Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Carriearchdale

Carriearchdale

Carriearchdale (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Populated account categories: confirmed

For archived investigations, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Carriearchdale/Archive.

11 July 2014

– A user has requested CheckUser. An SPI clerk will shortly look at the case and endorse or decline the request.

Suspected sockpuppets

Bob the goodwin (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.
Editor interaction utility

To provide background, Carriearchdale was recently blocked for continuous harassment of Daniellagreen and a wide variety of other editors to a less extreme point. Throughout her enthusiastic yet highly troubled stay here at wikipedia, she was taken to ANI by other editors a variety of times and has taken other editors to ANI, like Daniella (seen here, [1], she would take things to ANI for senseless and unfounded reasons that eventually got her WP:BOOMERGANG for her continuous unfounded accusations. She even dared taking the issue right to Jimbo Wales' talk page, seen here: [2]

She has - or had, rather - a consistent behaviour of consistently taking things to ANI that were insensible and irrelevant, as you will see below.

In all of these cases, the entire community at ANI has dismissed them as just so - rubbish, except, notably, for one user - Bob the goodwin.

The prime reason I suspect these two of sock puppetry is for their continuous support of each other whenever another found themselves under criticism or taking something to ANI which (to be frank), no editor other than Carriearchdale would take seriously. These two do not necessarily have similar article interests, but that says nothing to the possibility of them being the same person: Carriearchdale was smart enough to somehow gain reviewer rights only a month after her first edit, [3], meaning she is likely intelligent enough to disguise her sock.

Admittedly, Carrie does seem to be far more incompetent in terms of grammatical skills, but if she was attempting to partake in trolling, this could be explainable. The accounts were also either created or became active again at roughly the same time. However, as odd and nonsensical as Carrie is, her contributions can actually tend to be intellectual, she has successfully contributed to 21 different wikis, and is fluent in many languages, so I have no doubt that she could also have an extensive knowledge of medical practice. Her conduct used to be slightly more civilized as she first started, similar to how Bob the goodwin first behaved, seen here: [4] She didn't use to behave in the manner that got her banned, which means she could easily be Bob or any other number of people that act slightly more civil.

All instances of Carrie and Bob the goodwin nonsensically acting as sock puppets by repeatedly supporting each other in every instance of an ANI or other conflict

[5]
[6]
[7] (both Carriearchdale and Bob the goodwin seemed to have carried an odd grudge against user:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz, as they both made ANI reports about him consecutively. Carrie's nonsensical ANI report is here: [8]

Other instances of similarities

Both Carriearchdale and Bob the goodwin became active around New Year's 2014 - [9], [10] (although Carrie's account did exist since 2007, it had no contributions till 2014)

Bob has recently become inactive, but with the risk of whomever is possibly behind these two accounts continuing their harassment spree on another innocent contributor , I think proper investigation is required. If these two are not the same user, they obviously have some sort of predetermined bias in support of each other. Since Carriearchdale is likely a "Grade A troll", a check user may reveal any other accounts she prepared either way, as she is just the type of person to do so, based on how adamant she is. I may well be wrong, but given the circumstances, I think the evidence is here for a check user. Flip^and Flopped ツ 14:31, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note - I am not entirely familiar with how blocking works on wikipedia, so if any possible issues were taken care of already when Carrie was indefinitely banned, I apologize and would thus withdraw my investigation. If not, it stands. Flip^and Flopped ツ 14:41, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

More of Meatpuppetry, issue shall be discussed with Bob the goodwin. You've already notified, I can wait.OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 15:25, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You've got enough evidence about meatpuppetry, but I am not sure what bob the goodwin will do now, Carriearchdale has made no significant contribution to any wikipage so I don't know any page that will prompt her to edit or even request a unblock. Carriearchdale would make a few edits if she is operating another account. SPI got backlog, you can still wait for more evidence. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 01:46, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am no longer active in Wikipedia. I have a lot of hate in my heart about the experience at Wikipedia, and I liked and supported Carrie, and felt like she was being maligned. I cannot imagine how I would be accused of either Sockpuppetry or Meatpuppetry, as either requires disquising identity or intent. I am Bob Goodwin, you can email me at Robert_lovejoy_Goodwin@yahoo.com, or you can see some public writing that I have done to expose the bad acting in Wikipedia. Because this was put together politely, I will not go on a rant, which I really want to do because of all the anger I still hold. I tried to make friends on Wikipedia, and it all swung back at me as playing in the sand box badly. I made ANI's against people too, but if you look at the ANI's I was pointing out abusive behavior. I now realize that abusive behavior is tolerated, but being an unsuccessful contributor is not. Look in my sand box. You will see an enormous amount of effort that I was putting into taking highly referenced, neutral and quality work into Wikipedia. I failed because of the abusive environment, a sense of ownership by the incumbents and probably worst of all a complete unwillingness to be abused quietly. I wrote a published article about the bad experiences at Wikipedia. You will also see them under the byline bob Goodwin. I am an engineer at Microsoft, and I thought Carrie was right, and the abusers were wrong. But my opinion does not count, but it is neither Sock Puppetry or Meat puppetry if the opinion is genuine, and no deception was made. I am the only person I know who will not even hide their actual name. I do have some emails from the person behind Carrie, and I can find her identity if you want, but all I remember is she got a graduate degree from Stanford in Writing and runs a couple of small businesses and charities. I also know she lives in a rural county about an hour or two from where I live.

I think looking at my history, sand box and dialog, you will find that I tried to make friends, and that I gave up on all the assholes in Wikipedia. Send me an email if you want and I will tell you anything else you want.

Thanks for being polite in your accusations, otherwise all the hate in my heart for Wikipedia would have exploded.

BobBob the goodwin (talk) 03:29, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I looked over your notes above. I think calling my Wolfowitz ANI an odd grudge requires that you start with the assumption that I was a sock/meat. If you retract that assumption, I think you will find incredibly abusive behavior on his part against me, and in one case where I made a mistake, I apologized to him. But that does not detract from the point that he was/is completely abusive, did not follow the rules of Wikipedia, and deserved to have me start an ANI against him. I was careful and detailed and fair in all of my ANIs, but concluded that nobody cared about the rules, and thus I could be of no help to Wikipedia unless I was willing to be silently abused, which is not compatible with my personality. Bob the goodwin (talk) 03:38, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

These summaries have logic? I won't decide, but I can understand that Bob the goodwin may have supported Carriearchdale in good faith, but now he doesn't seem to be supporting her, at least he didn't commented on ANI or her own talk page for last 1 month. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 04:19, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments