The edit war on the Wikipedia article on John Lott has continued. Lott has now tried changing the page to his preferred version almost 50 times. The trouble he has encountered is that since his changes are so unreasonable at least half a dozen people have been undoing them. So, if you were Lott and it looked like you were outnumbered, what would you do? Yes that's right, create an army of sock puppets: Timewarp, Alt37, Purtilo, Sniper1, Serinity, Henry1776, Stotts and Gordinier.
These accounts have just been created and pretty well all they have done there is change the page into Lott's favoured version.
You really have to wander how Lott keeps so many fake identities straight.
More like this
John Lott keeps trying to use sock puppets to scrub his wikipedia page of criticism. Unfortunately other wikipedia users undo his changes, he makes them again and he gets into an edit war. He's used his socks to try to alter the page many many times. (See round 1 round 2 round 3).
This…
Last year an anonymous person from the American Enterprise Institute
repeatedly tried and failed to remove all
criticism of Lott from hiswikipedia page. He
eventually admitted to being
Lott and claimed
that the "posting contains a huge number of inaccuracies and outright
lies".
Over the past few…
[Update: June 6th: Chase-Me has definitely been a very naughty boy indeed. The only question is whether he'll hang on to his sysop bit.]
By popular request. And I've not seen anyone else wiki-literate discussing this, so I will (update: Wikipedia sockpuppetry is a problem, but baseless accusations…
After accidentally proving that he was using a sock on Wikipedia, Fumento is back for more. I think that putting a "(sic)" after misspellings is rather petty, but since Fumento does it when he quotes others, I've yielded to temptation and sicced all over his many spelling mistakes. Fumento begins…
Characteristic to all is the goal common to all of these of reverting the entire article to a single, whitewashing version from a month or two back without discussion of individual disagreements; plus of course, the blanket squeal of how nobody else wants to discuss the individual edits. I say this having wasted the better part of an evening itemizing my disagreements with several of the proposed changes one by one in hops of engendering some sort of discussion, only to receive the blanket and mystifying response that "Lambert is a proven liar".
I'm not sure Lott does keep these things straight. If you look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Gordinier you see a response by 24.107.50.131. Does that number fit into your IP tracking?
24.107.50.131 tracks to Missouri, so Gordinier might not be him. Or Lott takes care to make edits whenever he is out of town to try to muddy the waters.
Can we call it a sock drawer now?