Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Josefritz

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Veghead (talk | contribs) at 14:01, 10 December 2010 (→08 December 2010). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

– This SPI case is open.

Josefritz

Josefritz (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Populated account categories: confirmed
08 December 2010
Suspected sockpuppets

Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"

These four (yes, I'm counting right) users all came to my talk page within the past week to insist that I restore the deleted page Palda Records. Normally this wouldn't set off too many alarms, especially if this was a recent deletion and the current subject of some local/regional/national news thing. However, that's quite opposite of the actual case here. The article in question was about a record label that as I understand, existed in the 40's and 50's but has since ceased to be. Additionally, I deleted the article in April of 2008.

Josefritz has apparently been harassing the user who originally tagged the article for A7 (two and a half years ago) for some time now and has made a number of personal attacks.

The first IP address listed, 67.200.59.43, is confirmed to be Veghead due to this edit (secure link, sorry if you don't use it). The rest of these seem pretty duckish. I'd do all this myself and probably with checkuser too, but I am clearly involved and (as I said) the socking seems fairly obvious at first glance. Hersfold (t/a/c) 19:36, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

While these are all very old accounts, Josefritz and GrizzlyX were created within 5 days of each other in 2006. Veghead has no log entry, so was created before September 2005. Both IP addresses geolocate to the same city in Pennsylvania, one appears to be a business IP. Hersfold (t/a/c) 20:50, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've now (very belatedly, sorry) notified the involved users of this case. I have not notified the IPs just in case they're dynamically shared. Hersfold (t/a/c) 23:24, 8 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here is a repost of my comments on this matter from Hersfold's talk pageveghead (talk) 15:36, 9 December 2010 (UTC):[reply]
Hersfold. I, Mr Fritz and the other users are all friends who work at the same place. We wrote this from work. By all means complain to our boss about us misusing company machines during the day if it makes you happy. However, that is what we did when Mr Fritz told us of his bad experiences with Wikipedia. As supporters (financially as well as in spirit) of Wikipedia, we defended Wikipedia. When we saw the case study about which he was complaining, we were shocked that anyone (ie you) could be such a vandal as to delete such a clearly valid article. I still am. As we are working in the same place, we appear to come from the same IP address, because we are behind a NAT address like that vast majority of people on the Internet these days. Assuming that people with the same IP address are the same person is, in 2010, the act of a moron.
If you wish to make sockpuppet allegations, please do, but be warned: if you had done any research at all (like examining and comparing our histories) before resorting to threats, you would have held back: you are wrong. We are different people. So, you have a choice:
  • Continue along your anti-social, threatening path and maintain we are one person sock-puppeting. I can't speak for my colleagues, but I can tell you I am quite tenacious when I've been abused, for example in the way that you have.
  • Get a clue and realise you are out of order on this one, then maybe talk to us with out trying to rattle your limp sabre of wikipedianess at us. No-one will be impressed.
We have a genuine gripe. We also hold similar views about many things; "deletionism" is just one.
Play nice! veghead (talk) 01:42, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Update: Your use of the phrase "the lot of you" tends to injure your case :) veghead (talk) 01:42, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You could really use a much more civil tone, sir. If you are correct, which by the way a checkuser can verify if needed, then your statement above is an admission of meatpuppetry, which is often handled the same way as sockpuppetry. If you're not simply blocked for incivility first. Hersfold (t/a/c) 04:25, 10 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You speak of tone when by your actions you have exercised power against innocent users rather than choosing to address their complaints first. In terms of behaviour, your Tone is arguably worse. As regards meat-puppetry - that is a different accusation. One of the criteria would be that others were asked or persuaded to get involved. That is not the case. The irony here is that this whole business started because we were trying to persuade Mr Fritz that Wikipedia is not the unfair realm of power-crazed bureaucratic deletionist vandals he percevied it to be, in doing so it seems we have, thanks to your blunt actions, proved ourselves wrong and Mr Fritz was right. You have to understand that I genuinely care(d) about Wikipedia. If this ridiculous exercise of your limited powers continues then the worst possible outcome is that my account gets banned/deleted. Wikipedia will have lost yet another supporter - how proud it must make you feel. If only you put as much effort info genuinely improving the quality of the site rather than trying to act as some law enforcer and content remover. Shame on you.


Comments by other users

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

So, this is the first I've heard about this sockpuppet business, but I assure you I'm not JoseFritz. We were having a discussion at work and the topic of Palda Records came up. Jose said he'd made a page here, but it had been deleted. I was surprised given how involved they had been with The Mummers, and guys like Eddie Burns. A little research into restoring pages, and it is suggested that if other users feel it is notable, then they should post asking to have it restored. Although, I'm kind of nervous about doing that now. Just because a record company existed in the past and doesn't exist now doesn't make them less notable, particularly to a Philadelphian. (see http://www.spaceagepop.com/millerdl.htm) I'm no sockpuppet, I'm just proud of the local heritage. Bear (talk) 04:15, 9 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Josefritz&oldid=401617137"