Jump to content

Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/User:KellyAna(2nd),User:Irishlass0128(2nd)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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:KellyAna,User:IrishLass0128[edit]

Suspected sockpuppeteer

User:KellyAna
User:IrishLass0128

Suspected sockpuppets


Report submission by

--DJS24 (talk) 01:46, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Evidence

Here's what I got

It's clear that there is a pretty good connection between KellyAna first name (CelticGreen) and IrishLass0128. It's clear both names deal with the Irish origin

Irishlass = "Irish Girl"
CelticGreen = Green - Irish color; celtic - English words in the Irish origin [2].

KellyAna switched her name after being accused of a being a sock w/ Irishlass0128. Here is where she comments on it. [3]

TIME

1 - They both entered Wiki. at the same time in August 2007 (one day apart)- KellyAna August 1st [4] and IrishLass0128 August 2nd [5]. Both started working on the same site too.

2 - They are never on at the same time. NEVER. IrishLass0128 is on during the weekday afternoons between (12:00 - 20:00), contribs [6], while KellyAna comes on at night (21:00 - 2:00 next day) and during the weekends, contribs [7]. This makes me believe that one is her work account and the other is her home account. That way her IPs can never match.

3 - With the information describe in #2(TIME) here's an interesting note. If you look into the history of both KellyAna and IrishLass0128, on April 3, 2008 and April 4, 2008, KellyAna signs on Wiki. around noon on a weekday, this is very unusual from her normal time on. Weekday afternoons is the usual time IrishLass0128 is on, however these two days when KellyAna is on in the afternoon [8], IrishLass0128 isn't [9].

SIMS

1 - They work on the same articles Days of Our Lives [10], Charmed [11], List of Days of our Lives cast members [12], List of Days of our Lives characters [13] and several more.

2 - They both communicate with the same users at the same time. ([14],[15]); ([16], [17]) - several more just need to look.

3 - Deals with the same sitation at the same time. Example - [18], ([19], [20]) ([21], [22]) ([23], [24])

4 - They also contact the same adimns all the time. Example they both contact Daniel Case several times to help them. Examples - [25], Or they contact the same adimn the other one is talking to at that point, Example, Elonka.

ACTIONS

1. - They double team users that disagree with their theories or thought process. Examples - [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32], and several more.

2. - They both warn people and call their actions "vandalism" several times a day, when the users edits seem to be in good faith. Examples - IrishLass0128 -[33], [34]; KellyAna - [35], [36])

3. - They have voted on issues several times, which ends up going in their favor. Examples -
-In this diff, both KellyAna and Irishlass0128 vote together against me in a TV infobox dispute. [37],
-In this diff. KellyAna agrues against removing an article and out of no where, Irishlass comes in and defends KellyAna against a small insult. Both end up voting to not remove the article. [38]
-In this diff., you can see that KellyAna(CelticGreen) and Irishlass0128 vote against a user's citation on the Las Vegas episode page [39],

MISTAKES

1. - As much as they help each other, work on the same articles, vote, or discuss situations; they never talk to each other. I find it questionable that they can help each other several times and not once talk to each other. View their contribs - (KellyAna [40]) (IrishLass0128 [41])

2. - KellyAna makes a mistake. Example - [42] and here is where I questioned it to her [43], (they both try to save themselves -[44])

EDITS/EDIT SUMMARIES

Both have same types of edits, such as "removes" = (KellyAna - [45], [46], [47]) ; (Irishlass0128 - [48], [49], [50])
Both have same types of edits, such as "reverts" = (KellyAna - [51], [52], [53]) ; (Irishlass0128 - [54], [55], [56])
Both have same types of edits, such as "undos" - (KellyAna - [57], [58], [59]) ; (Irishlass0128 - [60], [61], [62])


Both use similar abbreviations in their edit summaries, such as "Rv't". - (KellyAna - [63], [64]) ; (Irishlass0128 - [65], [66])
Both use similar abbreviations in their edit summaries, such as "Rm'd". - (KellyAna - [67], [68]) ; (Irishlass0128 - [69], [70])
Both use similar abbreviations in their edit summaries, such as "fix(s)" - (KellyAna - [71], [72]) ; (IrishLass0128 - [73], [74])

OTHER INTERESTING DIFFs
In this diff, both KellyAna and Irishlass0128 edit on Blackwatch21's talk page on the same day. Both users return after being gone for several days. When they return, they both talk to Blackwatch about image guildlines, who at the time was a brand new user. [75]

Both of them work on the same articles, even outside of the soap opera topic area:West Garden Grove, Garden Grove, California - ([76], [77]) and they also both work on School District stuff - [78], [79],[80].


