Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Phoenix and Winslow/Archive

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.


Phoenix and Winslow

Phoenix and Winslow (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
14 April 2011
Suspected sockpuppets


Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"

All participated in the afd on Sheepskin boots and all are identified SPA two users had no previous edits prior to the afd and edit post the afd. User:Phoenix and Winslow posted to the talk page of Sheepskin boots that he emailed these users about their vote in the AFD. Phoenix and Winslow first edits occured by commenting on an AN/I investigating socks in 2009.
For the record a previous sock investigation didnt include P&W but given the recent admission and previous history I think a checkuser is appropriate. Gnangarra 01:36, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
  •  Clerk endorsed - It looks like these edits have been used in the past (e.g. July 2010) to also help push things through. CU to clarify. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 02:41, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This was already checked. TNXMan 13:45, 14 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • information Administrator note Per behavioral evidence I've blocked Linda and Youngteacher. I'm pretty sure the rest are meatpuppets. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 02:47, 15 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
29 July 2011
Suspected sockpuppets


Account User:Bigdog2828 created 29 July, enters a discussion about changing the Lead of Ugg Boots article started by Pheonix and Winslow which had no support. Gnangarra 13:31, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

Bigdog2828 (talk · contribs) is  Confirmed as being the same as Illume1999 (talk · contribs), who was mentioned here. TNXMan 13:49, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I forgot one. Phoenix and Winslow is a  Possible match. TNXMan 00:34, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
12 October 2011
Suspected sockpuppets


Sock has jumped in to assist P&W with attempts to edit war to include commercial content at Ugg boots. Behavioural similarities include supposed "chumminess" in addressing editors by their (assumed) first names (P&W: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ugg_boots&diff=prev&oldid=454828150 Sock: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ugg_boots&diff=prev&oldid=455063068 ). Here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikiquette_assistance&diff=prev&oldid=455041449 the sock appears to have knowledge of an unrelated dispute also involving P&W, said dispute having as far as I can tell been hidden from public view. P&W also claims here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Liberation3&diff=prev&oldid=422327023 to do most of his/her editing from IPs. I understand that for privacy reasons no comments are published as to whether IPs are socks and have no problem with this. Daveosaurus (talk) 05:50, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
  •  Clerk note: It's been four days since the IP edited, so that's a little stale for me. Relist if it becomes active. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 00:29, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
08 November 2011
Suspected sockpuppets


Two more single-edit accounts whose only contribution has been to back P&W up in his/her attempts to disrupt the talk page at Ugg boots. This fits the modus operandi of confirmed sock puppets such as Bigdog2828 and Barclaygla09. Daveosaurus (talk) 19:01, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

The two named accounts, plus P&W are all  Unlikely to be related to each other. Looking back (and correct me if I'm wrong), it was never established that P&W had any alternate accounts. There were some "possible" matches, but nothing concrete. There are accounts tagged as P&W, but I'm can't see why. TNXMan 19:50, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • The CU result here makes me think this is meatpuppetry. Closing with no action taken for now. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 14:44, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
15 September 2013
Suspected sockpuppets


Goodoldeboy has already been blocked as a sock but doesn't seem to have been reported here so is only included for the record. Comment on P&W's talk page "It should be noted that it appeared you went through some lengths to attempt to avoid detection" probably should also be included for the record. For this reason I am including Liangshan Yi who has already been checked but who has broken a silence of some months to revert removal of a tendentious P&W edit here: [1]. Scoobydunk appears to be a brand new editor whose very first edit [2] was to launch into an article WLRoss (an editor with whom P&W has been feuding for a few years) had been editing; with a suspiciously precocious grasp of WP jargon in the edit summaries [3] and [4]. Daveosaurus (talk) 02:43, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
  • no Declined - While I agree that Scoobydunk (talk · contribs) does have a solid grasp on Wiki jargon, I do not see much else that would suggest they are a sock of Phoenix and Winslow (talk · contribs). Just because Scoobydunk edited the talk page of an editor who P&W did not get along with does not really justify running a checkuser. Additionally, a CheckUser has already commented on the connection between P&W and Liangshan Yi saying the connection was  Unlikely. Lastly, Liangshan Yi did not show up in my most recent checkuser of P&W. Tiptoety talk 04:53, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • If there's no grounds to justify a CU in this case, there's not really grounds to block the two accounts either. Rschen7754 05:02, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Phoenix_and_Winslow/Archive&oldid=1043695941"