Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Skynyrdman/Archive

07 July 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Skynyrdman blocked for refusing to discuss repeated edit to Nature's Harmony Farm. Claimed to be "owner representative" of Nature's Harmony Farm in unblock request here. Skynyrdnyrdman1 created less than 1 hour after unblock request denied, and immediately made same edit. Skynyrdman and Skynyrdman1 then indef'ed. A few days later Naturesharmony is created and immediately makes nearly identical edit with edit summary again claiming to be "owner representative" of Nature's Harmony Farm. Meters (talk) 19:25, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

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

User:Naturesharmony confirms socking at User talk:Meters Meters (talk) 20:25, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I've blocked the admitted sock account with an explanation that if they wish to appeal the block they need to do it from their main account, they cannot continue to create new accounts to get around the block.--Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 22:17, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

25 July 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Skynyrdman is owner of Nature's Harmony Farm Short term block for edits to Nature's Harmony Farm, followed by socking and indef block. Ane wiki disloses he is a paid editor for the owner of Nature's Harmony Farm Ane wiki makes several substantial edits to article on behalf of blocked owner. See also the threads Talk:Nature's Harmony Farm and Talk:Nature's Harmony Farm. Pretty clear meatpuppetry for a blocked editor. I have sympathy here since it all started with a COI business owner against a POV SPA, and the paid editor probably didn't know better, but if you are going to be a paid editor you had better know that you are not editing for a blocked editor, and that he is telling the truth. Meters (talk) 04:27, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' I thought that the above explanation (with diffs for proof of everything) that the user Skynyrdman (indeff'ed for socking on the article Nature's Harmony Farm) is the owner of Nature's Harmony Farm, and that Ane wiki is a paid editor for the owner and has made substantial edits to the article while the owner was blocked met the requirements of item 3. Isn't a paid editor editing on behalf of a an indeff'ed editor a clear violation? They have not made identical edits, probably since some of the material the owner was removing was quite justifiably removed, and was kept out of the article once other eyes were on it (and before the paid editor got involved). However, if you want diffs there are certainly some commonalities. For example: all reference to a book about the farm written by the farm's owner was removed by Ane Wiki, by sock Naturesharmony , by sock Synyrdman1 , and by master Sknyrdman. As a said, I feel some sympathy; however, I can no longer wp:Agf. Despite claims in edit summaries or on talk pages, there is a book about this farm written by the owner, and there is a current real estate listing for the farm. Meters (talk) 21:44, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

I didn't say he was a sock. I said he was a meatpuppet since he admitted to being a paid editor for an editor (who was blocked for socking). From WP:SOCK "Sock puppetry can take on several different forms: ... Persuading friends or acquaintances to create accounts for the purpose of supporting one side of a dispute (usually called meatpuppetry)" If SPI is not the right forum for this report then please tell me where is. Meters (talk) 23:42, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
--Bbb23 (talk) 18:36, 3 August 2014 (UTC) Honestly, I suspect that Ane wiki is not only a paid editor for the owner of Nature's Harmony Farm but perhaps also a paid editor with respect to the now-deleted article Tim Leffel, where they spent a lot of their time. I'm not keen on paid editors, nor do I agree with wikipedia's policy on paid editors, but it is what it is. Either way, that doesn't make Ane wiki a sock. Nonetheless, given the possibility that I could be wrong, I am weakly endorsing a CU to find out if Ane wiki is a sock rather than exactly what they say they are. A little more rambling. I'm having trouble figuring out why a sock of this master would spend any time at Tim Leffel as I see no connection between Leffel and the sock's interests. If a CU is declined, I intend to close this with no action as the behavioral evidence is simply too weak.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:18, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
 * After this discussion on my talk page, I'm withdrawing the CU endorsement and closing the report with no action. As I stated on my talk page, I'm sympathetic to 's complaint, but I don't believe this is the right place for it.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:27, 8 August 2014 (UTC)