Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Harebag


 * 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:Harebag

 * Suspected sockpuppeteer


 * Suspected sockpuppets

-- Mufka (user) (talk) (contribs) 03:11, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Report submission by

Edits of the sockpuppet have only been on articles that the puppetmaster had created. The edits only removed tags such as prod, merge, notability, and db. Edits are here, here, here, and here. Last edit was yesterday.
 * Evidence
 * User Harebag has admitted using the account JV17 as a sockpuppet here. -- Mufka (user) (talk) (contribs) 23:57, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

While many editors have tried to work with User:Harebag, including his noble adopter User:VK35 (who interestingly has only been an editor for three days longer than Harebag), the user's attitude has been slightly less than civil from the beginning. I think everyone has been very patient and helpful. See comments that the user has left here, here, here, here. If it is found that the user has been using a sockpuppet to remove "problem" templates from his articles, something, perhaps a stern warning would help.
 * Comments


 * Comment by Adopter (VK35)
 * The comment about my tenure is uncalled for if it is to suggest improper behavior on my part. The original version of my talk page notes that my wife taught me much about wikipedia [].  Therefore, I'm more advanced than others of similar tenure.
 * Being named in a SSP case, even if only in the comments and not as an accused, is very damaging to my reputation because wikipedia content cannot be normally deleted.
 * All of my contributions have been of high quality, non-controversial, and well referenced. I have acted in a responsible manner such as welcoming new members, correcting vandalism, being an informal mediator for edit disputes, etc.
 * There is a saying "no good deed goes unpunished". I hope that this is not happening simply because I adopted Harebag.
 * After I was notified of JV17, I informed Harebag of what a sockpuppet is and either not to do it anymore or not to start. Given that Harebag is a new user, I would suggest no action be done and JV17's behavior just monitored.  I will be sending a message to JV17 shortly.
 * When Harebag created articles have had tags placed on them, I've given advice on how to improve the articles, even making suggestions on what to add. In one of them (Pigeon Forge Police Department), I even rewrote the whole article and made it much longer, added references.  I did this to show Harebag how I would improve an article.VK35  17:55, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I have to say that I have been involved with the issues with Harebag, and User:VK35 has displayed nothing but exemplary behavior throughout. Any negative comments regarding his tenure, even if unintentional or implied should be retracted immediately in my opinion.  Hatch68 00:57, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * If the above is somehow related to my comments in the evidence section, please see this where I addressed VK35's concerns on his talk page. -- Mufka (user) (talk) (contribs) 02:05, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

I admit to being the sock puppet beacuse on two of my articles I felt there was enough information on the subject. Two editors kept putting tags on them I didn't want. So I created a sock puppet to remove the tags. I apologize on being disruptive and I honestly didn't know doing things like this are against the rules.Harebag 02:12, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Note


 * Conclusions
 * JV17 is indef blocked. No action taken against Harebag. --Akhilleus (talk) 18:34, 27 April 2007 (UTC)