Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/User:Zoso2005

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:Zoso2005[edit]

Suspected sockpuppeteer

Zoso2005 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) (Account created 18:08 9/18/06)

Suspected sockpuppets

Evidence

Sockpuppetry and Vandalism issues surrounding Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The RCP (Red Car Posse) During this Afd yesterday, a series of vandalisms occurred to all the people who voted to delete and some of their article creations by a series of new user accounts. The following is my account of it. (also, it appears to be still alive diff)

User(s) suspected of sockpuppetry (my guess is that there are two distinct users, possibly three, but no more.):

User:Zoso2005 (first edit 9/18/2006, creator of article, only edits are the article itself, the Afd and some related image uploads.)
User:Franklin999999999 (first edit diff Remaining edits to article and its Afd.)
User:129.93.196.226 (first edit 9/18/2006 all to article)
User:Flea1999 (first edit to Afd on 9/24/2006, second edit vandalism of User:Angusmclellan diffthird edit vandalism of User:Charlesknight diff)
User:Tier1 (2 edits only, all 9/24/2006, all the Afd)
User:Lindy3930 (3 edits, all on 9/24/2006 two to the Afd, one vandalizing User:Dina diff)
User:Elvis 1950 (one edit on Afd -- Keep))
User:Memphisjack (one edit today to Afd -- Keep)
User:Dormir 2777 (see below for more info)

Affected users (in other words, users who voted to delete the article):

User:Kinu (tagged article for Afd)
User:Dina (participated in Afd, voted to delete)
User:Charlesknight (participated in Afd, voted to delete)
User:Angusmclellan (participated in Afd, voted to delete)
User:Metropolitan90 (participated in Afd, voted to delete)

User:Dormir 2777 did not participate in the Afd, instead, made four edits total as described below:

First edit 9/24/2006: Vandalizes User:Dina diff
Second Edit 9/24/2006: Vandalizes Student Academy Awards diff (note that page was created by User:Metropolitan90 and is listed as such on his user page.)
Third edit: 9/24/2006 Vandalizes Kerry Killinger diff (note: Page was created by User:Kinu and is listed as such on userpage)
Fourth edit: 9/24/2006 Vandalizes Marie-Anne Pierrette Paulze diff (note: page was created by User:Dina and is listed as such on her userpage.)

Possibly related acts by other single purpose accounts:

The vandalism to User:Dina was reverted by User:DVD R W, who also placed a warning on User:Dormir 2777 's talk page. User:DVD R W was then vandalized by User: Dvd R W (sole edit) diff

Comments

I don't understand how this pertains to me at all. Apparently it's not enough to condemn a factual article but now I get to be blamed for something I have no knowledge of. The "evidence" seems inconclusive and appears to be something Dina has against me, an intense vendetta. I apologize for anything these particular users have done, but I have no ties to this is any way. Wikipedia leaves itself open for such vandalism by not at least requiring all new accounts to have an email address. And, why is that even though some new users have nothing against the article in question, every one of them immediately must be a "sockpuppet"? --Zoso 19:32, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not conclusive, but it is suggestive. New users almost never edit Afd for the first time. It's also unusual when a new users first edit is to vandalize another users page, then vote in an Afd. Almost never happens, really. Wikipedia doesn't need email address confirmations because certain admins can run a check to see which IP addresses were used to post which comments. If, for instance, the same person sitting at the same computer created a new user name to post a "Save" in an Afd, or to vandalize the page of someone who had voted to delete, it would be possible to determine that they were the same person by checking the IP of both users. It's also often possible to see if all the comments came from the same city, school, etc. See WP:RCU. However, if you haven't made any of these other edits, you have nothing to worry about and I apologize in advance. If you have, my suggestion would be to simply stop. Dina 20:24, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What about various software that allows people to use other people's IP addresses? Would it then be possible for some hackers, like these "sockpuppets" to cloak themselves with my own IP address and then I become invariably blamed, being banned from this site forever? If so, that royally sucks. It seems like many problems here beget even more problems.--Zoso 21:42, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's certainly a (remote) possibility, but it seems unlikely that hackers would steal your IP address purely for the purpose of supporting an article you wrote in an Afd and vandalizing those who wanted to delete it. Occam's Razor suggests that the simpler answer would be that you, and possibly a friend, created a bunch of user names to make those edits. Wikipedia isn't really anonymous. Anyone who reads the above WHOIS links already has a good idea of where you go to school and the contact information of your school's IT department. With an IP or two, that contact person may even be able to identify where you live on campus. And I'd like to point out, as gently as possible, that it's extremely likely that you are one of the people whose full name is given in the article up for debate. Should this get out of hand, not only could you be blocked or banned, but your schools IT administrator might be informed. When I was in school, "computer crimes" using the school network were taken pretty seriously. If any of this hits home, I'd suggest you do the following: Confess and apologize, on the Afd itself and to each of the people whose pages you vandalized. Request that the page you created be deleted, since if creators make that request it can happen almost immediately. (As it stands, even if you remove your personal information from the page it will still exist in the history.) And decide to contribute as constructively as possible to Wikipedia from now on. You're obviously a bright guy, why waste your time with this B.S.? If you do those things, with good faith, I'll drop the issue immediately. Dina 22:05, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, buckling under peer pressure and in spite of internet pirates, I went ahead and requested its deletion.--Zoso 22:19, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I can't apologize for something I did not do. I sincerely mean that. At any rate, the page is gone now.--Zoso 22:36, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I appreciate you db-authoring that article. I will check with an admin. If it wasn't you, and was one of your friends, using an IP address in the IP range of your school, you might have issues anyway. You might want to doublecheck with the rest of the "posse" and if it's one of them, they should be taking the heat for this. If it wasn't anyone who had anything to do with you, then the checkuser will demonstrate that. You can request a checkuser for yourself at WP:RCU to clear your name, if you think that's really a good idea. Dina 22:52, 24 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note This matter appears to be resolved as the editor in question db-authored his article and so far as I can tell, the relevant user pages, articles etc. haven't been vandalized since. Since I'm relatively sure I can't personally close a sock puppet case, I'm just going to leave this note here until someone else does. If I'm mistaken in that assumption, please let me know. Thanks. Dina 01:45, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

Complaint withdrawn. Iola k ana•T 16:04, 28 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]