Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Telanian: Difference between revisions
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
##{{diff2|674112867|19:03, 1 August 2015}} |
##{{diff2|674112867|19:03, 1 August 2015}} |
||
##{{diff2|674116143|19:31, 1 August 2015}} "''I don't understand your reasoning. Nothing's being 'repeated'. The wording, as you seem to prefer it, is incomplete and misleading, as it falsely implies no finding was made as to who killed Tomlinson (the police officer). Do you disagree? If so, why?''" [[User:Keri|Keri]] ([[User talk:Keri|talk]]) 13:11, 2 August 2015 (UTC) |
##{{diff2|674116143|19:31, 1 August 2015}} "''I don't understand your reasoning. Nothing's being 'repeated'. The wording, as you seem to prefer it, is incomplete and misleading, as it falsely implies no finding was made as to who killed Tomlinson (the police officer). Do you disagree? If so, why?''" [[User:Keri|Keri]] ([[User talk:Keri|talk]]) 13:11, 2 August 2015 (UTC) |
||
Looking at the archive for [[Talk:Death of Ian Tomlinson]] there is a strong possibility that this is part of a much larger sock farm dating back to at least 2011. {{u|Elvellian}} demonstrated a very similar editing pattern, which is discussed in length at [[Talk:Death_of_Ian_Tomlinson/Archive_2#Unlawfully_killed]]. The tone used in that discussion is strikingly similar to that used by 95.147.94.92 and it is worth noting that the editor clashed with and was very critical of {{u|SlimVirgin|Sarah}}, as is happening again. What caught my attention was that Elvellian was subsequently [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Elvellian blocked for socking] (see also [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive726#User:4567treminater|discussion at ANI]]). Looking at their activity I see a definite similarity in the way that they brazenly make edits like this {{diff2|429515219|06:12, 17 May 2011}} (unlawful killing & Tomlinson) ''and'' this {{diff2|439664644|19:16, 15 July 2011}} (changing [[Nick Clegg]]'s name to "Twatface") - much like {{u|Alnanah}} {{diff2|636487269|17:59, 3 December 2014}} ("The man who unlawfully killed him, Simon Harwood") ''and'' {{diff2|636475967|16:25, 3 December 2014}} ("The Court of Appeal rejected their appeal, confirming that the two men will continue to rot in prison, taking it up the arse for Allah for the rest of their lives"). I don't know if this was a case of hiding "bad" edits in the midst of disruptive but otherwise "good" edits, or forgetting which account they were using, or simply defiance, but it was the hallmark of both the Elvellian and Masterdon5 socks. [[User:Keri|Keri]] ([[User talk:Keri|talk]]) 08:07, 3 August 2015 (UTC) |
|||
====<big>Comments by other users</big>==== |
====<big>Comments by other users</big>==== |
||
Revision as of 10:51, 13 August 2015
Masterdon5
- Masterdon5 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
02 August 2015
– This SPI case is open.
- Suspected sockpuppets
- User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
- Editor interaction utility
The editor presents as an SPA focused on the inquest verdict of unlawful killing in the Death of Ian Tomlinson, specifically associating the name of PC Harwood with the verdict. "For legal reasons" the verdict did not name the officer and this was reflected in the careful prose used in the lede. Check user would clearly be stale in this instance. I believe that WP:DUCK applies and that this is a single editor who persistently attempts to make a - seemingly minor but technically significant - alteration to the lede of an article using multiple, previously linked, accounts.
- Masterdon5 first altered this here 09:24, 27 August 2013. This was reverted, with the reasoning "Reverted misunderstanding of the role and outcome of the inquest."
- Masterdon5 was indefinitely blocked on 13 November 2013
- Plliddy23 - a sock of Masterdon5 - returned to the article 07:46, 24 January 2014 to again link "unlawfully" and Harwood.
- Gibbler183 - a sock of Masterdon5 - demonstrated very similar behaviour regarding naming names in the lede at Murder of Lee Rigby 02:00, 14 January 2014 "Michael Adebolajo and Michael Adebowale admitted killing Rigby - and they were found guilty of murder in court - so there is no reason not to name them in the lead."
- Sylvien3 - a sock of Masterdon5 - again demonstrated similar behaviour at Michael Gove
- 10:28, 30 October 2013 "Restored lead material that was overzealously snipped"
- 23:41, 31 October 2013 "In that case you will have to leave it for others to agree on, for I see no need to get rid of what seems to me to be highly significant and reasonable sourced material, that is appropriate for a lead"
- Alnanah - who I suspect is a related sock - revisted Murder of Lee Rigby 16:25, 3 December 2014 and revisited Death of Ian Tomlinson 17:59, 3 December 2014, again linking "unlawfully killed" and Harwood.
- 95.147.94.133 edited the Tomlinson page to again specifically link Harwood and the verdict:
- 95.147.94.92 - arguably the same as 95.147.94.133 - continues to edit to link Harwood and the verdict in the lede:
- 19:03, 1 August 2015
- 19:31, 1 August 2015 "I don't understand your reasoning. Nothing's being 'repeated'. The wording, as you seem to prefer it, is incomplete and misleading, as it falsely implies no finding was made as to who killed Tomlinson (the police officer). Do you disagree? If so, why?" Keri (talk) 13:11, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
Comments by other users
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
This is likely to be Elvellian (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), who was indefinitely blocked in 2011. His focus was adding to the top of the lead of Death of Ian Tomlinson the inquest jury's verdict of unlawful killing, and making sure that the name of the police officer, or reference to the killing being by a police officer, was in the same sentence. (The inquest didn't name the officer for legal reasons.)
Examples of those edits:
- Elvellian (May 2011) [1][2][3]
- Masterdon5 (27 Aug 2013) [4]
- Alnanah (3 Dec 2014) [5]
- 95.147.94.133 (July 2015) [6][7]
- 95.147.94.92 (1 Aug 2015) [8][9]
As well as these edits to Tomlinson, Elvellian engaged in vandalism and BLP violations elsewhere. His posts to Talk:Death of Ian Tomlinson are very similar in tone and length to those of 95.147.94.92.
See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive726#User:4567treminater for the results of a CU showing that the person behind Elvellian was running multiple accounts. Telanian was the oldest: Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Telanian. Sarah (talk) 17:09, 3 August 2015 (UTC)