Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Allaboutthat/Archive

Allaboutthat (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Suspected sockpuppets

• Haveuheard (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

• User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"

It appears that this user is trying to censor content about an elected official from the article on Saskatoon City Council. These edits (diff1, diff2) show the user deleted very specific information and references. In doing so they orphaned a named reference that was used further down the page; they also left no edit summary either time. I left an appropriate message on the user's talk page, indicated the material they removed was NPOV and properly sourced.

Today I saw that another user has removed the same passages (diff3), including the same citations, and left no edit summary. This nearly identical editing pattern leads to suspect sockpuppetry; the signs point to a person whose sole purpose is to engage in an edit war and circumvent the 3RR policy. I've already reverted the edits three times, which is why I am requesting an investigation. Thanks. Drm310 (talk) 20:41, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

•  Clerk endorsed - Very possible that these are meatpuppets given that it's about a local election. But i'd rather have a sock blocked instead of breaking 3RR. -- DQ (t) (e) 22:29, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Inconclusive, teetering on  Unlikely given the situation above. Looks like meatpuppetry is more likely. –MuZemike 03:25, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Very well, this case should be deferred by the filer to WP:3RR if neccesary. -- DQ (t) (e) 13:22, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]