Jean-Francois Gariepy (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

26 February 2019

Suspected sockpuppets

• Excluzziver (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Nate Hooper (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Possible sockpuppets, more likely a meatpuppet incident. Most of this background info was uncovered by Doug Weller, in his writeup on the talk page for James Allsup. Jean-Francois Gariépy, the editor, appears to be the same person as the one who posted the Youtube video "The Wikipedia Problem". (side note: at the 44:40 mark of that video, he explains why "Jews had it easier in the concentration camps than Germans)

The accounts that edited the Allsup page had been dormant for some time, and only edited the Allsup page during the last few days, and nothing else. Ewen Douglas (talk) 18:18, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

• I deny having used any sort of Sockpuppet and I also deny having acted in any way that contradicts the Meatpupettry guidelines for Wikipedia. The edit that I've been proposing was accepted by every editor since I proposed removing a segment that was defamatory and claimed a YouTuber was engaged in Holocaust Denial while he wasn't. The fact that many other editors showed up is simply linked to the fact that this story was covered in social media and has raised awareness of the extent to which vandalism on Wikipedia, as well as political bias by existing editors, can be used to smear personnalities. Because there are a lot of fans of James Allsup who were offended by the smearing on his page, there was, in consequence, a lot of people interested in supporting my edit. The very person starting this investigation has now recognized that my edit was valid and that the statement removed was indeed unreliable. Jean-Francois Gariepy (talk) 20:07, 26 February 2019 (UTC) Furthermore, the claim by User:Ewen Douglas that jews had it easier in concentration camps is absolutely ridiculous and I have never stated this. He's clearly misrepresenting a statement I've made about Germans who were firebombed in their own village, not Germans who were in concentration camps. I will consider making a complaint of harassment from this individual who has made everything in his power to intimidate me into retracting or delaying my edit, which was finally accepted by higher level editors here. Jean-Francois Gariepy (talk) 20:12, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• I cannot speak for Excluzziver, but I can assure you that I am not a sock-puppet of Jean-Francois Gariepy. Evidence for this can be found in our edit history. Although Jean-Francois Gariepy has been inactive for some time, we've each had our accounts for many years and we tend to edit very different types of articles (I've never edited anything relating to neuroscience). As for the meat-puppet accusation, in full honesty, my attention to the article was raised by his original video, but he did not encourage anyone to join his side in the "edit war." I simply saw what I perceived to be a violation of Wikipedia's editorial standards and made my contributions. Surely that shouldn't be counted as meat-puppetry since that would mean that nobody could ever publicise their impressions of an article to a large audience without it occurring. Nate Hooper (talk) 00:20, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Response to Bbb23: Since it was Ewen who opened this sock-puppet case against us, I'd be lying if I said that I didn't find this turn of events to be humourous. However, I must remain principled, and say that I feel blocking him may be a little harsh in this case, given that his sock-puppet wasn't involved in the recent discussion at all. But I'm no expert on Wikipedia's policies, so I yield to your judgement. Nate Hooper (talk) 02:07, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Nate Hooper: I don't think the issue here is socking but WP:MEAT. @Jean-Francois Gariepy: it's obvious that you weren't being accused of comparing Jews in concentration camps with Germans in concentration camps, your video makes it clear that you were agreeing that Jews in concentration camps had it easier than some Germans... those living in cities being bombed. That came after you gave advice to your listeners on how to make racist statements in comments on your channel without getting your channel banned. Sort of a Lesson 101 on how your listeners can frame their hatred of Jews, blacks, gays, almost anyone different from them to make them more appealing, or at least less offensive, and to stay clear of being accused of hate speech. So far as I'm concerned, hate speech by any other name still stinks. Before the lesson you complained about persecution. So sad. Doug Weller talk 10:19, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

At this point it should appear clearly to the investigators that what we have is not a true sockpuppet, nor meatpuppet investigation, but rather we have editors with political preferences who are looking at punishing me for my differing views. I will note that I have made all efforts to keep personal disagreements out of the discussion, but these guys have kept coming back with these "you're a racist" unsupported accusations. I have nothing to add other than remark that these accusations do not relate at all to the subject of this investigation, which is being used as a platform for smearing me. Jean-Francois Gariepy (talk) 20:08, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

I have just blocked the filer, Ewen Douglas (talk · contribs · count), as a  Confirmed sock of Rockypedia (talk · contribs · count). I've put the status of the report back to open so the merits of the report may be evaluated.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:37, 27 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• I see no reason for this to remain open any longer. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 02:13, 3 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

10 September 2019

Suspected sockpuppets

• Erdmännle (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

This new account has made only one edit, to a DRN thread filed by the older account. The new edit,https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard&diff=prev&oldid=914938090&diffmode=source , purports to be a volunteer edit, perhaps in order to skew the DRN. Robert McClenon (talk) 11:36, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

My name is Jean-Francois Gariépy, I am a known biologist and YouTuber. I did not participate to any coordination with any of the accounts mentioned and I do not know who they are. Jean-Francois Gariepy (talk) 21:03, 12 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

• Erdmännle is  Unlikely/ Inconclusive. However, Erdmännle is  Confirmed to:
  • Hijadealgo (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
  • Tongtom (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Blocked without tags the three confirmed accounts.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:04, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
• Opened Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tongtom for the others and closed. Closing this one per the above. TheSandDoctor ^Talk 05:29, 14 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]