Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Simon161388/Archive

12 March 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

1. Identical interests – Jake’s edits are solely in support of Simon, vandalizing a deletion template that Simon opposed, and !voting at an AfD in support of Simon.

2. Identical editing times -
 * Jake created at 04.41 on March 2. Simon edited seven minutes later.
 * Jake first edited at 05.04 on March 2. Simon edited the same article 15 minutes later.
 * No edits from either account for next nine days
 * Jake next edited at 13.51 on March 11. Simon edited 19 minutes later.

3. Similar user names. Euryalus (talk) 12:14, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Note also that both fail to sign their posts, and simply paste in a link to their talk page and a fake time-stamp, at Articles for deletion/Voipfone. – Voceditenore (talk) 13:15, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Simon161388 was created on 27 February . Jake748596 was created on 2 March —one hour after Simon161388's article Blue Penguins was proposed for deletion. Jake748596's first edit was to fake the time stamp on the PROD tag and completely remove the deletion rationale —15 minutes after Simon161388 had removed part of the deletion rationale . Within 15 minutes of Jake748596's failed attempt to refactor the PROD tag, Simon161388 removed the tag completely . – Voceditenore (talk) 13:36, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note as Simon161388 requested speedy deletion of Blue Penguins per G7 20 minutes ago, the diffs for that article are only viewable at Special:DeletedContributions/Jake748596 and Special:DeletedContributions/Simon161388. The diffs for both failing to sign their posts and the apparent !vote-stacking remain at Articles for deletion/Voipfone. – Voceditenore (talk) 14:50, 12 March 2014 (UTC)

No longer there is a need to contest this as Blue Penguins has deleted by Simon161388. The whole reason brought up by this accusation is the fact I been contesting WP:SPAM article Voipfone who Voceditenore apearintly has WP:COI with Voipfone. I bringing this mention because the Voipfone article has been written for the purpose of self promotion. The purpose of this investigation is to have Simon161388 WP:CSD_G5, I admit Blue Penguins was my first article written. I am learning more and more about Wikipedia, and in the future not to involve friends into helping you defending accusations on wikipedia. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community. So I will never think of using multiple accounts and never involve a friend creating an account just for the purpose of defending me on the same IP address, just remeber it more of a WP:QUACK than a WP:SOCK and i am throwing in a WP:SPADE on Blue Penguins, so there is no need for CSD_G5.

Simon161388 (talk) 14:49, 12 March 2014 (UTC)


 * This investigation was brought by an administrator, User:Euryalus. The purpose was not to have your article Blue Penguins deleted per G5, but because of your attempt to use sockpuppetry to sway Articles for deletion/Voipfone, one of its competitors. Note that neither I nor Euryalus have voted in that discussion or in Articles for deletion/Blue Penguins. Your continual accusations of "conflict of interest" and "self-promotion" both here and at the Voipfone AfD simply because I restored the awards section and references to that article are both absurd and bordering on personal attacks. Cut it out. Voceditenore (talk) 11:36, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I am fairly convinced that sockpuppetry is going on here. Since sockpuppetry is being used to influence an AFD, I think an IP address check on the various accounts is warranted.4meter4 (talk) 14:33, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

Voceditenore I have thrown WP:SPADE on this discussion and matter. Voipfone has won the award last year. But the article might be written in some neutral form, but it still lacks suitable content and notability outside of these awards. Eight of the references mentioned is self conflict interest, since it only mentions winning awards. You know, Voceditenore if think your Voipfone article shall remain. Wouldn't make more sense to spend the time making Voipfone a stronger article, rather than restoring the awards section, which were deleted last October for self promotion. This is deletion of Voipfone is exactly only a discussion. It is not about using using WP:SOCK to persuade follow editors and administrators to vote on the deletion of Voipfone. You should look for ideas of how to improve this article Voipfone and make it a more worthwhile contribution to the encyclopaedia than to keep a worthless Voipfone six sentence article, with only awards listed. FYI only the eight references were mentioned for Voipfone and mostly for awards. Many notable companies will have 20 to 60 reliable references, and have 3 paragraphs of writing about their company in a neutral form. Most of these references are from reliable third party sources that reputable,and mention about the company in general, other than just mentioned about awards won in the past three years. As Voipfone current article stands which makes it a candidate for self promotion in my personal opinion. Simon161388 (talk) 19:29, 13 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Simon161388, this is not the propper forum for discussing the voipfone article. Please post your thoughts in relation to that article at Talk:Voipfone or at the relevant AFD. This page is for investigating your potential use of multiple accounts. If you have anything to say related to that issue you may say it here. Please stay on topic. Also, User:Voceditenore never actually expressed an opinion for deletion or keep at the AFD, so your accusations against her above are completely unfounded and inaccurate.4meter4 (talk) 00:11, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Simon blocked 2 days and Jake indef'd and tagged. Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:08, 22 March 2014 (UTC)