Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Suadehead86/Archive

20 August 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

IP 80.235.236.54 has made numerous edits to the Rachel Reeves article breaching NPOV in Reeves' favour, for eaxmaple adding unsourced statements about how Reeves "campaigned vociferously" etc. They have also made other problematic edits in the past promoting Reeves, such as to the Armley asbestos disaster article. The IP changed content about a "humiliating" election defeat for Reeves in 2006, trying to play down what happened and adding completely unrelated information about a rival party (something clearly of little or no relevance to the article and not especially notable either) and in other cases simply deleted sourced material on the issue without explanation.

The IP also insists on adding that Reeves lives in "Leeds-West" when all neutral and reliable sources only state she lives in Leeds (she may well live in Leeds West but we of course simply go with what the reliable sources state).

On August 18th a brand new account User:Suadehead86 appeared. It was created that day, within half an hour of a problematic edit by the IP.. Suadehead86's only two contributions thus far have been to the BLP noticebard concerning Rachel Reeves, fully supporting the somewhat strange and clearly incorrect positions of the IP address and criticising my edits (which have in fact been restored by other editors also). They also falsely state that my additions are unsourced, a position already completely disproved by another uninvolved editor User:Bbb23

Please note this is not simply a case of someone later creating an account after previously using an IP. Suadehead86 discusses the IP as if they are an entirely different person to themselves stating "somebody attempted to change the text to reflect this" etc rather than actually admitting they themselves were the editor user in question. They are therefore deliberately creating the impression there are multiple parties supporting a particular view and if the two accounts are indeed the same person this is clear abuse and sockpuppetry. The timing of edits matches, with the IP editing generally during the afternoon GMT and Suadehead86 also editing at 3.48 - 3.50pm.

Note that users such as User:Off2riorob seem to have been taken in by the probable socking, using the case as an excuse to attack my editing. I also note with concern the fact that Off2RioRob is criticising editors for uncovering socking, something of which editors should in fact be very proud. Shakehandsman (talk) 00:18, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

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

 * I mean, yeah, the editor may be feigning knowledge, but it's not blatant enough to really do much. Either way, neither account has edited since this case was open, so I'm closing for now. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 02:25, 24 August 2011 (UTC)