Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Shulas/Archive

01 April 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Shulas is a single-purpose account that created the Grinberg Method article. I passed the article from AfC in October 2012 and today they asked for advice on my Talk page about controversial edits to the article. However, two new accounts have appeared (Saulmor and Costymw) to deal with the questionable edits on the article's Talk page. A third account, with limited edits (that has until now had no involvement with the page) has weighed in to deal with the controversial edits. This all seems too much to be a coincidence and looks to me like the original author is either (a) trying to avoid getting further involved using their original account and/or (b) attempting to make it look like the subject has more interest than it actually does. I suspect it is the latter. Sionk (talk) 16:14, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

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

Hello Sinok/Investigator, I'm Saulmor and I'm real. I've read the guidlines more thoroughly as I am new in Wikipedia. I don't think I'm a puppet and I'm very sure I don't have a master(-: I did a small contibution to the same entry in He.Wiki and when I saw the new section in the Eng. version I wanted to open this for discussion, so I opened the talk page. For some reason I didn't manage to use my He.wiki username so I did open a new username in En.Wiki.(I didn't know it's a violation-sorry). Yesterday I tried to unify the accounts but it only made Saulmor global and didn't merge it with my He.username, and I guess it's because it's a different name -(though the e-mails are the same), I searched for solution to delete one username (Wildblue) and merge them under Saulmor and couldn't, can you advise? If you need more information I'd be happy to give you and clear my name. Thanks.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saulmor (talk • contribs) 08:25, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Hello Sionk - response from Shulas

What happened is that I saw the additions that were added to the entry on march, I was very shocked and angry since I like this method a lot and I invested a lot of time and effort in making the entry fitting for the Wikipedia criteria - I didn't know what to do with the additions, since I don't have a lot of experience in wikipedia. I also didn't want to go into a fight with the writer who added it. So I wrote to some of my acquiescence who helped me in gathering materials for writing the entry in the first place, showing them what was added if they can give me some information. They were also angry and stressed, and wrote some things to defend the entry, on their own opinion. Since I don't know wikipedia so well I decided after a few days to talk to you and ask you what is the best and most appropriate way to handle this. I would like to apologize for this mistake, I will definitely know better how to deal with those situations if they happen again.--Shulas (talk) 19:35, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - - Also check for sleepers. —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 19:55, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Shulas and Saulmor are based on geographic location. The other two are ❌ to each other and to those two. T. Canens (talk) 12:24, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
 * On a behavioral level, I'm not sure Shulas and Saulmor are the same person. It seems like a maybe, but Shulas' contribution history is too brief for me to be convinced enough to block. Someguy1221 (talk) 00:40, 12 April 2013 (UTC)