Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Anton503/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Tag-teaming on that one article they are all editing, article is promotional, likely paid, one of 'em removed the COI tag saying the article was neutrally worded and well referenced. Usedtobecool ☎️ 19:39, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Just wanted to point out that the username Arjunbastu (the original page creator) is fairly close to the name of one of the company founders (Arjun Bastola), so possible COI there. Sure looks like tag-teaming between Anton503 and Torycontrolla, but I haven't dug deep enough to find any clear evidence yet. My gut says either company members collaborating on an article or UPE. creffett (talk) 15:42, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * These accounts are technically on the border of ❌. Moving to open cue for behavioural investigation. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:31, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Blocked Tory on the basis of their response at the AFD, which strengthened the quality of the evidence against Arjun, so blocks all round. Cabayi (talk) 19:50, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Another one for the sock pile - brand-new account that's deleting AfD tags/protesting the AfD nomination of the article (Veniqa) that all of the above users have been working on. Loud quacking. creffett (talk) 17:17, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Actually, let's request CU - this is a blatantly obvious sock, but I suspect that this account's relationship to the others above will tell us a bit about how this group is operating, and I want to know if there are any sleepers out there. My reasoning, in short: if CU comes back positive to one of the above (if it does, my money is on Torycontrolla), then it's almost certainly meatpuppetry going on above. If CU comes back negative, then either these people have a solid meatpuppetry setup or they're good at obfuscating the relevant technical evidence, and regardless it tells us that CU will not be a great tool in evaluating this group. creffett (talk) 18:06, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Think this counts as evidence for the above too; clearly, they think it's clever to create new accounts to do new unsavoury things. They did it as an IP just before they created this account. Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:56, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * . The other accounts above are still, looks like different devices but they could all be in the same location. One is on what appears to be a corporate VPN, which is masking geolocation data. ST47 (talk) 18:18, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * . The other accounts above are still, looks like different devices but they could all be in the same location. One is on what appears to be a corporate VPN, which is masking geolocation data. ST47 (talk) 18:18, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * . The other accounts above are still, looks like different devices but they could all be in the same location. One is on what appears to be a corporate VPN, which is masking geolocation data. ST47 (talk) 18:18, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * . The other accounts above are still, looks like different devices but they could all be in the same location. One is on what appears to be a corporate VPN, which is masking geolocation data. ST47 (talk) 18:18, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
 * . The other accounts above are still, looks like different devices but they could all be in the same location. One is on what appears to be a corporate VPN, which is masking geolocation data. ST47 (talk) 18:18, 16 April 2020 (UTC)