Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Deedstar

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.

Suspected sockpuppeteer

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

Suspected sockpuppets

83.41.21.10 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Nelorippalenga (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
As Tidies She (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
ESADE Class of 89 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Yksin 01:40, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence

Single-purpose sockpuppet focusing on the article ESADE, apparently using socks to evade blocks. First edits were as an anon IP 83.41.21.10 (talk · contribs), with this last edit. After reversion by Dreadstar (talk · contribs), the suspected sock created Nelorippalenga (talk · contribs), & restored the revert, & then again, a third time, a fourth time.

Given a 3RR warning by Dreadstar, Nelorippalenga then apparently created new account Deedstar (talk · contribs) in apparent parody of Dreadstar's username, & commenced readding the same problematic edits, the first time even parodying Dreadstar's edit summaries. Here's another reversion. After that was reverted again, Deedstar switched tactics and added different material. As it came from a self-published source, Dreadstar removed it; but Deedstar reverted all except the citation itself; then reverted a third time. At this point, Navou (talk · contribs) protected the article. On Nauvou's talk page, Dreadstar explained Deedstar's activities.

Deedstar's next activity was to post an oppose vote on Dreadstar's RfA. Subsequent questions about Deedstar's activities led Jaranda (talk · contribs) to block Deedstar, apparently for the disruptive parodying of Dreadstar's username.

Meanwhile, back at the ESADE article, protection had expired. Following the block of Deedstar, a new user As Tidies She (talk · contribs) reverted to the last version by Deedstar (here's the actual difference between Deedstar's last & As Tidies She's version; nonidentical parts are due to intermediate edits by an uninvolved editor). After that version was reverted by WarthogDemon (talk · contribs), new user ESADE Class of 89 (talk · contribs) restored it, with a somewhat mocking edit summary apparently aimed at WarthogDemon. I myself reverted, stating in the edit summary my suspicion of single-purpose sockpuppetry.

All involved accounts have edited only on the ESADE article or the account's own talk page, with the exception of Deedstar, 3 of whose 11 edits were to Dreadstar's RfA, in an apparent attempt to quash Dreadstar's candidacy. The first three user accounts also received warnings about policy violations from Dreadstar. Some of these accounts would say "see [article] talk page" in edit summary, but none of these accounts actually said anything at Talk:ESADE.

Given this user's history, it seems likely s/he will continue to create new accounts for the purpose of disruptively editing ESADE, and possibly for continued harassment of Dreadstar.

Comments

Looks good. All clear socks. The initial edits were disruptive, and where there were sources, they didn't well support many of the contentions (for example, I can't find a source indicating that ESADE spearheaded the forum, though they were involved). The initial disruptive editing strikes me as too little for an indef block of an established editor, but if someone is starting like that, I don't see much problem with a hardblock. I left a note on Jaranda's talk page saying as much. I'm off to try to fix some of the POV problems in this article.--Chaser - T 03:36, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

Duck test. Navou ^banter 03:00, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Nothing more to do here. --Akhilleus (talk) 03:47, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]