Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/DaveApter


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:DaveApter

 * Suspected sockpuppeteer


 * Suspected sockpuppets

Click on the red link in the template you just added and paste subst:Socksuspect2|1=SOCKPUPPETMASTER|2=SOCKPUPPETUSERNAME. Save the page. If the link in question is not red, this means the user has been suspected before, and you should manually edit the notice on suspect userpage to point to Suspected sock puppets/SOCKPUPPETMASTER (2nd) (or (3rd), (4th) and so on). The link did not turn red. Since I am new to the whole process, I am not sure what to do next, but according to the instructions this must mean that : "this means the user has been suspected before..." Smeelgova 18:21, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Evidence
 * 1) User:DaveApter initially created the user page for user User:Dante C.
 * 2) User:Dante C's contribution history shows a pattern almost identical to user User:DaveApter's contribution history.
 * 3) Sockpuppeteer User:DaveApter is clearly trying to artificially show that more than one user shares his POV agenda.
 * 4) When I completed step 2 of the Suspected sock puppets, Reporting suspected sock puppets :
 * Comments


 * 1) I most certainly did not create this user page, or insert this content.  In fact I had no notion that Dante's real name was Durante, nor had I ever heard or 'Jimmy "the schnozzola" Durante'.  I do appreciate that the record does appear to show that I created the page, but have no idea how this came about.  The most likely explanation I can think of is that I attempted to follow a link to DanteC's talk page (out of curiosity about a new arrival at that time) simultaneously to when he was creating it, and that this produced an edit-conflict which resulted in my being linked to the saved version rather than him. (This is pure speculation, since I cannot remember in detail what I was doing over three months ago). I am sure that any analysis of the IP addresses of our respective edits will be consistent with his being based in the midwest of the U.S. (assuming that his claim to be so is authentic), and my being based in Southern England (which I certainly am).
 * 2) Any similarity between our edit histories is adequately explained by our entirely coincidental concern at smeelgova's campaign to use wikipedia to propogate his own particular viewpoint.
 * 3) The third point is predicated on the assumption that I am a sock-puppeteer, and therefore hardly provides evidence that this is  the case.
 * 4) I have no idea either about the sigificance of links showing red, but can assure you that I have never before been accused of this before.  To me the whole idea seems both ridiculous and clearly mischievous. DaveApter 15:07, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Having looked into it a bit more, it seems that this is a complete non-issue. It is extremely common for user pages to be created by other users, generally by posting up a welcome page. For example my user page was created by user:SqueakBox, and this accuser's talk page was created by user:Humus sapiens. It looks as though this complaint is either a result of readiness to see conspiracies where none exist, or a deliberate attempt to embarrass me. DaveApter 12:04, 2 October 2006 (UTC)


 * If this is a "non-issue" then that's all well and good, but being relatively unfamiliar with how to deal with sockpuppets I thought this was something that should be brought to the proper individuals. If, as the editor states above this is truly an innoucuous event, then by all means, don't worry about it. "It looks as though this complaint is either a result of readiness to see conspiracies where none exist, or a deliberate attempt to embarrass me."  This, however, is completely not the case.  At face value it does appear to be a sockpuppet issue.  I have posted my findings above and will let other more experienced editors deal with the matter.  Yours, Smeelgova 16:50, 2 October 2006 (UTC).

No current problem. The account hasn't edited in three months. Iola k ana • T 19:51, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Conclusions