Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Artisol2345

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:Artisol2345

Suspected sockpuppeteer

Artisol2345 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

AL2TB (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Edit Centric (talk) 09:36, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence: Traceable, disruptive editing patterns are present between the "puppetmaster" account, and the current suspected sockpuppet. The master account User:Artisol2345 has already received action due to confirmed sockpuppetry in the past. [1]; Other similarities exist between these accounts, such as common grammar and word usage, and a focus on the same topic area(s) within Wikipedia, mostly WP:USRD articles. Examples of these similarities are as follows:; 1) Text excerpt from master account: "Anyways, I joined Wikipedia sometime... I don't remember."; 2) Similarity in word usage, from suspected puppet account: "Anyways, I would like to talk about my history."; 3) Reference to usable nickname / netname from master account: "But call me Stones... I like it better."; 4) Reference to the same netname on AL2TB external website, via this link, found on AL2TB user page: [2] "This site was created by Stones (my netname, not my real name)" (Direct quote from website text.); 5) Both User:Artisol2345 and User:AL2TB pages refer to a "wiki-addiction" in varying degree.; 6) Both accounts have been used to edit articles pertaining to schools in the same geographical area, (Same school district in southern California) but mainly roads articles within the WP:USRD Wikiproject.; This last item prompted further scruitiny by not only myself, but other editors and admins within the WP:USRD project as well. Upon confrontation with this information, user AL2TB states that the Artisol2345 account was his cousin, whom he has an unspecified conflict with over placing his "personal information" on the Artisol2345 user page. Most recently, AL2TB has reinforced this assertion by placing a deletion tag at the top of the Artisol2345 userpage, requesting its deletion for these reasons.

7) (Added 2008010422:26PST/2008010506:26UTC) - Both accounts are originating from the same IP subnet, assigned by Cox Cable. User:AL2TB is attributable to IP 68.4.104.141 (ip68-4-104-141.oc.oc.cox.net), User:Artisol2345 confirmed sockpuppet at IP 68.5.47.155 (ip68-5-47-155.oc.oc.cox.net). The assigned IP range for this subnet covers 68.4.0.0 - 68.5.255.255. Submitted for your scruitiny. Edit Centric (talk) 06:34, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

8) Results of associated Check user cross-posted as follows:

Result: There is a fairly high probability based on technical analysis of Checkuser results that these two userids are controlled by the same person, or by persons working closely together, so the result is adjudged as Likely. ++Lar: t/c 21:25, 7 January 2008 (UTC) (Cross-posted by Edit Centric (talk) 02:38, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Kommentare

Similar patterns of disruptive editing are beginning to take shape with the AL2TB account. Further, Wikipedia policy covers this surreptitious use of accounts at WP:SOCKS, specifically the section dealing with Inappropriate use of alternate accounts. This same policy also dictates that there does not need to be a time overlap between accounts for a finding of sockpuppetry to be made.

I suspect that this user was attempting to proceed as described by the "Clean start" section of the policy, however the same recklessness is beginning to be displayed as before, the most recent example of which, User:AL2TB willfully jumped into the middle of a revert war at CA SR 49. [3] In addition, the statements that AL2TB has made in regards to the cousin only reinforce the position that the AL2TB account is an intentional misdirection.

The User:AL2TB account similarities would seem to warrant scruitiny at this point. If a finding is made that these indeed are two physically separate entities, I would be the first to issue my apologies, not only to the user, but to the investigating administrators as well. I do not, however, feel that this is the case, and therefore the reason that I bring this item to your attention. Thank you for your time and efforts in clarifying the situation.

FOLLOW-ON - Recommend that the User:Artisol2345 page NOT be deleted, salted nor rendered unretrievable, until this issue is resolved to the satisfaction of all concerned parties. Contrary to what is being suggested in the subject user talkspace, this would be "putting the cart before the horse", so to speak, in that it would effectively NEGATE this sockpuppetry inquiry, by removing all evidential material. I am duly concerned that the party involved would press for this course of action, as they no doubt know that this would be the outcome of the suggested deletion. Therefore again, I am requesting and recommending a STAY OF DELETION on the master account for now. Thank you again for your time. Edit Centric (talk) 08:08, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FOLLOW-ON 2 - Earlier this date, AL2TB replaced the deletion tag on the Artisol2345 account page, and managed to back-date it. DELETION TAG REMOVED, DELETION TAG REPLACED, AND BACKDATED. These are VERY questionable actions at this juncture... Edit Centric (talk) 05:03, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I object with the 7th evidence that you provided. Here is why...