Comments
  • Please look at this posted on KellyAna's talk page. She is attempting to confirm her identity. Malinaccier (talk) 03:14, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • WHAT? You’re defending yourself with a video? Come On, when's the last time you've seen someone defend themselves using a picture or video. NEVER It doesn't prove anything. How do I know that, that's you? When are your names (KellyAna and Irishlass) mentioned? If they we’re, then maybe you have a little proof. I could put up a picture right now of my brother and tell you it's me. That's not proof. What is proof is the information I stated above. The information stated above proves 100% that you have the SAME (edits, edit summaries, work on the same articles, talk to the same users, and proves all my TIME points). There's no denying the information stated above. DJS --DJS24 (talk) 03:53, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank You Rm994 for posting a comment. I see that you also work on all the same articles as KellyAna and Irishlass0128. Such as DAYS and look, you even have a School District edit. I also see that you have communicated with them several times as well. Hmmmm DJS --DJS24 (talk) 04:44, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I work on the same articles as them because like them, I am a DAYS fan. If you are referring to the CCBOE edit, I was not even aware that KellyAna and Irishlass even made school district edits. Anyway, I have communicated with KellyAna one time before today, and Irishlass once a few months ago. But what you don't know is that I have edited with several IP addresses and KellyAna and Irishlass BOTH have reverted my changes more than once. So, I don't know what you're thinking, but I assure you, I am not a sock. I think we would all be better served to work together on these projects instead of fighting. Thank you for your time.Rm994 (talk) 05:10, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • IMO Rm994 should be officially added as another SSP. -- Dougie WII (talk) 23:41, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow. This is so sad. Just because I express an opinion that they aren't the same person, that automatically makes me a sock. You know what? Maybe they are the same person, who knows? All I know is I have NEVER edited a page for one of them, and we are not the same person. If you look at my school district edit, it was in edit in GEORGIA, where I am from! Plus, I am a male Ph.D student, and, like I said, have had my changes reverted by them before. And, if you look at my contributions compared to them, I RARELY edit. If I were a sock, wouldn't you have some sort of proof like you do for them? That's the last I'm going to say about this topic. It's REALLY REALLY sad. Thank you. Rm994 (talk) 01:25, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • You have a total of only 17 edits, a majority of which are on the same pages related to Irishlass and/or KellyAna. It's only natural to be suspicious here. -- Dougie WII (talk) 01:40, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is that a free pass to assume bad faith and make a drive-by accusation? An edit count trumps good faith? Really? the_undertow talk 01:43, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Stating facts isn't an assumption of bad faith, neither is simply being a bit suspicious in this circumstance. -- Dougie WII (talk) 01:47, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Stating fact in conjunction with conjecture is still assuming bad faith. I suggest we take this off this page, unless you are formally adding a user to the SSP report. the_undertow talk 02:06, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I disagree, but this is DJS's report so I don't want to change it. If he wants to add the other account then I would support it, otherwise I don't care if you delete my comments on this issue. -- Dougie WII (talk) 02:11, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they are related to KellyAna and Irishlass because I am a DAYS fan just like them. But I assure you, I am no sock. I have never called a good faith edit vandalism, and to my knowledge I have only reverted a change once, unlike above where it is pointed out they they do that numerous times. I just don't think that they are the same person, it's just my opinion. I am sorry that you are suspicious. Have a nice day. Rm994 (talk) 03:00, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • If you have nothing to do with them, then I apologize to you for being suspicious. -- Dougie WII (talk) 03:09, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And I apologize to you if I seemed too defensive. I could see based on which articles we participate in, that you may assume that we're linked somehow, but I promise, they have reverted my changes more times than I care to count! But that doesn't mean that they were wrong. I do hope that we can all work together to make this a trusted and reliable site. Thanks for understanding :) Rm994 (talk) 03:17, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Right from the start I assumed that KellyAna and Irishlass were sockpuppets. After watching the Desperate Housewives page for some