Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Devalover

: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 {{NAMESPACE}} talk:{{{nosubst. 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:Devalover]]=

;Suspected sockpuppeteer

;Suspected sockpuppets

;Report submission by:

edgarde 03:22, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

;Evidence

Prior to [http://wikitravel.org/wiki/en/index.php?title=User_talk:Evan&diff=prev&oldid=403379 2006-11-29T20:59:48], User:KyndFellow and User:68.5.116.235 always used the unlinked text signature "Daniel E. Knodel, M.A." Mr. Knodel (logged in as KyndFellow) has acknowleged that both these accounts are his.

KyndFellow is edit-warring heavily to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sex_tourism&diff=89352559&oldid=89349296 reinstate] pro-sex-tourism POV edits to Sex tourism. Recently User:Devalover joined the Discussion page making sycophantic comments. KyndFellow can effectively call & response with Devalover, as demonstrated in [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Sex_tourism#Distinction_from_.22child_sex_tourism.22 this interaction], essentially a conversation with himself demonstrating a consensus of puppet editors that certain changes are merited.

Scroll upward from there to see User:Def Trojan's history on that page. Puppetry is evident but not so clearly apparent as in the abovelinked section.

Note the contribs for these 4 users, especially in their overlap with 68.5.116.235. In addition to editing a similarly limited set of pages, 3 of these users put "See also" links to Sex tourism in other sex-related topics (all but one too tangential to merit a "See also").

KyndFellow has recently taken to using the phrase "majority of editors" (meaning him, Devalover & Def Trojan) in disputes. As Mr. Knodel is currently warring against two other editors, Def Trojan was needed to quickly create this majority.

User:Def_Trojan started editing about 3 days ago and entered the discussion using a combination of KyndFellow's language and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sex_tourism&diff=prev&oldid=89098779 language] from [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ASex_tourism&diff=85400306&oldid=85395913 prior comments] directed at KyndFellow. Def Trojan is similarly sycophantic.

Def Trojan is also supportive in KyndFellow's campaign to insert his personal website in the article's External links. Neither will accept the more notable link of World Sex Archives as a compromise. (Mr. Knodel's bottom-line insistence on particularly his site is an obvious COI; Def Trojan's enthusiasm would have no such apparent motivation.) However, Devalover is the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sex_tourism&diff=prev&oldid=87272710 first] to add that link.

Devalover was also [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sex_tourism&diff=prev&oldid=31738571 first] to advance one of KyndFellow's hobbyhorses -- removing references to "Child sex tourism" from the Sex tourism article.

Kyndfellow is the dominant character in this team on Sex tourism. However, Devalover is the older account, KyndFellow only having begun editing on October 28, so I'm labeling Devalover as the puppetmaster.

Interestingly, Mr. Knodel has deleted 2 comments referencing sockpuppetry on Talk:Sex_tourism, the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sex_tourism&diff=next&oldid=85430810 1st] restored by him, the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ASex_tourism&diff=89351728&oldid=89351010 2nd] restored by me. The 2nd was deleted shortly after his [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:AMA_Requests_for_Assistance/Requests/November_2006/KyndFellow AMA] advocate announced he would be reviewing Talk:Sex_tourism, which is suspicious timing, circumstantial tho it may be.

Warning: Mr. Knodel deletes[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ASex_tourism&diff=89351728&oldid=89351010][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AKyndFellow&diff=89357318&oldid=89209889][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Edgarde&diff=next&oldid=89369687] other editors' Discussion page comments cagily, including [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:KyndFellow&curid=7716564&diff=89364595&oldid=89362857 warning templates] — check page histories to be sure.

About a month ago, Mr. Knodel was asked about editing as User:68.5.116.235. He [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Sex_tourism&diff=next&oldid=85432323 explained] he forgot to log in (as if needing to do so before every edit). This hasn't happened in a while, and might have not been deliberate — I didn't think so at the time. — edgarde 06:57, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

IP of interest (possible alternate IP addresses):

205.178.145.65 — Mr. Knodel's website.

;Comments

Edgarde, do I understand the frustration of dealing with sockpuppets, multiple accounts.

And, I wish you had asked me first instead of taking this action... and... here we are!

So, what happens next? Devalover 16:59, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

The only response I have is to please notice the date of the first edit of this account.Devalover 04:52, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

:It seems I cast too wide a net. This would make User:KyndFellow the puppeteer. — edgarde 00:23, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

;Conclusions

{{Confirmed}} in part by Dmcdevit [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration&diff=90501861&oldid=90457560 here]. Using Checkuser, Knodel is almost certainly DefTrojan, or used the same semi-static IP at least. Devalover is probably unrelated. Posted here by Thatcher131 20:46, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Closing without block. As above, Checkuser cleared Devalover. As for DefTrojan and KyndFellow, let me cite Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Sex tourism#Puppets: "Sock or meatpuppets which edit in the same manner and with the same themes as KyndFellow are subject to the remedies imposed on KyndFellow. Indefinite blocks may be imposed on aggressive socks. All blocks and bans to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Sex tourism#Log of blocks and bans." Since DefTrojan last edited Nov 20, and 68... last edited Nov 3, they can hardly be considered "aggressive socks". More details on the arbcom decision page, above. AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 23:42, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

----