Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Sgt. bender

User:Sgt. bender

 * Suspected sockpuppeteer


 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Report submission by

--SmashvilleBONK! 16:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Evidence

Please see: Articles for deletion/Bryan Pisano (2nd nomination), Articles for deletion/Gary Hayes and the DRV for Gary Hayes at Deletion review/Log/2007 October 18. Pretty clearly passes the duck test. --SmashvilleBONK! 16:22, 6 May 2008 (UTC)


 * Comments


 * Give Me a Break Give me a break, I am not a sockpuppet.  Look at all of my contributions.  I have created four articles, all of which are still on Wikipedia, I have contributed to Wikipedia over fifty times, and I have edited many articles.  The only two things that Sgt. Bender and I have in common is indeed the Bryan Pisano page and the Gary Hayes page.  Nothing else, no other association.  It seems to me that someone got angry that they were disagreed with and is accusing users of frivolous assumptions. Dr.orfannkyl (talk) 19:23, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Your very first four edits on Wikipedia were for an AfD for a non-notable article created by Sgt. Bender. One of your of your next 3 were adding information on the non-notable person to other articles. The next 4 were the DRV. So of your first 11 edits, 8 of them were related to the deletion of an article created by Sgt. bender. You have also both edited Schoharie County, New York. In addition, you both edited Middleburgh (village), New York. Do you just coincidentally have an interest in the same AfDs and the same village of 1,200 people? --SmashvilleBONK! 21:12, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * So all of my other articles and edits have no merit? How many times did Sgt. Bender edit Araxi Hubbard Dutton Palmer, the Times Journal of Cobleskill, Elata, or Ashley Bowen?  The answer is never.  In regards to editing similar things, is it not possible that we come from the same area, or is that not allowed? Dr.orfannkyl (talk) 21:33, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * You don't have to edit ALL of the same articles. So you are arguing that the three of you come from the same 1,200 person town, yet the 3 of you are all interested in the same obscure political candidate and the same non-notable web actor? And you just happened to make your random sojourn to Wikipedia on the exact same day to the exact same AfD/DRV as the other two twice? --SmashvilleBONK! 21:39, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * The vast majority of my edits have nothing to do with the Sgt. Bender's and vice versa. Also, three?  I'm talking about Sgt. Bender and myself, who's the third?  Also, since we come from the same area, isn't it obvious that we would have the same interests? Dr.orfannkyl (talk) 21:44, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * JoeC2004 has participated in the AfD and the DRV. The vast majority of your edits consist of fewer than 125 edits in over 6 months, over 40 of which are made to articles that Sgt. bender has edited. --SmashvilleBONK! 21:56, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * So, you're agreeing with my previous statement, then? Dr.orfannkyl (talk) 21:58, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * No, I'm saying your statement is misleading. That you have only made 80 edits in the last 6 months 14 days that were to articles not related to Sgt. Bender. In addition, Holy Barbarian has made 21 edits since joining Wikipedia. 8 of the 21 are to articles/talk pages involving you and Sgt. Bender. Squeeblz has made 100 percent of his edits to said articles. JoeC2004 has made 17 of his 24 posts to articles involving the two of you. So, you have two people with 1/3 of their edits to the same articles, one with one hundred percent and one with 75 percent. Plus, you have Sgt. bender's admission below that he knows most of you personally, that passes WP:DUCK with flying colors. --SmashvilleBONK! 22:07, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * My statement is true; it's as misleading as the statements you're making. I don't really know/care about Squeeblz, JoeC2004, or whoever else, I'm just trying to show that I am a specific user that is not sock-puppeted.  So what if I know another user?  What, you don't know anyone else who uses Wikipedia? Dr.orfannkyl (talk) 22:13, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Make the case against me. I really don't think that there's any case I can make to convince anyone. It would be much easier for me to create 5 accounts by myself than try to ask others for help. Still, I haven't. I like my Wiki account, and no, I don't have an SPA.Sgt. bender (talk) 21:37, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Added Squeeblz to the list. May not be a direct sock and hasn't edited in months, but pretty clearly familiar with Sgt. Bender. --SmashvilleBONK! 21:26, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Not a sock puppeteer Well, I guess it won't matter in the end, but I haven't been a puppeteer. We went through this with Gary Hayes. I do have another account that I do not use for anything but could theoretically be used for puppetry. Of course these users are cooperating with me. And yes, one is from the same area as me...Schoharie County is pretty remote. For the most part I know them personally. However, check that they are for separate people under separate emails that cannot be faked.
 * Reply: Separate e-mails can easily be faked. I have my primary e-mail, an e-mail address from a game I play, an e-mail address at work, an e-mail address from having a Yahoo account, an e-mail address from being an alum of my university ...   RGTraynor  00:54, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Point well taken. I'm still not a puppeteer. In fact, I can name every one of my "Puppets" and have them email you (or be emailed) or be certified as actual people through a university under separate (but equal) names. Still, I don't believe that this will prove anything anyway. Someone get me more string and a ventriloquism lesson. Stat! Sgt. bender (talk) 01:24, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * So you are all together at the same university? --SmashvilleBONK! 01:28, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Not all of us. But four of us (me included). Separate people leading separate and very uninteresting lives. I will provide (privately to an arbitrator) all the necessary and unnecessary proof of this and allow you to sort it out through the Registrar's Office if it's that important. Sgt. bender (talk) 01:50, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. As it happens, the rules against and the sanctions for practicing meatpuppetry are not particularly different from sockpuppetry, if an admin determines it to have taken place.    RGTraynor  05:42, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd be willing to admit to some form of meatpuppetry except in the case of Dr. Orfannkyl. That's my brother. He does what he wants. The other accounts are real and shouldn't be punished, though. Sgt. bender (talk) 14:10, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * * Besides, I might as well make all of your jobs a little easier. Sgt. bender (talk) 14:11, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

