Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Mattisse (3rd)


 * 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:Mattisse

 * Suspected sockpuppeteer


 * Suspected sockpuppets

Suspect is tagging the same set of articles previously tagged by Mattisse and her other sockpuppets, continuing the pattern of tagging and/or vandalising articles on pagan writers and musicians, vis:
 * Evidence
 * also tagged by Mattisse and puppet (see article history)
 * , also vandalised by Mattisse sockpuppet
 * also tagged by Mattisse and puppet (see article history)
 * also tagged by Mattisse puppet
 * also tagged by Mattise

On most of these articles, the same tags are being placed as were placed by Mattisse and her sockpuppets.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hanuman Das (talk • contribs) 13:30, 21 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Comments by Neil916


 * On the Harvey Wasserman article, on September 12th, user Timmy12 added the unreferenced tag to the article and a fact tag to a bold claim that Rev. Jesse Jackson referred to the subject of the article and another person as the "Woodward and Bernstein of the 2004 election", . User Mattisse's edits on August 21st consisted of adding a proposed deletion tag to the article for being nonnotable, and the addition of the unverified and advert tags , .  The edits appear justified, non-malicious, and not similar to the edits made by Mattise.


 * On the Donald Michael Kraig article, on September 16th, user Timmy12 added the fact tag to three claims of notability in the article . The tags seem appropriate to me.  The four edits by user Nothingmuch consisted of three vandalism edits and adding the citation needed tag to a different fact in the article, , , .  The edits don't seem similar.


 * On the M. Macha Nightmare article, user Timmy12 made one edit to add the importance tag and three fact tags to claims made in the article . The edits seem justified to me.  On August 24, user ABSmyth made his/her only edit to the article, adding wikify tag to the article .  On August 21, user Mattisse added the verify tag and importance tag to the article.


 * On the Raymond Buckland article, user Timmy12 added the unreferenced and importance tags to the article on September 18. I'm not sure I personally agree with those tags, but they don't strike me as malicious in nature.  On August 23, user NLOleson added the citations missing tag to the article .  The edits don't seem similar in nature, and in fact Timmy12 removed NLOleson's tag when he made his edit.


 * On the Gilli Smyth article, user Timmy12 made several edits on September 19, adding the music-importance, unreferenced, and advert tags to the article, added a fact tag to a claim made in the article , then battled reversions of those edits by user Ekajati and user Anger22. As an impartial observer, I don't disagree with the addition of those tags to the article.  Mattisse's sole edit to the article on August 21 was to add the music-importance tag to the article.


 * The Timmy12 user has contributed to far more than just those five articles. The Mattisse user has contributed to far more than just those five articles. The fact that both users have contributed to those five articles is well within the possibility of being just a coincidence.


 * The Unreferenced tag has been added to over 22,000 articles on the English Wikipedia. The Importance tag has been added to nearly 3,000 articles. The Advert tag has been added to over 2,000 articles.  I haven't even tried to count the articles with the fact or citation needed tags.  These are clearly not obscure templates that are used by a relatively small number of wikipedians.


 * The Timmy12 account was created at 14:11 on September 8, 2006 and began editing immediately The edit contributions showed a knowledge of Wikipedia that was significantly more advanced than a typical new user. On September 3rd-4th, user Mattisse  engaged in a discussion on his talk page that indicated that he was frustrated with recent events on Wikipedia and was advised to create a new account to avoid scrutiny.  The user Mattisse did not contribute again until late on September 8th.


 * When the Timmy12 account was created, the user Mattisse was not blocked, so this does not appear to be a case of block evasion. None of the evidence points to any policy violations in edit wars (i.e. 3RR avoidance) or voting issues.

--Neil916 (Talk) 17:05, 21 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Conclusion by Neil916


 * The evidence provided does not show that the contributions of Mattisse (and his proven sockpuppets) and Timmy12 are similar enough to demonstrate a sockpuppet relationship. In addition, there has been no evidence provided that if the two users are the same, that there has been any policy violation of WP:SOCK. The Timmy12 user appears to be an active contributor, and while there may be some editorial disputes with other users here, they don't appear to fall into the category of malicious or vandalism.

--Neil916 (Talk) 17:05, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Not blocked. Iola k ana • T 11:53, 23 September 2006 (UTC)