Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Burberryjzk89/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets
I have reason to believe that these two accounts are the same person because of their very similar !votes at Articles for deletion/Michael Maigeri Ede. Both have written conforms to WP: SIGCOV and notability fall(s) under in their comments and both have put a full stop after writing 'keep'. I note that Burberry has !voted in other AfDs and also written a user page but I think that that's merely just a ploy to distract from the sockpuppetry. It's quite clear that these accounts were created to vote stack at this AfD.

I am requesting CU because I believe that some of the other SPA accounts in this AfD might be linked and the user may have created other accounts that are lying in wait. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:36, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

There may be some overlap with Sockpuppet investigations/Bookwormank as they are also pushing the same person - Michael Maigeri Ede. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 05:41, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Hard to tell what's going on here, but WP:UPE is certainly a possibility, beyond just simple meatpuppetry. --Hipal (talk) 20:41, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment. There are several unusual comments by and  at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Michael Maigeri Ede in support of the keep arguments made by  and . I suspect that  and  and the anon ip 111.119.177.11 may all be connected in some way to . Whether that is through sock puppetry, meatpuppetry, canvasing, or some sort of paid editing connection I can't say for sure.4meter4 (talk) 21:25, 28 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Notice Stop wasting your time checking whatsoever you want to check. I have no connection with anyone here. Notorious Hipal happens to have conflict with Katobara on one article which I just check it, that's why he is busy following his/her footstep to Katobara's down fall on Wikipedia. Please check this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Naveen_Jain. Notorious Hipal maybe under go UPE. My main reason why I say so is that why does Hipal want the article to stay? Katobara only commented for delete, from that he has been sending him unfruitful message on his/her talk page, check it and see. Generating suck puppet at this time will bring no significant but exhaust of time and it is a cumulated pain of Katobara that notorious Hipal want to revenge. Gartuwaso (talk) 05:56, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the evidence against you both. --Hipal (talk) 16:45, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
 * The editor probably meant to link the subsequent AfD, which was overturned at: Deletion review/Log/2022 February 24. I've planned on taking it to COIN, after seeing if situations like this one come up. --Hipal (talk) 00:57, 2 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Comment. The newly created account which also voted keep at Articles for deletion/Michael Maigeri Ede as the account’s only edit, may also be a sock or canvased SPA account.4meter4 (talk) 20:25, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I'm closing this without action. The two named accounts are technically ❌ to one another, and while I can't rule out off-wiki coordination, there's not enough on-going disruption to block anyone over. The AfD discussion has been closed, and the article deleted, I suspect the disruption is over for now.  Girth Summit  (blether)  16:49, 3 July 2022 (UTC)