Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Momento

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:Momento

Suspected sockpuppeteer

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

Suspected sockpuppets

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

Report submission by

Mael-Num 04:54, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence

Both users (User:VictorO and User:Momento) appear to be single-purpose accounts with a specific interest in removing information from the Prem Rawat page that is of a critical nature.

Both users appear to have been editing today, beginning at around the same time [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

As shown above, both users share a style of "revert warring" to achieve their goals in making their edits last. Neither appears to dialogue as a means to resolve conflicts. In the case of Momento, I can say that this user may even edit in spite of consensus against him, and sometimes lawyers WP policy to give his edits the appearance of validity, even though he appears to have no genuine interest in consensus [7] [8] and shows flagrant disregard for his fellow editors' opinions [9].

The evidence of "revert warring" and malicious editing in spite of consensus speaks to the apparent disregard for rules on the part of the user, which supports the idea that such a person may resort to puppetry.

In any case, these users (User:VictorO and User:Momento) are malicious WP:SPAs which exist for the sole purpose of disrupting progress on articles related to Prem Rawat. If they are not found to be sockpuppets via IP research, and neither is a proxy, then they are surely meatpuppets related to a small number of editors who have recently made superlative efforts to disrupt and inject POV into the Prem Rawat series of articles. Per the cited section on such puppets "for the purpose of dispute resolution, when there is uncertainty whether a party is one user with sock puppets, or several users acting as meatpuppets, they may be treated as one individual."

Other editors who appear to be participating in this campaign include Jossi and possibly Francis Schonken.

In evidence of the above statement, Jossi within a short time of my making a series of reverts made to protect against vandalism on the part of VictorO filed a WP:3rr case against me with no warning[10], and in spite of a ban for VictorO for vandalism [11]. The ban against VictorO would preclude my reverts as being anything other than the proper course of action. Indeed, the WP:3rr was declined when reviewed by one admin, and upheld when another admin fixed an autoblock issue. Yet Jossi continues to insist that the ban be applied for 48 hours, despite my never having been banned for any previous offenses.

Addendum Upon a second review of the case, VictorO's block has been reduced from 1 week to "time served". The original findings (decline) of the WP:3RR against me have also been upheld. Mael-Num 22:00, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I submit this as evidence of possible collusion to precipitate a revert war using the VictorO account with the goal of removing editors with a contrary opinion from participation in the Prem Rawat article. This is another example of meatpuppetry.

Francis Schonken moved the Criticism of Prem Rawat article into the main article despite ongoing discussion and a growing consensus against such a move. The move was followed by a continuing series of edits to "trim" the then-"overly large" Prem Rawat article by removing critical content [12] [13].

This merge, used as a justification to trim criticism, is being perceived by some editors as an effort to marginalize certain opinions not favored by some editors [14]. However, it is plausible that this was just a case of Francis innocently trying to be helpful, and others taking advantage of the situation. The action is suspicious, and perhaps based on this alone merits some looking into, but I have no evidence or belief that he is working in collusion.

Finally, I also request the assistance of any interested admins who are reviewing this situation in referring me to the next step that needs to be taken. This is obviously a very complex situation, and I understand if it is beyond the scope of those who deal primarily with puppets and would require more thorough investigation. I am a relatively new user and need advice in documenting what I perceive as a very serious issue. Please get in contact with me at my talk page].

Addendum 2/1/07: After a series of reverts[15][16][17], rising out of Momento's and Jossi's shared disapproval of critical information in the Prem Rawat article and unwillingness to edit and revise rather than revert, VictorO made a sudden return to the Wikipedia scene, jumping in right where Momento and Jossi left off[18], without a word spoken in the ongoing discussion[19].

Please do not mis-represent me. It is you who made unilateral changes to the article. You argue for others to revise, when you actually delete other editor's work, delete sources and engage in original research. Pot kettle black. Seek to build consensus instead. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 03:15, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

See WP:AN/3RR#User:Mael-Num_reported_by_User:jossi_.28Result:.29 for the discussion about this user's disruption. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 05:34, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With his first edit on December 6 2006, this user seems to be awfully familiar with WP. Maybe a checkuser on his account is warranted. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 05:43, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By all means, and with my explicit approval. Mael-Num 06:10, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have been involved in the set of Prem Rawat articles from the start and I do not think that VictorO and Momento are sockpuppets of anybody. I agree with user:Mael-Num that Momento engages in Wikipedia:Wikilawyering to remove contents that s/he does not like. For example, all stable contents in non-English was removed by Momento with the stated reason that the original Dutch had not been provided which was to a great extent untrue; I had provided most of the original Dutch citations long ago, but they were lost somewhere in the many talk archives of several closely related entries, like talk:Prem Rawat and talk:Criticism of Prem Rawat. Also, I think that Momento's habit of labelling claims as "exceptional" on the basis of his personal opinions and thus raising the bar for inclusion higher and higher is inappropriate and a form of wikilawyering. Andries 10:38, 21 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I'm late. M-N didn't tell me he had alleged I was sock puppet or a meat puppet. I'm neither.Momento 13:48, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions: confirmed Betacommand ^{(talk • contribs • Bot)} 16:46, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Both users unblocked; see [20]. --Akhilleus (talk) 02:01, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]