Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Attic Salt/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

I undid an edit by 141.131.2.3  in changing the Introduction page of Plasma (physics), to be accused by them of WP:OWN  on the Talk:Plasma (physics) and on my Talkpage here. .

They did not respond, however, another newly registered editor Attic Salt has now trying to engage others to reinforce a similar change to this here, in which I responded here.

Yet, Attic Salt did not respond, but instead opened another section requesting "Request for comment" as an rfc.

Attic Salt is seemingly using this to make change and is supported this with the IP 141.131.2.3 to bolster consensus from their own POV, and it looks suspicious behaviour that looks like socking.

I have already posted this question to Attic Salt here, and on the Talk:Plasma (physics).

Thanks. Arianewiki1 (talk) 23:21, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * That IP is an external access point for Cirrus Logic; it could represent a large number of individuals. In any case even if someone who had edited from that IP created a user account I don't see any indication of a violation of WP:ILLEGIT. VQuakr (talk) 01:08, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
❌. Please close this. Doug Weller talk 19:29, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  16:53, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Attic Salt is an editor who has had their own previous sockpuppet investigation recently. Attic Salt was created just a few weeks ago, and started editing like a pro from the beginning. They had been accused of misrepresenting an IP, and ultimately they implied that they had been dually editing as an IP (and as you see above, their recent sockpuppet investigation addressed them potentially using the IP malfeasantly). Now Attic Salt has been having difficulty pushing through massive changes to the New York City article, many of which I have found bizarre and suspicious, as well as shorter ones with gravitas like this, interspersed with some perfectly reasonable edits. Enter ReeceTheHawk, who was created on 1 November 2017, less than two weeks ago but who also edits like a pro. The piece de resistance comes here, as ReeceTheHawk sets the stage for Attic Salt to controversially delete thousands of bytes just minutes later, with Attic Salt using the dubious template created by ReeceTheHawk to do their dirty work. I should have actually filed this investigation immediately when I realized this nearly 24 hours ago, because both accounts have gone on to make many more subsequent edits since then. Castncoot (talk) 03:36, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

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

Umm, I believe Castncoot should have notified me about this on my talk page. I am not a sockpuppet. But, because of Castncoot's suspicion, I am forced to say more than I would like: My privacy is important to me, and to protect it, I have, in the past, used other accounts, but never simultaneously. My Attic Salt account is the only one I am using, and I do not edit as an IP (though, like everyone else I was, once, an IP editor). All of this is consistent with the rules of Wikipedia:. That Castncoot is upset about my editing the article on New York City is more reflective of his/her feeling of ownership than any coincidental agreement I briefly had with ReeceTheHawk. I will now return to editing. Thank you, Attic Salt (talk) 17:38, 19 November 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Given largely divergent interests and generally very little overlap between these two, I'm inclined to say that they are not the same person. Sir Sputnik (talk) 18:10, 26 November 2017 (UTC)