Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bapi Murmu/Archive

30 September 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

The usernames are very similar, and the article Santali cinema by was accepted by, who has not done any other reviews at AfC. Also, the pages they edit are extremely similar. Jackmcbarn (talk) 21:38, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Is there a reason you blocked Bapi Murmu and not Sbmurmu09? Jackmcbarn (talk) 01:53, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I blocked the newer account since it was a sock. Do you think the master has been disruptive? I'm not necessarily against blocking him. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:55, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Isn't the act of socking itself worth a (temporary, 1 or 2 weeks) block on the master, without regard to other disruption? Jackmcbarn (talk) 02:23, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I could see the merit in doing it either way, actually. Anyone want to give a second opinion? Mark Arsten (talk) 05:42, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I generally block 1 week at least for sock blocks, unless there is a good-faith explanation that might convince me otherwise. --Rschen7754 10:18, 11 October 2013 (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

 * Bapi Murmu and Sbmurmu09 are as they have edited from same PC settings and IP ranges. This would be ✅ in many other cases, but the IP ranges are too busy for saying that. Thus any search for sleepers must be accompanied by behavioral evidence. Materialscientist (talk) 06:36, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Blocked Bapi Murmu indef. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:48, 2 October 2013 (UTC)