Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Spellage/Archive

21 December 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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


 * At http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Richard_Nixon#Proposed_Changes, User:Mitchumch mentions a 2009 discussion of the same topic at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Richard_Nixon/Archive_5#Refactor.3F  Normally, this would appear to be simply building a case, except that reviewing the 2009 discussion brought up the page of a banned user starting the discussion, I cannot help but wonder if we have a sockpuppet account intended to promote a similar issue, as the behavior of Mitchumch has become tendentious, characterized by extensive tl;dr discussions and a general refusal to accept consensus.  Seems that Spellage was banned quite quickly, so if that account was part of a sockfarm, maybe a little further investigation is in order.  Montanabw (talk) 18:20, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * http://toolserver.org/~pietrodn/intersectContribs.php?wikiDb=enwiki_p&firstUser=Mitchumch&secondUser=Spellage&sort=0 Parallels

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - Spellage is . This will have to be decided on behavior alone. Reaper Eternal (talk) 22:07, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 * It's exceedingly unlikely that any conclusion we draw from the behaviour of these accounts will be accurate. The alleged master has not edited since 2009. I am dismissing this report and marking for closure. AGK  [•] 22:31, 6 January 2013 (UTC)