Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Smfhs photographer/Archive

Report date October 5 2009, 20:59 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * Evidence submitted by Ruhrfisch

Accounts all used to edit some or all of the articles Stow, Ohio, Munroe Falls, Ohio, and especially Stow-Munroe Falls High School. Names almost all have compound word followed by a number, most names are related to the articles (school initials are smfhs, mascot is bulldog, colors are maroon and gold). All accounts have a tendency to blank the talk page and refer to previous edits in edit summaries, talk. Accounts initially seemed to be to avoid WP:3RR but now seem to be for evading a block (IP) after personal attacks and harrassment. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 20:59, 5 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.

I have had several interactions (including being the target of two personal attacks yesterday, which included vandalism of my user page, talk page and two articles I have edited extensively) with many of the user names and all interactions suggest the same person, not only due to content and wording, but also referencing previous discussions even if the discussion was with another user name. Edits have mostly been non-dispruptive and good-faith (particularly at Stow-Munroe Falls High School), however, user has recently shown unwillingness to work with others and has expressed a sense of ownership with the articles, particularly at Talk:Munroe Falls, Ohio. He/She has also largely been unresponsive when I have left messages at his/her talk page or on the article talk pages and usually blanked comments left on any user talk page without response. Would like to see the editor stick with one name and work with other editors more, but am skeptical at this point after recent actions. --JonRidinger (talk) 21:31, 5 October 2009 (UTC) After reviewing the activity, i myself also believe that these accounts are definitely sockpuppets. especially who i myself had had interactions with. although the user claims that the edits being made are in good faith and that "he will use sandbox" next time. i'm not entirely convinced. >>>> Posted By Alex Waelde (Leave Me A Messgae) 23:12, 5 October 2009 (UTC) I've been involved somewhat in this for quite a while, seeing this user continually advocate specific positions on rather inconsequential subjects (e.g. the private schools that JonRidinger notes), and there's the habit of virtually never editing anything except articles on these cities and this school, and the user talk pages of those of us who have attempted to engage him/her. Consider this edit by 3227Egraham to Jon's talk page, where 3227 claims to have made edits to the school article that were made by MaroonGoldSpike1; this by itself should connect 3227 and MaroonGold. 3227's username is also related to the school, as its street address is 3227 E. Graham Rd. Finally, I should note — I was the one who blocked the IP address included in this investigation, due to obviously unconstructive (and copyvio-ish!) edits such as this. CheckUser will not reveal all of these editors to be editing under the same IP, because at least MaroonGold and 3227 were created this afternoon, while I blocked the IP and prevented account creation around midnight last night; I suspect that these accounts were perhaps created from a school or work IP. Nyttend (talk) 00:10, 6 October 2009 (UTC) Requested by Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 20:59, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments by other users
 * Comments by other users
 * Comments by other users
 * CheckUser requests

MuZemike 23:42, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Additional information needed: Please provide a code letter. SPCUClerkbot (talk) 20:59, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

✅ =
 * Conclusions

Blocked and tagged. J.delanoy gabs adds 02:07, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Cleaned up; closing. NW ( Talk ) 02:19, 6 October 2009 (UTC)