Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Villaged/Archive

11 November 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Requesting that someone look into this user. The majority of their 37 edits seem to be focused on creating public awareness that Joseph Smith married a 14 year old girl named Helen Mar Kimball. This seems to have been the primary mission of User:JosephSmithMarriedA14yearOldGirl, who picked the username and then immediately started editing high-traffic articles to get the username into the article history logs. Similarities between the two users include trying to get headline attention (see for instance this section header) and a feigned ignorance of how this could possibly be controversial. (See JSMA13yOG Villaged) Owtc is easier: a single edit, eight minutes after account creation, chiming in support for Villaged's push to highlight the details in the article's body. Also, the Owtc account was created approximately 3 minutes after Villaged made this statement, saying "Majority rule does not equal consensus" (in disagreement with another user who pointed out that Villaged was in the minority). Further evidence that they've been around the block before includes this little exchange where they correctly infer that the acronym "SPI" (no WP: links or mention of "socks" anywhere on the page) refers to "sock puppets" and seemed to imply that they were not new ("Even if I were new..."). Requesting a checkuser on this. I think the link to Owtc is pretty clear, but it would be nice to know what other accounts might be linked. (Unfortunately JosephSmithMarried... is probably stale.) ~Adjwilley (talk) 06:06, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Comment. I too noticed the probable link between User:Villaged and User:Owtc. The latter seems to have been created solely to voice support for the former's position in a mild dispute in an article discussion. Good Ol’factory (talk) 08:35, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Wow. I'm actually stunned by this. So, first off, I've had an account for quite awhile, and for the most part, I've made edits of grammar and spelling. When I read the JS article, I had knowledge, backed by many sources that spoke to something that I could add. I don't see the marriage as being controversial: it's just a fact of what happened. I've never added something that read, "JS is a pedophile." or something equivalently inflammatory. Indeed, the Church itself has admitted that JS married a 14 year old, and it was front page of the NYT... and Washington Post... and CNN... anyway, I digress.

I have no idea who JSmarrieda14yearold or whatever his name is, and I don't know who owtc is. I appreciate the fact that you think there's something there, but I assure you, there isn't. I'm sorry that you see a conspiracy behind the coincidences.

So, to answer the questions above:

1. Explain how you know the accounts belong to one person:  I know they don't, as I have only one Wikipedia account: villaged. 2. Explain how the accounts are being used abusively:  Aside from the one revert war, which I *immediately* went into a talk section, started a conversation and achieved consensus around my edits, there has been no other "abuse". 3. Explain ... evidence is needed:  It's not needed, I have only one account.

As for the other two accounts in question, I imagine that we should hear from them. I'll contact them using their page. I'm a little frustrated that adjwilley didn't extend me that curtesy, but instead, I had to learn about this investigation from someone else...

One more comment after re-reading adjwiley: I quickly figured out what a SPI report was after *googling* it. Again, this has nothing to do with a conspiracy.

Villaged (talk) 02:52, 13 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment. OWTC here.  I am not the same person as villaged nor User:JosephSmithMarriedA14yearOldGirl.  I am insulted that after entering the fray on my first article, I am immediately accused of being a sockpuppet.  I thought WP welcomed new users.  Perhaps at some level, but not with adjwilley.  Adjwilley, is it OK if I continue to edit the Joseph Smith article, or are you going to accuse me of being a sockpuppet again?   From what I can observe, villaged is trying to clean up an article, and adjwilley is trying to resist in any way possible.  Me doth think the lady protesteth too much! Owtc (talk) 03:09, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Good Olfactory for pointing out on my page that somehow, it's been determined that OWTC is a sock puppet of mine. I have no idea how that's possible. I make edits from my home and my office. While I know that I'm the only one with an account at my home, perhaps owtc is at my office? I have no clue, as I am not him, and he is not me. I'd like to see the evidence that we are the same person, as there's just no way. There has to be a mistake in this. Villaged (talk) 03:26, 13 November 2014 (UTC)


 * So why do you think whenever you edit, the other account doesn't edit, and whenever it edits, you don't? And why had Owtc only made two edits until you notified it, and then Owtc immediately saw the notice and came here to comment? Was Owtc user just sitting on Wikipedia, waiting for a message to pop up, but not doing any editing? You'll forgive us I'm sure if we think it all looks a bit weird. Good Ol’factory (talk) 03:43, 13 November 2014 (UTC)


 * It does seem an odd coincidence that someone in your office decided to show up to support you on the talk page. Did you ask a co-worker for help perhaps? (That kind of thing is still not allowed, but it's certainly a lesser crime than deliberately trying to deceive the community.) Perhaps User:DeltaQuad could shed some light on this? There are other parts of the story I don't buy, like you "for the most part"...making "edits of grammar and spelling". (I found only one such edit.) But perhaps I'm missing something. ~Adjwilley (talk) 04:47, 13 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Stop. I didn't say that someone in my office *is* owtc.  I was creating a theory of why, if the IP address were in the same range, that could happen.  I have *zero* clue who owtc is.  None.  As for the timing of edits, I could say the same thing about you two.  I mean, look, you guys created the above edits an hour apart...  so what?  Seriously, you guys look for a conspiracy behind every coincidence.  Villaged (talk) 10:30, 13 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I posted on his/her page, so that probably generated an email that notified him. Shrug.  Villaged (talk) 10:43, 13 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment. This. Is.  Crazy.  And it has given me the kick in the pants to edit more and participate more.  Good Olfactory:  This was actually a coincidence, as I was on Wikipedia looking at the talk page, and then reading all of the user pages.  When I found your notice to villaged about this SPI thing, I dug in, and found this.  I did not receive an email notifying me about this; I do not have notifications turned on.  I seriously doubt that I work in the same office with villaged: I work from home.  TTFN-MFs!   Owtc (talk) 14:07, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * JosephSmithMarriedA14yearOldGirl is, otherwise ✅. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  20:13, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Sock blocked and master blocked for a week. Mike V  •  Talk  16:33, 13 November 2014 (UTC)