time, I can definetly vouch for the constant reverting of good faith edits as vandalism. [81] [82] [83] My problem with the claim that they are friends lies totally within their edit times. I usually edit articles related to greek music and i talk to 3 other people who also work on those articles through AIM and Windows Live. The fact that KellyAna and Irishlass are never on at the same time, yet seem to know what eachother is upto seems a little suspicious. They claim that they are friends off site, but never edit together? I discuss a lot of my edits with my wikifriends, we're a team, but I'm not seeing a KellyAna/Irishlass team, I'm seeing edits to the same articles by two different usernames at different times. Grk1011 (talk) 05:15, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • IrishLass0128 claims to be from California on her home page[84], and KellyAna claims to be from North Carolina[85] but now she's claiming she has pictures of them together? I think an IP traceroute on these accounts would be helpful and I think DJS is probably onto something here, it smells very fishy. -- Dougie WII (talk) 05:37, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, looking at IrishLass's contribs for the past 3 weeks (probably more i just didnt keep going) she doesnt edit on the weekends. This could possibly be KellyAna's work or shared computer account. She would use IrishLass at work (and not work weekends) and KellyAna when she is at her home. I'm guessing that instead of just registering a second account (which is perfectly wikilegal) she decided to use both accounts to get her way in discussions. Grk1011 (talk) 15:03, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree 100% w/ the home/work account. I stated that above under "TIME". So that way, if they did a IP trace or a checkuser, there would be no match DJS --DJS24 (talk) 15:26, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I know, but you might find out that they are in the same city/general area. -- Dougie WII (talk) 19:31, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Interesting NOTE - This link, is a SSP report, that was reported about two months ago on Users KellyAna and Irishlass.[86] In this report Irishlass claims she lives in West Garden Grove. So if KellyAna lives in North Carolina, why would she need to edit on a city in Calf., the one city Irishlass happens to live in. DJS --DJS24 (talk) 20:06, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • My first and only interaction was here under LeVox when I was using 'Equilibrium.' I could not tell the two apart - I thought it was the same person. the_undertow talk 20:31, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Based on their editing patterns, it does look like both accounts are being controlled by the same person. The two biggest pointers for me are lack of overlap in editing times, and the similar edit summaries. The IrishLass0128 account seems to only be used during work hours, and the KellyAna account on evenings and weekends. On days that KellyAna *does* log on during the day, IrishLass0128 is mysteriously absent. The two accounts obviously work on the same articles, and they have similar styles and edit summaries, especially the '" Rv't " abbreviations. I have looked over the pictures and video that KellyAna provided, but I fail to see how this proves that the accounts are being run by different people. I guess it is possible that the accounts may have been created by different people, but if so, I would guess that there is some password-sharing going on and that KellyAna is the prime user of both accounts. I don't have CheckUser access, but I would be curious to know if the IPs behind both accounts trace to the same geographical area. IrishLass0128 self-reports as coming has a userbox which says she "lives in or hails from" California, and KellyAna self-reports as living in has a userbox saying she lives in or hails from North Carolina. I would recommend looking at their IPs to confirm this. If they are being used by the same person, then that's a serious issue since the IrishLass0128 account was used to access Wikipedia while the KellyAna account was blocked for disruption. --Elonka 00:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Note: I adjusted my comment from "self-reports" to "lives in or hails from" since that's all the userboxes say. If someone has a diff where they actually said where they are currently living, please let me know. --Elonka 04:31, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • It appears that before the CelticGreen account was started on August 1, that this editor may have also used User:Antigone28, an account which was blocked for disruption on June 30.[87] I have added the information to the top of the report, and will invite administrator Yamla to this discussion. --Elonka 11:12, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There seems to be sufficient reason to suspect a connection between the accounts and what would be abusive use of sockpuppets (double participation on the same pages, block evasion, etc.) to file this at WP:RFCU to set it straight one way or the other. Avruch T 01:45, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RFCU

