Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bijun yang/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

, due to time of account creation, time and nature of first edit, nature of subsequent edits which looked a bit unusual in the same way. Maybe worth a CU look, given the long calendar time they have put into the entire process. Murph 9000 (talk) 22:48, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

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

I'm requesting that her first account be unblocked and I will emphasise the error she made. Thanks Victuallers (talk) 11:09, 5 May 2017 (UTC) I was wrong. I have discussed this with Bijun Yang. This is a false positive. Two new users are both working on the same article. Can you restore both accounts please. Victuallers (talk) 13:42, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * , you saying this should be opened back up? Primefac (talk) 22:41, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * No, they're not. This is being worked out outside the SPI, but not very quickly I'm afraid.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:25, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm not familiar with the procedure here, but we have two innocent newbies who are locked out of Wikipedia. They are not sockpuppets - I don't think anyone thinks they are now. Its nightime here, so I have to sleep. Be great if we could just reset these users back to where they were. Victuallers (talk) 00:05, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
 * There is a third below who seems to have made quite small edits and is a Loughborough student Victuallers (talk) 22:09, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
The two listed accounts + are, blocked, and tagged.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:23, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * This is a separate user from Loughborough and not a sockpuppet Victuallers (talk) 22:16, 6 May 2017 (UTC)