Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Asclsmo/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Edits on Draft:American Society for Clinical Laboratory Science - Missouri. Both accounts have only edited the draft.

The suspected sockmaster Asclsmo created the draft at 05:13, submits the draft at 05:18. I declined the draft for reasons of being undersourced and reading like an advertisement (diff). I then tagged the draft with some cleanup tags (diff), as the suspected sockmaster was suspected non-disclosed paid. I had also posted on their talk page about this before I started to review the draft (diff). 10 mins after my last edit, the suspected sockpuppet account is created (log). 40 mins later the account makes its first edit to expand the draft hugely (potentially taking ~30 mins, as they even themselves said it was Massive changes (in their edit summary)) (diff). Removes Undisclosed paid tag (diff). Resubmits after about 30 mins of editing over several edits (diff). The draft is then declined again (diff). The account then makes two further edits to the draft, expanding it once again (mostly citations) 1 and 2. Main reasoning these accounts are connected is that they both only made edits to the draft and both wrote in promotional ways. Also the second account was created and edited the draft, after I noted using Undisclosed paid that it was edited by someone close to the subject (and potentially being paid). I think this is abusive (if proven to be connected) as I had tagged the article with undisclosed paid and after the major first edit, the suspected sockpuppet removed this, potentially in an attempt to hide any connection between the draft's creator/editor and the subject. Requesting Check User to get definite evidence. If more behavioural evidence is needed, give me a ping and I'll get on it. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me &#124; my contributions 23:25, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * , I am writing it. Give me time. The Twinkle box is small and I prefer to edit on the page. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me &#124; my contributions 23:40, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
 * , thanks for the tip. I'll use that in the future. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me &#124; my contributions 23:43, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Evidence is required in SPI cases, yet I see none above? -- The SandDoctor Talk 23:38, 21 April 2019 (UTC)
 * No problem. I tend to write out reports using the form at WP:SPI as it is far easier and then all complete by the time you submit. -- The SandDoctor Talk 23:42, 21 April 2019 (UTC)


 * CU comment:  and  are ✅ to be technically indistinguishable. Given the similarity of their edits, they are almost guaranteed to be socks.  Risker (talk) 02:06, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Cabayi (talk) 09:57, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * - Please block the master for 3 days & indef the sock. Cabayi (talk) 09:58, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * . GABgab 13:36, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Nothing further to do here, closing. The SandDoctor  Talk 15:04, 22 April 2019 (UTC)