  • NOTE - I have opened a WP:RFCU for KellyAna using IrishLass0128 while her account was blocked. KellyAna's Block Log - [88] WP:RFCU case link - [89] DJS --DJS24 (talk) 02:54, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just a quick note for those watching this page. Thus far the rfcu has proven inconclusive for KellyAna/IrishLass0128, stale for Antigone28, and unrelated for Rm994. DJS24 has asked Thatcher to clarify if KellyAna and IrishLass0128 could be accounts operated by the same user at different locations. I'm guessing that's the case because the "Rv't" and "Rm'd" are just such odd edit summaries for two people who edit the exact same articles and joined at almost the exact same time to just be coincidence. If one was actually editing from North Carolina and the other from California as they claim, I think it ould be fairly easy to mark them as unrelated. AniMate 05:23, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Kind of guessing here, but I imagine that the IPs must be in roughly the same geographical area otherwise the result would have been listed as unrelated instead of inconclusive. -- Dougie WII (talk) 20:07, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
One more piece of evidence not yet introduced: the initial userpages on both accounts: IrishLass and KellyAna (then CelticGirl). No wonder I used to get them both confused back then. Daniel Case (talk) 03:25, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

After RFCU

  • NOTE - I have asked that the conversation regarding the WP:SSP on KellyAna/Irishlass be moved back to this page. After reviewing the WP:RFCU, they found that Rm994 was unrelated and Antigone28 was stale. However there was no clear-cut answer for the KellyAna/IrishLass connection. Here is how Thatcher described it - "The technical results of the check are that KellyAna and IrishLass do not share IPs but do edit from the same geographic location." With that said, I'm assuming that that confirms our work/home account theory. Like it was noted by AniMate, if they truly live in California and North Carolina the results would have been "unrelated". It's clear that one of them is lying about their location, which brings us back to the work/home account situation. I'm not sure how this moves on from here - Any thoughts? Thanks DJS --DJS24 (talk) 20:56, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think at this point we need to hear from KellyAna or IrishLass0128. I would buy them as off-site friends, if they had ever edited at the same time or interacted. We do need an explanation, though. If none comes forth, I say block one indefinitely and give the other at least a month off and heavy civility and revert restrictions. AniMate 21:13, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Another quick note:I've left comments for both KellyAna and IrishLass0128 asking for explanations. AniMate 21:43, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment At this point is everyone satisfied that these accounts are being operated by the same person? Both in the same area, both edit all of the same topics, both self-identify as Wiccan, neither ever edits at the same time, and neither seems to be editing currently. Personally, I am convinced. The question now becomes, what steps do we take to prevent further abuse from this person. AniMate 05:09, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Even though I have said I would like to see more results from Checkuser that I believe might more clearly establish a pattern of misrepresentation, I think we can start this part of the discussion as the circumstantial evidence has, I believed, crossed the preponderance threshold and, more importantly, I cannot hypothesize any innocent explanation out of those circumstances. There is just no way that two people living a continent apart can so consistently manage to avoid editing at the same time.

Since there is a lot of productive editing activity here, I would not like to see this user indefinitely blocked. Two weeks to a month, yes, but not forever. If she really does feel the need to have a separate account on a public computer for work as many other people do, then she should be required to disclose that relationship on the IrishLass page and possibly rename it (see Delldot and Delldot on a public computer). All talk should be directed to the KellyAna talk page.

