Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ThomasHart1972/Archive

09 May 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Single purpose accounts. nota bene: The subject of this article has admitted to having used sockpuppetry on other sites to promote his books, which is what these account are also doing.. &mdash; goethean 11:58, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Two issues here: 1. Is ThomasHart1972 a sock for Lott? (This is implied by the nota bene comment.) As Lott had admitted, the previous, socking (not on WP) by him was done 10 years ago and he commented about it in the Washington Post. Seems most unlikely that Lott himself would be socking on his WP article. There is little direct book promotion in the listed diffs (i.e., his book is not mentioned); ThomasHart seems more interested in restoring a university law school law review article written by Lott. The original article was not published by Lott -- he has posted it on his webpage. 2. Is Reporter4321 a sock for ThomasHart1972? It may well be that Reporter is related to ThomasHart, but 2 edits by Reporter in the same article are the only diffs that support this idea. (This may be more a RS issue than socking issue.) Unless checkuser finds a connection, I recommend dropping. – S. Rich (talk) 14:20, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Two brand-new users in the same week contributed identical material. That's enough to block them per WP:DUCK. &mdash; goethean 14:59, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Srich, RE: Issue #1 is not being adjudicated here. Please strike your remarks. RE: #2: Issue #2 will be adjudicated according to WP rules and methods, on what basis do you have any additional recommendation to make? Please consider striking #2 as well. SPECIFICO  talk  15:03, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I do not know enough about the process for detecting socking to comment on this particular allegation. But the Lott thing should be discussed sensitively, since he's a living person. (It's entirely possible that someone unsympathetic to Lott's views would create an account implied to be Lott's and dedicated to making his WP entry look better, so as to embarrass him, given his prior history of "socking.") Steeletrap (talk) 15:08, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I see new accounts editing, but I don't see any actual abuse. Closing. Dennis Brown - 2¢  © Join WER 10:20, 11 May 2013 (UTC)