Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/South Philly

User:South Philly

 * Suspected sockpuppeteer


 * Suspected sockpuppets

Gscshoyru 03:19, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Report submission by

Student Erotica is tag-teaming with South Philly in Erotica. 
 * Evidence

151.197.111.178 and Student erotica/151.201.155.166 are SPA's previously blocked for 3RR and using socks (respectively) to restore a "Student erotica" section to Erotica against consensus (removed by 4 different editors, explained extensively on Talk:Erotica and User talk:151.197.111.178).

South Philly is the original insertor of this information. 

Today, South Philly stops when he hits three and Student erotica takes over. Both users have a pattern of similar accusations made in Edit summaries, including presumptive accusations of edit warring before any has occurred. 

NangOnamos harrasses an Erotica editor involved in this conflict on that user's Talk page. Less certain about this one, but the bogus, insinuating accusation fits the pattern of other socks in this case.


 * Actually I think he's just pissed at me because I undid some mass blanking to an article that he thinks is justified -- I don't think he's a sock. Gscshoyru 12:33, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Considering the edit history, doesn't seem like the same person. My mistake. I'm striking that one. / edg ☺ ★ 13:04, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

All these socks are new accounts. With the exception of NangOnamos, all use Wikipedia jargon in edit summaries, suggesting experience beyond their edit counts. 151.197.111.178 makes a manipulative RFPP. Student erotica begins adding WikiProject tags to articles minutes after being called an "SPA" in this report.

Note the intention to edit war stated here. South Philly acknowledges being informed of this SP report here. Student erotica then canvasses, ,.

Article Erotica is fully protected pending the outcome of this SP report. Checkuser is requested. / edg ☺ ★ 10:02, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * This edit war has been going on for at least a week before I jumped in. Gscshoyru has been editing, claiming consensus, against another user, driving an edit war and getting another user blocked. I joined into the argument today, and now I get attacked too. South Philly 03:26, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * None of what's been presented is actually evidence. Just innuendo. South Philly 03:35, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * If tag teaming were a crime, then Gscshoyru would be blocked as well. South Philly 04:43, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * We need a checkuser to determine these claims, but I will have to agree with the contributor filing this claim. Edit histories are similar, in addition to comments and uncouth behavior. -- Joe Beaudoin Jr. Think out loud 04:50, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Let me get this right, I got nowhere editing anonymously, so I register. that makes me a sock of another user with whom I happen to agree? That's pretty screwed up logic. Student erotica 04:05, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
 * No, it's the similarity in your manner (edit summaries and the way you talk to people) and the time in which you edit as well. You're a suspected sock, not a proven one. The checkuser request will show whether you are or aren't. Gscshoyru 04:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

If it's not sockpuppettry, it's meatpuppettry. Both are blockable. But we'll wait for the checkuser first.Rlevse 16:55, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I registered because there were complaints about anonymous edits. Edit summaries and style of talking. Please ... Student erotica 21:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Conclusions
 * Checkuser is well-backlogged. If this is blockable either way, why not get on with it? / edg ☺ ★ 18:04, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Looks blockable to me, the two usernames are apparently being used to tag-team, and the editing patterns are very similar. Dreadstar  †  19:10, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
 * User accounts indef blocked, IP's temp blocked and article protection reduced to semi-protection. Dreadstar  †  19:25, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Nice. Thanks much! / edg ☺ ★ 19:33, 23 October 2007 (UTC)