Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Joseph507357

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 1995hoo (talk | contribs) at 12:52, 27 May 2024 (→‎Comments by other users: comment to note what I’ve observed.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Joseph507357

Joseph507357 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log· investigate · cuwiki)

27 May 2024

– This SPI case is open.

Suspected sockpuppets

Figure the easiest way to lay this out is via timeline.

Background: There is an existing consensus on the Utah NHL team article and among WikiProject Ice Hockey users that Utah is officially and de jure an expansion team, rather than a de facto relocation of the Arizona Coyotes, going off how the NHL itself and reliable sources have described it. A comparable situation to what the league and team(s) have declared is the Cleveland Browns and Baltimore Ravens situation from the late 90s.

In short: Joseph and both IPs took the same position on the team's status, and did so in a similarly angry/confrontational manner, with similar verbiage/grammar, over a similar period of time. Joseph also hasn't edited since he removed 1995hoo's comment, so I'm not sure if this is an attempt to evade scrutiny on his main account or not. The Kip (contribs) 04:57, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[]

Comments by other users

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

I appreciate @TheKip opening the investigation. I’ve commented on these before, but I would have had to do some research to familiarize myself with how to open one and it might have been a few days before I got around to that. Setting that aside, there's not too much I can add to TheKip's comments beyond my own observations. I became suspicious on May 25, and voiced the concern in an edit summary and on the article's talk page, but I didn’t do anything further because it was a single incident and I figure I should give the benefit of the doubt even if the evidence is pretty damning—the nondisplaying comment about "stop changing my edits" might have left some room for doubt, but I tend to think it was not a "reasonable" doubt. Yesterday's little rant took away any doubt I might have been willing to harbor. What I find particularly objectionable here is that the first of the IPs removed a citation to an article discussing how the NHL Board of Governors is treating the Utah franchise as an expansion team (as TheKip has noted, similar to what the NFL did in the 1990s with the Ravens). Deliberately deleting a citation that supports a point of view other than what the one user is advocating smacks of bad faith in my mind. 1995hoo (talk) 12:52, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments