Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/360nosc/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets

 * ( original case name)


 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

See Articles for deletion/Evan Nied. Ocean11s created the article Evan Nied, and voted in favour of its retention. The other three have made one edit each, and all to that AfD. I'm not totally convinced that Ocean is the sockpuppeteer (bolded keep instead of just keep) so I'll leave that up to the patrolling admin, but the other three should be pretty open-and-shut cases. Sdrqaz (talk) 21:31, 16 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks and  for the hard work. Sdrqaz (talk) 22:54, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Obvious socking (, note the formatting). There's also, see . It's ducky, but I'm not entirely sure about their relationship to the master, so , please check the socks against the master and look for sleepers. Thanks and best, Blablubbs&#124;talk 22:08, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * There are two sets of edits here. Group 1 ✅ to each other:


 * Group 2 ✅ to each other:


 * I would call the two groups as being very from a technical standpoint. Note  is the oldest account.--  Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 22:52, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Moved to the oldest account. This is clearly abusive socking given the votestacking and blatant promotion. – please indef the lot. Thanks and best,  Blablubbs&#124;talk 23:02, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Blocked & tagged. I didn't bother differentiating group 2 when tagging. Back to .  Cabayi (talk) 09:16, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Sock !votes already axed, case already moved, closing. Blablubbs&#124;talk 09:23, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

A day or two before Draft:Evan Nied was about to be deleted, CSD G13, Dondaestaskanye? shows up to edit the article and go to AFC Help Desk to argue that the draft shouldn't have been rejected. This behavior is in line with other 360nosc's socks. Whether it is a sockpuppet or meat puppet, I can't be sure but there are an awful lot of people who seem to want this teenager to have a Wikipedia article. Liz Read! Talk! 03:33, 9 October 2021 (UTC) Liz Read! Talk! 03:33, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
 
 * - Since the only people to ever have been interested in this article are socks, I'm pretty confident that this is another one, and while the archive is stale, I think a sleeper check is in order since they were found to be running about a dozen accounts the last time around. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 04:14, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 16:24, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the check. It seems rather unlikely that an unconnected user would stumble upon this non-notable draft and edit it extensively, using similar edit summaries to previous socks: . There's also an interesting juvenile pattern going on with the usernames... "360 no scope", "poop" and "69", and now Kanye. I'm confident this is yet another socking attempt to try to get this article published, so - please indef Dondaestaskanye?.  Spicy (talk) 18:31, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
 * , closing. --Blablubbs (talk) 20:42, 9 October 2021 (UTC)