PS By the way, I'm kind of flattered to believe that I am accused of this. It's not something I've done, but it's something I could see myself doing. Say hello to my hangman! Sgt. bender (talk) 21:40, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment According to this IP's edits, this may have been coordinated using a fan page at Facebook. That would absolve any sockpuppetry claims, but would still fall afoul of WP:TEAMWORK, based on the common activities of the users in question. --Dhartung | Talk 06:54, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Look, I'm not that coordinated to pull off a Facebook coup. All of our 14 members.... If you'll look, the fan page was created after most of the hubbub. So, like, I admitted to some sort of meatpuppetry. Isn't that good enough? Just because you people hate the next Sidney Poitier named Bryan Pisano doesn't mean he's not awesome. Sgt. bender (talk) 20:45, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Also if you're going to lurk around the Pisano fan page, you might as well join. Help the guy out, he works as a busboy. Sgt. bender (talk) 20:50, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I don't have a Facebook account, but thanks for the invitation. --Dhartung | Talk 07:00, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reasonable tone of this discussion. At some point an admin is going to fill in the 'Conclusions' section below, and decide what to do. My proposal is that the people named in this report should stop showing up in the same AfDs together, since it violates WP:MEAT. If any of you do so again, a block should be considered.  I see that two of you are working as normal editors and some articles have been created. So please keep on with doing that. In my opinion this case could be closed. EdJohnston (talk) 12:28, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * EdJohnston thanks for being reasonable. It's edits like this that show that Wikipedia can be a reasonable place for the sharing of ideas. I just have one issue, though... you seem to be nice to me and my buddies. You wouldn't happen to be a meatpuppet of mine, would you? It's okay if you are. Sgt. bender (talk) 14:57, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd be a good bit happier with a voluntary, admin-hands-off approach if the puppets hadn't been involved in multiple AfDs backing wildly unnotable articles, and if their approach didn't involve insults and heated denials.   RGTraynor  12:43, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Wasn't I the one to, like, admit to all of this? Besides, for the Pisano page I didn't insult once. (Not even through meatpuppetry.) Anything my buddies have said have been through cooperation was after someone else smacked them with sarcasm. Sgt. bender (talk) 14:55, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * At the very least, you were quite uncivil in the Pisano AfD...moreso in the Gary Hayes DRV, but that was months ago. --SmashvilleBONK! 15:23, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Sgt. bender, if you will agree to not participate in any future AfDs at the same time as any of your friends, that could make it quicker to close this report. EdJohnston (talk) 15:31, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I agree not to use meat puppetry on Wikipedia anymore. I have just one caveat, however, if me and and my brother are working on the same articles, I cannot promise that he will not edit or be involved with any potential deletion process. Thanks. Sgt. bender (talk) 17:51, 13 May 2008 (UTC)
 * He can still place a comment in the AfD, he should just not vote either Keep or Delete, just 'Comment.' And he should state in his comment that he is your brother.  Is that acceptable?  EdJohnston (talk)
 * That is acceptable. 00:49, 14 May 2008 (UTC) Sgt. bender (talk) 00:50, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Hopefully this will now be resolved without taking the process further than it needs to be. If future behavior is agreed to conform with WP:CIVIL and general article and AFD etiquette I will be satisfied. That said, it was personally stressful to me to make a good faith nomination and then be accused of attacks and wanting to start arguments. You and your friends should avoid not just showing up in the same AFDs, but behaviors including attacking the nominator, pretending not to know one another, playing good cop/bad cop games, empty threats of administrative intervention, and deleting comments. These could all be labeled tells, which many of us have seen before, and really don't improve your chances of keeping an article. For your friends, until they build up a broad history of editing, they will still be likely to be given an WP:SPA notation in AFDs. (The template says "few or no edits outside this topic", which was correct, regardless of whether the users in question had been registered since 2007 or 2006.) Also, I strongly advise you and your friends, when writing articles, to choose topics that have easily shown notability based on reliable sources. In other words, don't write stuff that begs to be brought up for AFD, and you won't have to gang up to defend it. --Dhartung | Talk 07:00, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * WP:CIVIL went out the window in his second AfD edit. --SmashvilleBONK! 13:40, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree to Dhartung's terms. Sgt. bender (talk) 06:14, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

I am glad that we obtained some promises of good behavior regarding future AfD debates and civility. It seems to me that no sanctions are needed at this time. Some of the editors who joined the discussion don't yet appear satisfied, but I think we are ready to close. Any further issues that occur can be reported at WP:AN. EdJohnston (talk) 17:05, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Conclusions