Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Valleyhollandman/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Valleyhollandman

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

22 August 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]
  1. Valleyhollandman claims [1] to be the owner of The Raw Story.
  2. Valleyhollandman is a virtual SPA on The Raw Story and The Raw Story-adjacent articles (e.g. BLPs on owners and writers).
  3. Valleyhollandman recently made a number of substantial edits to The Raw Story's Wikipedia entry, largely focused on editing the lead section [2]. I left a note on their Talk page advising them of WP:PAYDISCLOSE [3].
  4. Within 12 hours of that note, the SPA Spoonpassport account was created; Spoonpassport and SPA 174.244.209.131 began commenting on the article's Talk page by making edit suggestions similar to the edits that Valleyhollandman had previously made (centered around issues with the lead, e.g. [4]). Prior to this, only one other editor had commented on the Talk page in more than two months. [5]
  5. Spoonpassport uses an unusual royal "we" in their comments, in a way that suggests it is registering the corporate opinion of The Raw Story (e.g. "We have no issue on the full disclosure ..." [6]).
  6. 174.244.209.131 geolocates to the Washington-metro area where The Raw Story is located [7].
  7. 1propen (no longer active; blocked by El C for personal attacks) and Aamma23 are additional SPAs (see [8], [9]) on The Raw Story that have activated within the preceding three weeks.
  8. 66.44.16.149 and 216.15.26.245 are SPA IPs whose edits on The Raw Story and The Raw Story-adjacent articles are focused on clarification of ownership status and whose edit summaries contain notes that they are trying to protect the company from reputational risk (e.g. [10]), which is a form of edit summary I usually only see with COI accounts. These IPs also geolocate to Washington, where the company is based.
  9. None of the suspected sock/meatpuppets sign their Talk comments.
    Chetsford (talk) 04:14, 22 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-CU Comment Based on the Checkuser results in concert with behavioral indicators this seems like it's a chimeric sockmeatpuppet, particularly with respect to Spoonpassport who keeps commenting as though they're legally related to the verified sock who is claiming ownership of the site (e.g. "... go after our site. We have no issue on the full disclosure of all information.") [11] [emphasis added], who makes the same Talk page error (unsigned comments), who makes the bulk of their edits on Thursdays not unlike the sock, and who is also an SPA on this article. Chetsford (talk) 01:15, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

I believe this section also needs another eye/ correction, since the claim did not happen:

"Post-CU Comment Based on the Checkuser results in concert with behavioral indicators this seems like it's a chimeric sockmeatpuppet, particularly with respect to Spoonpassport who keeps commenting as though they're legally related to the verified sock who is claiming ownership of the site (e.g. "... go after our site. We have no issue on the full disclosure of all information.") [11] [emphasis added], who makes the same Talk page error (unsigned comments), who makes the bulk of their edits on Thursdays not unlike the sock, and who is also an SPA on this article. Chetsford (talk) 01:15, 9 September 2021 (UTC)"

I have, from time-to-time, forgotten to sign my comments. Spoonpassport (talk) 23:40, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Adding, this claim is made several times on this page. It would be great if they were all corrected. Spoonpassport (talk) 00:11, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
  • CheckUser requested and endorsed by clerk - There's no doubt there's COI going on here, and the fact that the 3 IP's geolocate to where The Raw Story is based is certainly a red flag (and makes me think more likely people directly connected with the site vs random UPEs). On the other hand, I see some more technical indicators that we're dealing with more than one person here. This seems like the kind of thing CU would be good at sorting out. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:42, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Valleyhollandman is  Confirmed to 1propen. Spoonpassport and Aamma23 are Red X Unrelated to Valleyhollandman and  Unlikely to each other. no No comment with respect to IP address(es). Mz7 (talk) 05:12, 8 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Normally, I would just give Valleyhollandman a short block because they did declare their COI, and indef their sock, 1propen. But 1propen is already blocked for personal attacks, and that applies to the person, not the account, so indef the master and tag both. I'm not 100% sure I would have called their edits PA, but they can ask to be unblocked and explain themselves there.

I dropped uw-coi on Spoonpassport and Aamma23, and since the IPs haven't edited in several weeks, I'm not going to do anything there. Should additional issues arise with this group of accounts, the AGF situation is pretty much exhausted. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:26, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

09 September 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]
  1. Valleyhollandman has previously claimed to be the owner of the website therawstory.com [12]. In this edit [13], Artlover404 also claims to be the owner of therawstory.com. Artlover404 was a years-dormant account that became active after the previous SPI on Valleyhollandman was opened.
  2. Spoonpassport is an SPA on The Raw Story article [14]. Spoonpassport presents an almost identical objection to an archived source as Artlover404, that the fact it's disappeared due to link rot means the Columbia Journalism Review "deleted" [15] or "retracted" it.[16] Typically, two editors simply agreeing with each other would not be a behavioral indicator, however, in this case, they are SPAs repeating the same point in different threads on a page at which, prior to the appearance of these newly minted / activated accounts, there had been no substantive comments on in more than two months.
  3. Artlover404 and Spoonpassport174.244.209.131 both use the royal "we" to refer to therawstory.com in Talk comments. 174.244.209.131Spoonpassport:"... go after our site. We have no issue on the full disclosure of all information.") [17] [emphasis added]; Artlover404: "we believe he/she should be blocked from editing the page and the page should be restricted to editorial review from experienced editors" [18] [emphasis added].
  4. 66.44.16.149 and 216.15.26.245 are SPA IPs whose edits on The Raw Story and The Raw Story-adjacent articles are focused on clarification of ownership status and whose edit summaries contain notes that they are trying to protect the company from reputational risk (e.g. [19]), which is a form of edit summary I usually only see with COI accounts. Both IPs geolocate to Washington, United States where the company Valleyhollandman and Artlover404 claim to own (therawstory.com) is based.
    Chetsford (talk) 18:12, 9 September 2021 (UTC); edited 22:56, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

---

@RoySmith - you're right, sorry, I'm probably following this too closely and my explanations are suffering from brevity and lack of context. He claims to be John K. Byrne; John K. Byrne is also the name of the site's majority owner [20]. Sorry for not better explaining the backstory. Chetsford (talk) 21:05, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

There are comments attributed to me here that I did not write. The whole "royal 'we'" bit, as well as comments about reputations, etc. was another editor, at another IP (according to your own histories), who did not sign her/his comments. I did write "we" at one point, quoting another editor and asking a question. Spoonpassport (talk) 22:29, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, my apologies. I had two windows opened at once and referred to the incorrect one. I've corrected this. Chetsford (talk) 22:56, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The newly created ArtLoveretc account goes back to 2018. Is that "newly minted"? And maybe my objection to the CJR article was repeated because ArtLoveetc read my comment about it? Spoonpassport (talk) 23:10, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
  • I'm still not exactly sure what's going on here, but I do note that Valleyhollandman ... claimed to be the owner of the website ... Artlover404 also claims to be the owner is not quite true. The former said, "I am one of two owners" and the later simply claims to be the "CEO/Founder". Collaboration, COI, POV, sure. But this is SPI where we're mostly concerned about one person controlling multiple accounts, and those two statements don't necessarily support that Artlover404 and Valleyhollandman are the same person. These new IPs also geolocate to Washington DC. I'm going to endorse for another CU run to look at Artlover (which was created less than a day after 1propen was blocked). -- RoySmith (talk) 19:59, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Valleyhollandman/Archive&oldid=1047587890"