Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Carriearchdale

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Flipandflopped (talk | contribs) at 22:45, 11 July 2014 (Ew, a grammatical error). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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


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. FlipandFlopped 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. FlipandFlopped 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 (TalkContributionsLog) 15:25, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments