Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Matthvm/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Matthvm

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

Prior SSP or RFCU cases may exist for this user:

Report date July 31 2009, 05:34 (UTC)[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by Kinou

For the sake of full disclosure, I have edited under two accounts since 2004 or 2005 - this one and User:Sprocket, which I no longer use.

User:Cherry1000 and User:Matthvm3 are sockpuppets of the banned user Matthvm, whom I and others reported a couple years back. In the past, over 10 of his sockpuppets have been blocked.

My accusation on the HRM talk page has been reverted by Cherry and another one of his alts, User:Matthvm3, a total of nine times for a number of frivolous reasons (and probably has been reverted again by the time you read this). He uses his multiple accounts for meat puppetry, primarily in the debate over how to organize the Halifax, Nova Scotia series of articles in light of the municipality's 1996 amalgamation. He's consistantly incivil and has been blocked in the past for making legal threats. I suspect he has more puppets; these are the two most obvious. Kinou (talk) 04:41, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.

1.Kinou is the same person as Sprocket and is posting personal information that is against Wikipedias privacy policy [1] and could also be could be Harassment which is also goes against the policy of Wikipedia [2]. 2. Request checkuser as I am not User:Matthvm3 nor User:Matthvm as most of my edits , new articles are not of Halifax Regional Municipality or Nova Scotia .--Cherry1000 (talk) 16:19, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Two things. I have never used my old account for meatpuppetry, in fact, I don't use it anymore, nor have I ever hidden the fact that I own that account (see the very first sentence of my comments above). Second, what personal information? Kinou (talk) 22:53, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

3. Where is this incivil edits ? Beside that I am not User:Matthvm3 nor User:Matthvm . I have researched most of .Kinou and Spocket edits whenever someone he or she disagrees with when the topic is centered on Halifax Regional Municipality edit Kinou automatically presumes that its Matthvm or the patylucy or the other editor who make edits on that topic. Like one had quoted "To sprocket there seems to be a Matthvm under every bed" as shown here[3] . Wikipedia is suppose to be an encyclopedia based on fact .--Cherry1000 (talk) 23:32, 31 July 2009 (UTC) 4. Personal information including thier name without thier consent --Cherry1000 (talk) 23:40, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I never accused Lonewolf BC of being Matthvm, and regardless it isn't relevant considering all my accusations were confirmed in the last round of blocks. Why would you know about that conversation if you aren't Matthvm? It was two years ago, you're obviously the same person. I didn't think posting his name would be a problem -- he himself had posted it to Wikipedia numerous times, for example, here. Kinou (talk) 05:07, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So why is it when a user disagrees with your point of view its automatic that user is a sockpuppet of Matthvm ? Im am NOT matthvm . Cherry1000 (talk) 13:50, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That isn't true at all, plenty of times people have disagreed with me on all sorts of things and I haven't accused them of being Matthvm. Cherry1000 and Matthvm3 are the only two accounts I've reported (or accused of being Matthvm) in 2.5 years, which is certainly less than the number of people I've had disagreements with during that timeframe. Stop exaggerating. You never answered my question as to how you knew about a discussion between myself and Lonewolf BC from over two years ago. Kinou (talk) 01:02, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users


Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 Clerk note: Per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Checkuser criteria and letters, we cannot honor a CheckUser request to prove their own innocence. MuZemike 18:10, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: I don't think it's a case to prove own's innocence. Kinou was only doing full disclosure of one's self so that the argument won't turn into pot calling kettle black. But I think it backfired. OhanaUnitedTalk page 20:50, 4 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Conclusions

I wasn't sure about this until I read: "Beside that I am not User:Matthvm3 nor User:Matthvm". It is obvious that both Matthvm3 and Cherry1000 are related (see the similarities of the edit summaries here and here, as well as the edits in general). Presuming that Matthvm (who is indefinitely blocked) = Matthvm3, it can be said with some certainty that Cherry1000 = all these users. As such, I have indefinitely blocked both accounts. PeterSymonds (talk) 21:05, 12 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.
15 May 2015[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


See archived SPI as well as Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Matthvm and Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Matthvm (2nd) and previously indeffed User:20060706 and User:20060715 with similar account naming to this editor.

The User:19960401 account was created 2006 July 15, the same day as the now blocked User:20060715 was created and the day before the now blocked User:20060706 account was created. There are numerous other previously blocked socks, but User:19960401 seems to have slipped through, while the Easternhfx account is just over a year old.

They all seem to have the same interests (Nova Scotia towns, particularly Halifax), and they've exhibited a fixation on Halifax vs. Halifax regional municipality.

In addition, for behavioral patterns, note the strange punctuation in the use of a space before a period:

Compare with:

And:

And User:Easternhfx does the same:

Given the plethora of blocked socks across several previous SPI cases, a check for sleepers might be warranted. Mojoworker (talk) 06:51, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  •  Clerk endorsed to compare 19960401 and Easternhfx to each other (Matthvm and his socks are  Stale). Similar punctuation errors, and similar comments on the same talk page is enough evidence. Vanjagenije (talk) 18:05, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Confirmed to each other:
19960401 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Easternhfx (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
  • While we can't technically compare the accounts to previous socks, the grammar and the heavy interest in Nova Scotia makes me confident the two accounts are sock of Matthvm. Mike V • Talk 18:40, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've also blocked Tantellion (talk · contribs) and Xfhnretsae (talk · contribs), as these accounts were created by Easternhfx. Mike V • Talk 18:44, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

01 September 2015[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

To date about 20 accounts controlled by the puppetmaster Matthvm have been blocked (here (August 2006), here (January 2007), here (July 2009), and here (May 2015)). Matthvm is fixated on nuances of municipal administration, especially with regard to the Halifax Regional Municipality and to nomenclature of neighbourhoods ("community" vs. "district" vs. "general service area" etc etc.) The behaviour of the above users resembles that of Matthvm. Another user made the same observation a couple months ago.

The last round of sockpuppets were banned in May 2015 while User:B3khrm emerged later the same month.

Additionally he has a longstanding interest in making stub articles for tiny communities, having made hundreds such articles under past accounts like Markhamman. This interest is reflected in the few contributions of B3khrm where he has reverted instances of stub articles being merged into articles for larger communities.

The grammar used by the above accounts is also in keeping with the other Matthvm accounts. The edit summaries are similar, for example the phrase "there are no cities in Nova Scotia" (use by blocked account, use by IP above) Thanks, Citobun (talk) 03:19, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

  • I've declined the CU request. Based on the archives, all the previous socks are stale.--Bbb23 (talk) 04:42, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Clerk note: @Mike V: Is there some data left from May to compare B3khrm to previous socks? Vanjagenije (talk) 09:30, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The following accounts are  Confirmed to each other:
B3khrm (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Levesme (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Ottawaresident (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Looking at the IPs from the checkuser logs show that they geolocate to a similar location. Based upon the behavior of the accounts I think it's reasonable to block them. I can't "confirm" them to the master account so I'll tag them accordingly. Mike V • Talk 13:29, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Matthvm/Archive&oldid=1079619202"