Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Mtngoat63

User:Mtngoat63

 * Suspected sockpuppeteer


 * Suspected sockpuppets

--Clubjuggle T/ C 05:20, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Report submission by

Mtngoat63 appears to be a SPA whose edits are focused on tying Saul Alinsky to Barack Obama. The IP-editor above (96.225.208.227) appeared at Saul Alinsky shortly after he was warned about edit warring (after having recently come off a block for same) and after an ANI report was filed against him. I suspect sockpuppetry here to game 3RR and continue with edits designed to push an agenda.
 * Evidence

Addition at 16:10, 25 September 2008 (UTC): The second IP-editor above, 149.117.164.28, also appeared this morning to revert. It is probably worth noting that the 96.225 IP geo-locates to Portland Oregon, and that the 149.117 IP's edit history suggests a connection to the Portland area.

Both Mtngoat63 and the IP account use their edit summaries to make personal attacks / complaints about the person they are reverting, often addressing by user name in the edit summary. Not conclusive but that is an unusual and contentious that supports the proposition. The IP editor has a very short history so we're unlikely to get much more. Wikidemon (talk) 05:28, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comments from Wikidemon

This editor has been treated disgracefully from the first day he or she started editing Wikipedia. Look at the damn history at Revision history of Talk:Saul Alinsky and Revision history of User talk:Mtngoat63. In fact, look at the first edit on the editor's talk page after that editor made one edit. A newbie editor has been run through a buzz saw at the Saul Alinsky page by Wikidemon and GoodDamon, constantly treated roughly and reverted for what looks like honest attempts to add information to the article, even if the editor doesn't know all the policies and guidelines. Instead of being greeted with courtesy, Mtngoat63 got slapped around. In these circumstances, a person just might get a little angry. We may never know if this person would have become a good, established editor. I hope it happens. whose edits are focused on tying Saul Alinsky to Barack Obama. It turns out Mtngoat63 has a better handle on the facts than Wikidemon, who doesn't seem too knowledgeable about the candidate he's been franticly defending for months. -- Noroton (talk) 06:30, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comments from Noroton
 * Noroton, please keep your comments focused on the issue at hand. The paragraph that included whose edits are focused on tying Saul Alinsky to Barack Obama was mine, not Wikidemon's. If you wish to accuse me of POV-pushing, I challenge you to find the diffs to support it, and even then this is not the place for that discussion. I strongly suggest you refactor your comments, which seem premised on the assumption that Wikidemon filed this report, when it was in fact I who did so. --Clubjuggle T/ C 07:38, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Refactored. My apologies. Why don't you apologize for your part in the kick-the-newbie game you're playing. Are you proud of your role in this? Do you like the idea of degrading the encyclopedia in order to promote the interests of a candidate as perceived by his fanatical supporters who are ignorant about the topic that they're edit warring on? Can you imagine that a new editor might find that a little tough to take (not being as used to the idea as the rest of us are)? Particularly after that editor has been treated with punctillio by those very same people, now joined by you? Any admin thinking of blocking should first approach Mtngoat63 and offer some advice in a nonthreatening way. Something you should have done, Clubjuggle -- in addition to advising GoodDamon, Wikidemon. That's what would be best for Wikipedia, its editors and its readers, not swinging a club. Try to reserve that for experienced editors bullying others. -- Noroton (talk) 00:28, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Yikes. If that's the refactored version I would hate to see the unexpurgated one.  Interesting use of an SSP comment to attack a slew of other editors.  Wikidemon (talk) 01:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


 * When Wikidemon says "Yikes" I always brace myself for some insult. It's an interesting use of an SSP complaint to batter a newbie whose edits are in the way of pushing a POV at Saul Alinsky. I've left a friendly note on Mtngoat63's talk page here User talk:Mtngoat63 (diff here ), one of the few times that editor has been treated with a little sympathy and respect. Please watch, give it a chance and maybe it will have some positive results. Obviously, if disruption continues, it didn't work, but at least an effort will have been made by someone who hasn't already been fighting with the newbie. Noroton (talk) 01:42, 26 September 2008 (UTC)


 * A clue here. I say "yikes" when insulted past the point of it being a worthy response.  I'm not pushing a POV.  The nonstop accusation from the above editor everywhere I go are pretty much harassment.  I haven't insulted anyone at all.  And to be subject to the stalking and crass insults across multiple pages here is just sad.  I do endorse Noroton's attempt at kindness, and wish he could find a way to be kind to misguided new editors without being aggressively hostile to established productive ones.  The soft approach notwithstanding, the fact is the editor has been terribly tendentious, disruptive, aggressively insulting, and utterly unresponsive.  None of that really matters - this is a sockpuppet report, and the sole question is whether the editor was using IP socks to get around 3RR.  If yes, the supposed biting of the newbie (which I do not think happened) is no excuse.  Noroton's attempting to intervene and defend people who I'm dealing with as behavior problems, out of some self-declared mission to fight my (and other editors' supposed POV-pushing), is troublesome.Wikidemon (talk) 21:40, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

The editor in question was asked politely, repeatedly, nearly to the point of ad nauseum, to review Wikipedia's policies and guidelines concerning content and content sourcing, and has been warned repeatedly about personal attacks. At this point, there is zero excuse for gaming the system if that editor is in fact a sockpuppeteer. -- Good Damon 06:42, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comments from GoodDamon

The 149 IP is used by a blogger from the Portland area who once had an issue with me removing some linkspam from the Portland, Oregon article. This person was invited to dialog on the talk page, but instead he chose to personally attack me and blog about how people like me will be the downfall of Wikipedia. Anyway, I'm not sure if this is the same person who is now causing problems, but let me know if further info (diffs, external links) would help the investigation. Katr67 (talk) 17:52, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comments from Katr67

The case for puppetry here is extremely thin. One of these IPs has only made a single edit to Saul Alinsky, and the other has made two edits. It is hard to get any data at all from behavioral analysis of these editors, since they didn't seem to have any interest in political topics. There is no misbehavior by the IPs prior to the Alinsky business (except for one petulant response to Katr67 when  he  she was trying to enforce WP policy). I suggest that this SSP case be closed with no action. If any *actual* misbehavior by the IPs occurs, the case can be reopened. EdJohnston (talk) 21:04, 26 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comments from EdJohnston
 * I'm a "she". Katr67 (talk) 22:25, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

In the absence of any further comments, or any new edits by the two IPs listed here, I'm closing this report with No Action. If these IPs engage in actual misbehavior, open a new report and cite this one as a reference. Mtngoat63 finished up his 3-day block on 29 September but has not yet gone back to editing articles. EdJohnston (talk) 19:37, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Conclusions