Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Plumoyr/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

User:Plumoyr

[edit]
Plumoyr (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Plumoyr

Plumoyr (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Report date April 9 2009, 20:51 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Evidence submitted by Bali ultimate (talk)


Plumoyr (talk · contribs) was shortly blocked for serially creating unsourced stubs on international relations of the format "Malta-Japan relations" (for instance). After his block, he was found to be using Groubani (talk · contribs) as a sock to do the exact thing per here [1]. New user Hilary T (talk · contribs) seems to be editing in much the same vein. It's fourth and fifth edits on wikipedia were to vote keep [2] [3] on two articles created by the indef-blocked user (per here [4] and here [5]). It has then gone on a "X-Y relations" creating rampage [6] the likes of which have not been seen since Groubani ([7]) and Plumoyr ([8]) were blocked. This all seems ducky to me, but Hilary has enlisted some Article Resecue Squadron friends who i'm sure will want more than this behavioral evidence. Bali ultimate (talk) 20:51, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

These past discussions of Plumoyr and Groubani may be useful. [9]

[10].Bali ultimate (talk) 21:01, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.

I should probably point out that I changed my name from User:Hilary T In Shoes to Hilary T for ease of typing. Hilary T (talk) 21:18, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, if you look at my talk page you will see that Bali ultimate is under the false impression that my articles are unreferenced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hilary T (talk • contribs) 08:56, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am the target here not Plumoyr/Groubani. Just get it over with. Hilary T (talk) 08:57, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(This was a response to the question below which says "...the user (Plumoyr) does not appear to be under a community ban or blocked currently...")
Comments by other users


CheckUser requests
Checkuser request – code letter: E (Community ban/sanction evasion )
Current status – Declined, the reason can be found below.    Requested by Bali ultimate (talk) 20:51, 9 April 2009 (UTC) [reply]



Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 Clerk note: You specified code letter "E", but the user does not appear to be under a community ban or blocked currently. Can you provide clarification as to how "Community ban/sanction evasion" applies here? Thanks, — Jake Wartenberg 03:05, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk declined: This is a content and behavioral issue, checkuser is unnecessary. Alleged sockmaster is not blocked, and also not active. No evidence of attempts to create a false consensus or evade a block or sanction. Best dealt with (if necessary, last page created was 4 days ago) at AN/I. Avruch T 18:53, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.


23 April 2013
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Created a non-notable international relations article Croatia–Philippines relations just like User:Groubani used to do en masse. A look at the contributions shows more edits atypical of actual newcomers - creating a navbox Template:Cairns Group member countries on the very first day here, adding intricate yet broken references in Philippines–Greece relations, moving Mongolia–Philippines relations to use a dash instead of a hyphen, etc. Joy [shallot] (talk) 15:37, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

First edit was an infobox. Maybe my standards are too low, but people don't normally just join Wikipedia and instantly add a kilobyte of text, that is, intricate wiki syntax. --Joy [shallot] (talk) 15:39, 23 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Amalthea - I'm thinking that someone who was diligent enough to make over five thousand edits four years ago shouldn't be underestimated. Modifying the scope of edits for a new sockpuppet is a fairly obvious tactic to try to avoid scrutiny. And, four years is really not that long a time, we all know of the phenomenon of long-term block evasion. In any case, I just wanted this to be looked at by someone who was more familiar with Groubani. Would I be out of line if I were to canvass the previous three admins who had blocked the account? --Joy [shallot] (talk) 16:01, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Of course not, canvass away! Amalthea 16:40, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users
[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
  • I don't think there's a relation to Groubani. MJ Soquerata seems to only focus on articles related to the Philippines, Plumoyr/Groubani had a much wider focus -- and the last sock was found 4 years ago, I'd at least discuss any perceived problems with him before doing anything.
    I'm however very concerned about the copyright violations in those articles. You mentioned he doesn't appear to be a new users -- I agree, and if there are prior accounts, they need to be looked into to begin with the copyright cleanup. Amalthea 10:51, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Clerk note: Closed. I'm not really seeing the sockpuppetry, and it wouldn't violate WP:ILLEGIT even if they were the same. Plumoyr is unblocked and stopped editing years ago. Reaper Eternal (talk) 03:32, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Plumoyr/Archive&oldid=1138677622"