Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/DeFacto: Difference between revisions

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

Populated account categories: confirmed · suspected

– A checkuser has completed a check on relevant users in this case, and it is now awaiting administration and close.

Suspected sockpuppets

• Cobulator (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

I believe that User:Cobulator is a sock-puppet of the banned user User:DeFacto, operating from a sleeper account set up before DeFacto was banned. User:DeFacto was banned as a result of his continued disruption to the article Metrication in the United Kingdom. Cobulator has shown signs of becoming disruptive to the article History of the metric system

Disruption to article History of the metric system

• DeFacto:The principal "contributors" to History of the metric system are myself (154 edits), User:Stevengriffiths (21 edits) and User:MeasureIT (17 edits). Most of the edits made by that latter two were reverted once they had been exposed as sock-puppets of User:DeFacto. The principal "contributors" to Talk:History of the metric system are myself (31 edits), User:Stevengriffiths (11 edits) and User:MeasureIT (22 edits) - most of the discussion being tedious nit-picking in which User:DeFacto's sockpuppets were trying to discredit aspects of the article. Discussion with them occupy about 90% of the Talk Page.
• Cobulator: User:Cobulator's "contribution" to the same article consits of nit-picking about Simon Stevin's contribution to metrication (for the record, Stevin, who developed decimal numbers in the late 1500s foresaw that one day people would use decimal numbers to represent measurements, a view that is recorded in the article). Cobulator's "contribution" shows that he has not read the article, but is looking for a fight in the same way that MeasureIT and Stevengriffiths did.

Cobulator is clearly attacking the same pages as did DeFacto's proven sockpuppets.

Creating and abandoning stubs

• DeFacto: DeFacto too had a track-record of creating stubs on road-related topics and never progressing them. When he was appealing against his block, DeFacto wrote that he had created 138 artciles. Rather than work through all his articles, I checked the first 18 articles that he wrote. My findings were that of the 18 articles, he only made significant contributions to one of the - Shared space:

• Cobulator: I checked Cobulator's record and found that he had created one 1300-byte stub Preston By-pass, but has otherwise added very little constructive to Wikipedia.

Both Cobulator and DeFacto have a track record of creating stubs and then abandoning them.

Anti-metric editing

• DeFacto: DeFacto's replaced metric units in the article Forth Road Bridge with imperial units. ].
• Colulator: User:Cobulator's contribution to the article Thelwall Viaduct was to replace metric units with imperial equivalents, leaving the metric units in brackets.

Both DeFacto and Cobulator have taken a strong anti-metric stance.

These three similarities appear to me to be shouting WP:QUACK. Martinvl (talk) 15:53, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

This is a ridiculous and unfounded attack. Martinvl seems to resort to this tactic each time his will is challenged - he recently tried a similarly weakly argued attack against 'Up and in' when challenged over his attempts to force a point in another article. The trouble is, mud sticks, and the false-accuser is not held to account. The comparisons he makes above, between myself and DeFacto are ludicrous. I was editing concurrently with DeFacto for a long while before he was banned - I started in November 2011 and DeFacto wasn't banned until April 2012 - why would I do that if I was DeFacto? Does Martinvl suppose that DeFacto foresaw his demise, 7 months ahead of time, and invented me to carry on in his footsteps? And if that is his assumption, why does Martinvl think that I waited so long, more than a year after DeFacto's ban, to continue his work?

Please examine Martinvl's behaviour, his edits and his arguments, both here and in numerous other places, then look at the edits I made to History of the metric system and its talkpage and tell us who is being disruptive here. Cobulator (talk) 08:16, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• CheckUser requested - Self-endorsed by clerk for checkuser attention - Taken as a whole, I believe the evidence presented to be sufficient for a check. Definitely not WP:DUCK though. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:16, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• Looks  Possible and seems  Likely. WilliamH (talk) 07:43, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

1. What looks possible, and on what basis - fact or opinion?

2. What seems likely, and on what basis - fact or opinion?

Cobulator (talk) 08:08, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]