Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Mariaflores1955

User:Mariaflores1955

 * Suspected sock puppeteer


 * Suspected sock puppets


 * Report submission by Koalorka (talk) 21:24, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

This case has its roots in a content dispute over media that should be included on the Joachim Peiper biography page. I first introduced an image from the newly released German Federal Archives which I believe is superior to the small and grainy existing image in hopes of improving the encyclopedia. I assumed this would be greeted with support from the history buffs, since high-quality images like this were extremely rare. To my surprise, over the next few days the image was reverted several times by a series of seemingly unrelated IP users accusing me of "vandalism":     followed by the registered account []. After both receiving warnings from a project admin about good faith edit warring I recognized the pattern and questioned Mariaflores1955 about the use of sock puppets, she responded by saying these were her "colleagues": and "others":. Not surprisingly, these "collegues" also happen to originate in London, UK, where the accused user allegedly works or resides (as stated on her introduction page: ). After both receiving a warning from the involved admin, discussion ensued, but Mariaflores1955 could not restrain herself from reverting any remaining images of hers that were removed. After one more revert from myself, another IP adress quickly stepped in to revert me yet again:. I then informed Mariaflores1955 that she would be reviewed for sock puppetry and she then admitted to using an IP, claiming a browser session time-out. Her continued reverts under different IP's, constant and unwarranted accusations of vandalism and stubborn personal attachment to any changes or contributions made by her prove that this user is not acting in the best of faith.
 * Evidence


 * Comments
 * Seems obvious enough to me, socking in violation of policy (and as far as this is concerned, meatpuppetry is viewed as socking) and some issues with WP:OWN as well. Regarding the image, there needs to be consensus over which (if not both) should be included and it needs to be shown that abusing accounts to distort consensus will not be tolerated. The master account requires sanctioning in such a way that they will be persuaded to contribute within policy in the future. LessHeard vanU (talk) 15:13, 1 January 2009 (UTC)


 * This is pretty desperate attempt by Koalorka to get his own way. I would go as far as saying that it is absolutely laughable dinner theatre. I do not dispute that one of the IP addresses is mine. It is my home IP address as I explained already. While editing couple of articles my log-in timed out and I did not realized immediately. However, as soon as I discovered this I logged in under my user name. The other IPs do not belong to me and blocking them will only affect other Wiki users. As for the other IP addresses, according to IP address locator - 85.70.121.251 is not even in the UK!! This IP is from a user in the Czech Republic. I guess this user found it also offensive that Koalorka freely changed content of several articles throughout Wikipedia. I do not know who he/she is but hope that the person will leave a comment either here or on the Peiper discussion page. Another IP address belongs to a friend of mine from Kensington in London who, brought the unwanted changes to my attention in the first place. I certainly did not tell him to make any reverts, but as far as I can see these were done well in the Wiki guidelines. As for the last IP (86.141.169.132), I do not know who it belongs to, but it surely is not mine!!
 * I am also puzzled why LessHeard vanU commented on this case without having all the facts, besides the mad rumblings of Koalorka. Is this a forum for you express your opinion? I believe this is a section for my comments on the unsubstantiated accusations of sock puppetry. If you would like to leave a comment regarding the Peiper photo or any other photos, please do so on the appropriate page. This is not the venue for it. The discussion is ongoing at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Joachim_Peiper Also, I suggest that you review the talk page of Mr. Koalorka with comments by administrators before making rash comments here. Also, I welcome any messages regarding this issue on my page. Best Regards, Maria Mariaflores1955 (talk) 01:32, 2 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Um, I am an admin and am reviewing the case for sockpuppetry as part of my WP responsibilities; you are perhaps fortunate that I decided to comment rather than block you for abuse of policy and write up my conclusions. I am uninterested in reviewing the images, as there are other avenues for that, but in limiting policy violation. I am also aware that one ip was non UK based - and know that there are ways to proxy addresses - but would point you to the fact that having other people edit for you (admitted by you) is meatpuppetry and is regarded as violating WP:SOCK as well... On the above basis and your disregard for WP practice and policy I would suggest to another reviewing admin (now that I am "involved") that your account is sanctioned for socking and other disruptive actions. LessHeard vanU (talk) 11:59, 2 January 2009 (UTC)


 * It is important to state that no one edited anything for me. Again, please do reared the above statement. Please see comments left by other administrators regarding this ridiculous complaint e.g. J Milburn and his statement on Koalorka talk page. Again, I was informed by another contributor about the disrespectful changes to the articles and there is no meatpuppetry here. Can you please list for me any violations I have committed? You state that the addresses are my proxies, is there an evidence to support this conclusion? After all, this is not Sadam's Iraq or Hitler's Germany - one should not be punished without evidence. My conscience is absolutely clear, as I have not done anything wrong!! Although I am only an American living in the UK, I am sure that there is something called burden of proof!! Best Regards, Maria Mariaflores1955 (talk) 13:40, 2 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Conclusions
 * Tad hesitant to block here, LHvU, but feel free to reverse my decision. I think a stern warning against meating and a helping hand towards WP:MEDIATE might be warranted here. Scarian  Call me Pat!  05:38, 7 January 2009 (UTC)