Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/45Factoid44

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:45Factoid44

Suspected sockpuppeteer

45Factoid44 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

68.52.36.127 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

96.5.66.240 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Mayalld (talk) 10:23, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence

45Factoid44 has previously disclosed that he formerly edited from 96.5.66.240, but when that IP began editing and showing ownership in a MEDCAB case raised by 45Factoid44, it was denied that the two were the same person, or that they even knew each other. I closed the MEDCAB, per WP:DUCK evidence of sockpuppetry.

All 3 are clearly located in Nashville, TN (IPs geolocate, and registered user has self-identified as once having posted from one of the IPs)

All 3 share a common opinion, and are seeking to oppose the classification of airports as Focus Cities unless the airline says so in a primary source.

Clear evidence of the use of multiple identities to make an opinion held by only a single person look more widely held.

Comments

• Evidence to the contrary:
  • In 3,000 plus people it is not unreasonable that two people would take the same side of an issue.
  • The other user at the university IP never posted from both my user name and the IP in short succession to suggest that both edits were made in the same sitting.
  • The other user at the university IP never posted from my other IP off campus suggesting they weren't me and thus didn't have access to it.
  • The other user at the university IP was open about explaining that they saw this case in a contribution history when they started participating in the Medcab case per Mayalld's talk page and the IP and the username were never used in unision to evade or break any rules such as 3RR etc.
  • Mine and the other university IP user's opinnions were the same as everyone else who disgreed with listing LAX as a focus city and just because they agreed with my one and only submission to the case about a believed fallacy in a source before deciding not to accept the outcome of the mediation I suggested doesn't indicate we are the same person.
  • While it was a poor decision for the other university IP user to restart an edit war that I had the page protected to stop originally, they did not violate 3RR or use two identities to do so.
  • A user is well within their right per what the mediator said at the beginning of the case to reject the medition at any time if they are unhappy with the way it is being handled and request formal mediation or new informal mediation instead.
  • Neither me nor the other university IP user ever violated any rules or Wikipedia policies and there no multiple occurances of sock puppet like behavior in the contribution histories.45Factoid44 (talk) 02:36, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• User no longer active/Has retired(I was already considering this and with continued ill will from the rest of Wikipedia I am proceeding on with it.) 45Factoid44 (talk) 14:57, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• I think this is pretty ridiculous and since I'm not even a registered user(and thankful for it) I'm not even gonna waste my time with this case. I could care less what happens to 45Factoid44. 96.5.66.240 (talk) 14:40, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if multiple users are able to post comments, but I'd like to note that on this very case, 96.5.66.240 has added responses which have then been re-branded as being from 45Factoid44. This is not an isolated case, either. While a shared IP is always a possibility, I find it extremely coincidental that three people from the same school could all being fervently interested in protesting airline focus cities and hubs (not exactly a broad and popular topic, I think) and that two, specifically, could verge on the same article. All three users also appear to have the same short-temper, as can be seen in various edit comments and replies. NcSchu_(Talk) 17:42, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Noting that 45Factiod44 and 96.5.66.240 both cleaned up their user spaces within 5 minutes of each other today. What a co-incidence! Mayalld (talk) 15:30, 4 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

This disruptive editing and elusiveness is continuing to the present so I am blocking all three for a week. —Wknight94 (talk) 16:23, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]