevin ( aka L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) 20:29, 27 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Yes, Robertamukes is HIS account. You'll notice he never uses it, just wanted direction in removing the vandalism. He did not ask me to make updates to his page; I took that upon myself when I noticed how outdated it was. Then I noticed my contributions were repeatedly getting replaced with the vandalism.

My main issue with all of this that this anonymous valdal seems to be allowed to repeatedly make the same edits, which other users besides me have undone. How long will the temporary protection last? Please let me know where I go to disclose my connection with Robert. 1974bug (talk) 20:13, 27 September 2017 (UTC) Moved, Kevin ( aka L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) 20:29, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Thanks for leaving a message here. Is Robert's account?
 * The relevant Wikipedia policy provides that recruiting new editors to influence decisions on Wikipedia is prohibited and essentially treats multiple users who are connected to the same individual (say, someone who asked them to edit) as a single individual with multiple accounts. That applies in this case: for administrative/policy/consensus purposes, the accounts Robertamukes and 1974bug will be treated as operated by a single individual.
 * The biggest problem I can see so far is "edit warring": Wikipedia prohibits repeated undos or "reverts" of other users' contributions. There's a bright-line rule called the three-revert rule (or "3RR"), which basically states that making more than three reverts on a single page within 24 hours is strictly prohibited. There are some exceptions, one of which seems applicable, but the practice of edit warring is generally frowned upon. I see that the edit warring issue is likely to go away soon, as there's a pending request for page protection for Robert's article, but I do want to make you aware of that.
 * I'm willing to take you at your word that Robert exclusively uses the Robertamukes account and you exclusively use the 1974bug account. I'm inclined to close this case without action if you and Robert undertake to disclose your connection with each other on your userpages and agree to abide by Wikipedia policies, such as edit-warring. Is that agreeable?
 * Is the above acceptable to you? Thanks, Kevin ( aka L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) 19:46, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I've moved the comments by and  to the "Comments by other users" section. In accordance with the above, I'm closing this case.  I'll add a Connected contributor tag to the article talk, which will likely be sufficient. To keep SPI pages on-topic, further discussion of non-sockpuppetry issues should be raised at the appropriate page. Thanks, Kevin ( aka L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) 20:29, 27 September 2017 (UTC)