It appears that EditCentric manage to pin point out all the evidence between the connections of the accounts. The only way to prove that AL2TB is innocent is to provide Artisol2345's e-mail address. E-mail aristol2345, and get a reply with a different e-mail address. AL2TB however must show Artisol2345's e-mail address since it is not enabled on wiki. In a case where 2 email address are operated, this comment can be nullified (but is unlikely). PrestonH 07:21, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm terribly sorry that you feel that way, however there's no way that you can object to that evidence; the WHOIS doesn't lie. It's empirical insomuch as the IPs' whois isn't coming from me, it's coming from Cox Broadband's own DNS server, and the results are reproduceable for anyone who checks. In addition, I have in my possession, e-mail from AL2TB, which, when examining the e-mail header data, is reporting the following source-IP: "X-Originating-Ip: 68.4.176.68", which is again within the same subnet range assigned by Cox Broadband. So in essence, it has been established (at least) that both accounts are (were, in the case of Artisol2345,) operating from within the same IP subnet, through the same ISP. From my own personal experience installing and maintaining DSL and broadband networks, it is entirely possible that both external IP addresses have been assigned to the same interface device (cable modem) at different times; all one needs to do to change the IP is turn OFF the cable modem, and wait a length of time. The IP will be released back to the pool, and when the modem is turned back on, a different IP may be assigned to the device.) Edit Centric (talk) 07:55, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

*sighs* I give up on the case between Aristol2345 and AL2TB. The evidence shown and along with the WHOIS database, is nearly irrefutable at this point. I'm now increasingly convinced that AL2TB = Aristol2345. But AL2TB said this on my talk page.

I see that you support the checkuser case pertaining to Artisol2345. I'm not mad about it or anything, and I don't really care if you do believe I am a sockpuppet of Artisol2345 (which I deny the fact, despite the evidence from checkuser). But I'm still going to contribute when I have time.

Also, I wish to ask you this. Say hypothetically I was Artisol2345 (I'm saying this because multiple editors accuse me of it). If this account happened to be the sockpuppet, there would be nothing wrong when one would contribute with a new account and never use the old account again (correct me if I'm wrong). Anyways, I don't care that you support checkuser. What I would like you to do is to NOT inform me of anything related to my account and my cousin's on my talk page.

He dosen't really care if he is a sockpuppet now. I'm terribly fustrated and disappointed by the fact that I had to become a teacher only to realize one is using sockpuppets in an inappropriate way. With that said, I hope things turn out for the better. :{ PrestonH 08:38, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: I don't care if people think I'm a sockpuppet, not is a sockpuppet. ^_^ AL2TB ^_^ 18:51, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The only minor counter-evidence left is that Aristol2345's very revent IPs are in the 70s (poss. internet connection change), which contradict the fact that AL2TB is using Cox Communications. PrestonH 08:42, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Margin reset) This does nothing to contradict AL2TB's ISP, that much is proven. What this does indicate is that the Artisol account's latest edits were generated using a different ISP. If the IP you're referring to looks anything like 72.130.41.48, that is also listed as a confirmed (THIS one is debateable, as it is a completely different ISP!) sockpuppet, whose name resolves as "cpe-72-130-41-48.socal.res.rr.com". This belongs to Roadrunner, which is a service of Time Warner Cable (I know this, I had Roadrunner when I lived in ElPaso, TX.) Edit Centric (talk) 09:17, 5 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

There you have it. The checkuser came out positive. Either they are sockpuppets, or they are meatpuppets (depending on how you look at it). Pending administrator action... --EoL talk 00:07, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

These guys are being disruptive. The CU and this edit pretty much nail it. As for the Cox/nonCox IPs, both trace and WHOIS to Orange County, CA. These could be home/work, home/school, etc IPs for the same person. Based on everything, I think it more likely these guys are meats, but they could be socks. Blocking each 2 weeks. Also note Artisol2345 has been blocked for socking before. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:22, 12 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]