Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Amrit914: Difference between revisions
| Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
As a long time admirer of Mata Amritanandamayi I have checked the Wiki page from time to time. I'm not the type to get involved in the editing process. But as the so called controversies section grew and grew, I couldn't keep silent. If you look into the editing of Sreejithinfo who has been editing this page multiple times a day day-after-day and not allowing any other user to edit the section with their points of view, I'm not an expert on Wiki policies but this doesn't seem appropriate to me. I believe this user is using every possible case that is somehow loosely connected to Amritanandamayi in attempt to slander her. |
As a long time admirer of Mata Amritanandamayi I have checked the Wiki page from time to time. I'm not the type to get involved in the editing process. But as the so called controversies section grew and grew, I couldn't keep silent. If you look into the editing of Sreejithinfo who has been editing this page multiple times a day day-after-day and not allowing any other user to edit the section with their points of view, I'm not an expert on Wiki policies but this doesn't seem appropriate to me. I believe this user is using every possible case that is somehow loosely connected to Amritanandamayi in attempt to slander her. |
||
I'm not a meatpuppet. Since the Hugging saint is reported to have hugged more than 30 million people, you shouldn't be surprised if people are interested in keeping this page |
I'm not a meatpuppet. Since the Hugging saint is reported to have hugged more than 30 million people, you shouldn't be surprised if people are interested in keeping this page accurate. - [[User:JamesRoberts1949|JamesRoberts1949]] ([[User talk:JamesRoberts1949|talk]]) 02:02, 18 August 2012 (UTC) |
||
======<span style="font-size:150%">Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments</span>====== |
======<span style="font-size:150%">Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments</span>====== |
||
Revision as of 02:06, 18 August 2012
– A user has requested CheckUser. An SPI clerk will shortly look at the case and endorse or decline the request.
18 August 2012
- Suspected sockpuppets
- JamesRoberts1949 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Pritivarma1985 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
I just protected the page Mata Amritanandamayi due to a content dispute. In the related discussion at Talk:Mata Amritanandamayi#Controversies, LanceMurdock999 (talk · contribs), an account created in March 2010[1] whose contribution history suggests a single purpose account, gave a detailed rationale for his removal of content.
Subsequently, two new SPAs appeared on the page to agree with him:
- Pritivarma1985 (created a few days ago[2]) whose only edits have been to this discussion.
- JamesRoberts1949 created today 8/17[3], who also filed a 3RR report against the opposer in the discussion (see WP:ANEW#User:SreejithInfo reported by User:JamesRoberts1949 (Result: page protected)).
The SPA activity of all three accounts and the apparent collusion on the talk page, plus the fact that one SPA appeared to be trying to get an opposer blocked, leads me to suspect that there is some sockpuppetry going on. It doesn't quite rise to the WP:DUCK level so I haven't blocked anyone, just protected the article. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:18, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Comments by other users
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
As a long time admirer of Mata Amritanandamayi I have checked the Wiki page from time to time. I'm not the type to get involved in the editing process. But as the so called controversies section grew and grew, I couldn't keep silent. If you look into the editing of Sreejithinfo who has been editing this page multiple times a day day-after-day and not allowing any other user to edit the section with their points of view, I'm not an expert on Wiki policies but this doesn't seem appropriate to me. I believe this user is using every possible case that is somehow loosely connected to Amritanandamayi in attempt to slander her.
I'm not a meatpuppet. Since the Hugging saint is reported to have hugged more than 30 million people, you shouldn't be surprised if people are interested in keeping this page accurate. - JamesRoberts1949 (talk) 02:02, 18 August 2012 (UTC)