Someone else mentioned revert and civility restrictions, but those would be informal unless imposed by the Arbitration Committee, and we're not there yet. Daniel Case (talk) 15:16, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, let me point out that, we’re not dealing with someone who used a sockpuppet once to get their way in a dispute. We’re dealing with someone, you used both accounts to vote on consensus several times, double team other users in disputes and in fact got other people blocked with their double team tactics. Both accounts have been rude and uncivil to several users over the lasts few months. I wonder how many Wikipedia members left Wikipedia on behalf of their double team tactics. Daniel, if you don't mind me asking and of course I don't have full knowledge of the situation. But what's the difference between KellyAna/IrishLass vs. Grant Chuggle. Let me point out right away, that I don't condone Grant's actions at all, but every time the guy gets a new account, it's blocked right away. Now if Grant's original account was blocked indefinitely for vandalism, how can KellyAna/IrishLass walk away w/ only a two week block? Now let me give KellyAna/IirshLass credit, they clearly know the information on the articles they work on. Both accounts seem to have much knowledge of the rules/guidelines, and with that knowledge, she tried to out start the rules and she got caught. Now my personal opinion on the outcome is that both accounts get blocked indefinitely. Only the accounts though not her IP address. Give her the chance to start over, with a new account and following the rules this time. I think we all know, that whatever the outcome is, she will end up back on Wikipedia, if she's not already with a new account. There's no way with all the edits she does day that she could just walk away from it. However, I strongly believe that both accounts should be blocked indefinitely. Thanks DJS --DJS24 (talk) 16:17, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
KellyAna/IrishLass0128 hasn't engaged in any hardcore vandalism. She has displayed ridiculously bad incivility, bad faith, and ownership of articles, but she really hasn't vandalized any articles. Grant Chuggle wasn't originally blocked indefinitely for having a sockpuppet, but was blocked for increasingly long periods of time for continuing to make sockpuppets leading to an indef block. While I think KellyAna has been the "bad cop" of this duo, I also believe this is the "main account". She has contributed positively, and while it wouldn't bother me if she came back as a new account that only edited properly, I think KA should have the right to redeem herself. Block KellyAna for 1 month, and Irishlass0128 indefinitely. If she returns and wants to edit from IL we can always reverse the blocks. Besides, blocks are supposed to be preventative not punitive. If we block both indefinitely, we're punishing a rather good though problematic contributor not preventing a good but problematic contributor for gaming the system. That's my opinion. AniMate 18:32, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • One or both should be indefinitely blocked - I'd prefer to allow the IrishLass account to continue to edit (based on a less problematic edit history), but if the user admits the sockpuppet abuse then she should be able to choose which one to continue as sole account. Future evidence of sockpuppetry by this user should lead directly to an indefinite block. An intermediate step of blocking for a month seems mostly to encourage her to create a new account. If its a static IP (not clear from the CU results) perhaps new account creation can be blocked on that IP. Avruch T 18:46, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree that if one is to be indefinitely blocked, it should be the KellyAna account since it has been the far more abusive account. -- Dougie WII (talk) 19:29, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see no problem with indefinitely blocking both until the sockpuppetry has been admitted to. AniMate 19:00, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Concur with Avruch. Unless the user expresses a preference, block the KellyAna account, tag as a sockpuppet, and redirect the talkpage to that of IrishLass0128, with the hope that she would be able to Continue to Contribute in a Constructive and Civil manner (alliteration, whee!). --Elonka 22:42, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I could live w/ blocking KellyAna and keeping IrishLass, as long as she is warned about future sockpuppets. DJS--DJS24 (talk) 00:05, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For the love of the Gods you bunch of fucking tweedles. Irish is a simpering nice girl and I'm not her. DJS is a jealous child that can't get over that I get to go to the NASCAR races each weekend and HE DOESNT. Elonka, you know DAMN WELL Irish emailed you to say she wanted gone and would never edit here again, how convenient for your conclusion (then again, you've lied repeatedly in the past and present). Dougie ~ you're an idiot and a child who can't handle a strong woman. I'm the only one who's gone against you, Irish never has, so OF COURSE you want your foe blocked. You have no evidence, you're just a scared child. Block me, I don't give a fucking rats ass. Irish has already turned tail and run because she's afraid of internet idiots and liars. What's so fucking funny is DJS is a repeat sock yet he gets to fuck with Wiki all he wants. Do you really believe DJS and Blackwatch are two differentvpeople? If you do you are dumber than anyone I've met. Irish and I aren't socks, she's too freakin nice most days for my tastes. By the way, has anyone ANYONE ANYONE bothered to note that the tweedle bringing these accusations is, himself, a proven sock that posed AS AN ADMIN? KellyAna (talk) 02:46, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Based on this singularly unhelpful and uncivil response, we might consider indefinitely blocking both accounts and be done with it. Even with no other problems, she'd earn herself about a weeklong block from that alone. Avruch T 02:48, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
KellyAna account has been blocked for one week, though I would support an indefinite block if there is agreement that there is consensus for it. --Elonka 02:59, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • WOW - DJS --DJS24 03:22, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Conclusions

I have read the above report and decided to indefinitely block User:KellyAna, and apply a two week block to User:IrishLass0128. I find it is extremely improbable that these are not sock puppet accounts. There has been abusive editing, as well as an attempt to deceive the community. Jehochman Talk 03:13, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/User:KellyAna(2nd),User:Irishlass0128(2nd)&oldid=1142565522"