Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Arunkapadia/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations | Arunkapadia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by DGG (talk | contribs) at 01:51, 8 March 2017 (→Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments: ty). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.


Arunkapadia

23 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

HM8383's edits are indicative of undisclosed paid editing e.g. at Nevan Krogan and Anthony Gill (professor). Naval Nadia has only made two edits, one of which was to add a photo they uploaded to the Gill article: [1] and the other was to remove an {{advert}} tag on Jody MacDonald [2] which was created by Tropical Animal, another seemingly throwaway undisclosed paid editing account. SmartSE (talk) 18:08, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

This is definitely paid editing. See Special:Diff/768169912/Special:Diff/768170555. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:18, 3 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  •  Clerk endorsed - Please check these accounts. Thanks, GABgab 01:25, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • If this isn't paid editing I'll eat my magic checkuser wand. The following are  Confirmed to each other (and by "each other" I mean the same promotional sockfarm):
GeneralizationsAreBad -  Done. Accounts indef'd and all creations nuked. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:00, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Oshwah: I'm sorry if we might have miscommunicated there. I've tagged their articles/promotional sandbox drafts for CSD. Thanks very much, GABgab 01:06, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, GABgab 00:51, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • GAB two of those accounts are stale. For future reference, it's worth taking note that one of the article subjects got in touch with Oshwah and said that someone had contacted her and written the article without payment, rather than her seeking them. SmartSE (talk) 00:10, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
not exactly. from that posting, " I never paid him any money because it wasn't finished". This makes it clear the intent was to write for money, and that the undeclared paid editor solicited the job. DGG ( talk ) 01:50, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ah, my mistake - seem to have misread the dates. Closing. GABgab 01:49, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • My view is that all articles written by this group should be deleted regardless of notability. The TOU are foundation policy. Our COI policy is based both on that and WP:NOT, which supersedes all consideration of notability. Attempting to advertise someone highly notable, is still advertising, just as advocating the worthiest of causes is still `advocacy. Some of the people being written about are so notable, however, that an article ought to be written. I considered whether to rewrite the existing articles, but decided not to, because it would take rewriting from scratch. I think the only way we can enforce our rules and deter promotionalism is to first delete, and then wait a bit and communicate with the subjects to make sure the lesson is learned, and then rewrite.
Of these articles, Gill is quite notable, and Krogan is famous.
There are some related articles/editors that should be mentioned:
Gladstone Institutes, (unfortunately stale, but undoubtedly advertising)
California Institute for Quantitative Biosciences, a declared paid editor, but not exactly following the disclosure rules. Also unfortunately stale. DGG ( talk ) 01:50, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Arunkapadia/Archive&oldid=769187010"