Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/AdamTayl/Archive

02 October 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

User:AHugeHolbyandCasualtyFan appeared on the scene to continue disruptive work carried out previously under AdamTayl. Cibrennan was the original new account but activity very quickly switched to AHHaCF. The user was reported to ANI after this edit and othter insulting edit summaries - The user insulted editors who reected his constant unsourced edits, the new accounts appeared on Holby City (series 17) hours later - all mobile or similar style edit summaries. I know damn well this editor thinks they are being clever creating a new account, they are fairly new to this, so probably were not aware of a SPI. But a checkuser is so likely to drag more up, it would be interesting IMO. Aside from this quacking quack - there must be some sleeper accounts just waiting on the sidelines with this angry individual.  Rain  the 1  23:58, 2 October 2014 (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
I've reviewed the contributions and I'm sure there is a connection between AdamTayl and AHugeHolbyandCasualtyFan. I added Adamtaylor345, as this user shows similar contributions and edit summaries as AdamTayl. I believe a checkuser will help clean out the sock drawer. Mike V •  Talk  04:38, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
 * and are basically ✅. The other two are  to . Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:34, 7 October 2014 (UTC)


 * I've blocked the master account for one week and blocked AHugeHolbyandCasualtyFan and Adamtaylor345 indefinitely as socks. As the technical evidence isn't concrete, I don't feel the behavioral evidence of Cibrennan is strong enough to block right now. I would suggest keeping an eye on the account and see how things progress. Mike V  •  Talk  17:43, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

12 October 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

As with two previous socks User:Adamtaylor345 and User:AHugeHolbyandCasualtyFan, the edits are to Holby City (series 17), Casualty (series 29) and other similar articles. The edit summaries are a match and look the same. There is also a mix of mobile edits without edit summaries which matches. The account also came into action on 7 October 2014. The block date of the previous socks. I reported last time. They came to my attention after I logged on to find that they have thanked my edits. So they are baiting - obviously want to be caught. Rain  the 1  21:44, 12 October 2014 (UTC)  Rain   the 1  21:44, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

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

I suspect 86.164.22.186 is also the same user, the articles edited and the edit summaries, some uncivil, are similar. AdamTayl, SilverKnight055 & the IP. - JuneGloom    Talk  23:05, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I've blocked the sock and gave the master account a 1 month block. The next block is likely to be indefinite. Mike V  •  Talk  04:06, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

12 January 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Edit summaries echo User:AdamTayl, User:SilverKnight055 etc. Edits focus around Casualty (series 29), Holby City (series 17) etc. This account became active when the original blocked sock account became active again and the user offered an apology for socking and personal attacks.

HOWEVER I observed this conversation on a talk page where the user was editing under an IP address and plays ignorant as to why they are editing on multiple IP addresses. While blocked, AdamTayl accessed IP hopping aids to work around the block. User:TheLostWonderer became active when User:JuneGloom07 highlighted via my talk page (User talk:Raintheone), to AdamTayl that she had observed him sockpuppeting once more. It was met with no response but this new account sprung up editing in all the old familiar places. So I suggest the clear thought of this user, was that they did not want to be pulled over for sockpuppetry once again so they created this new account. I think a checkuser is needed here to pull out any sleepers. IP hopping and these games suggest the need for more accounts when they are caught out. Rain  the 1  23:31, 12 January 2015 (UTC)  Rain   the 1  23:31, 12 January 2015 (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
. There's enough evidence to warrant a CU, although more evidence and more support for some of the statements would be helpful, e.g., the IP-hopping, the edit summary similarities. Also, the consequences of a sock puppetry finding are severe with respect to the master as this time they would be indeffed. I don't see any obvious evidence that there might be sleepers.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:22, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
 * and are ✅ as .-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots  22:57, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Indeffed, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:36, 26 January 2015 (UTC)