Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/CKJJ99/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Entirely obvious WP:DUCK given both the tied articles (one non-notable subject) and also the shared name, both contributions summaries are also the same. Recent attempt by another user to understand our policies yielded no results. SwisterTwister  talk  05:21, 1 June 2017 (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

 * Sock indeffed, master blocked for 3 days. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  14:16, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

on. Recent edits seem to be quite strongly WP:NOTHERE, WP:NOTGETTINGIT, or both. Worth a CU to check for additional socks? Murph 9000 (talk) 10:56, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
 * There's also an absurd WP:NLT violation of "Authorities have been contacted." in VanishedUserCK's edit summary.  Murph 9000  (talk) 11:04, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

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


 * To me at least, 'authorities have been notified' seems like they called the police, which is far-fetched, but not a legal threat. Seems like WP:DENY is applicable. Dat GuyTalkContribs 11:26, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, I interpret it as roughly "I've filed a complaint with the police" (or equivalent), but I do consider that to be a legal threat. The policy is not limited to only threats of civil legal action.  Threats of criminal legal action are just as serious a problem (with the same potentially chilling effects on editors), although normally do have more checks and balances in place before they can proceed (i.e. other than costly private prosecutions, the authorities typically have to be convinced that there's a public interest and evidence to support a prosecution).  Or is there a consensus that NLT only applies to civil cases?   Murph 9000  (talk) 11:36, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * All blocked and tagged. Talk page access removed. Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  15:32, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

I just blocked for obvious duck behavior and saw this account editing similar pages as well (see Killeroo, Killeroo (comics). I think that the behavioral case is a bit less airtight here, so I'd like to get a CU to look into this. signed,Rosguill talk 22:50, 8 May 2020 (UTC) signed,Rosguill talk 22:50, 8 May 2020 (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

 * at best. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:28, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
 * In that case I think we can close this with no action, given that this editor has not been particularly active. If they continue to make duck edits in the future this can be revisted. signed,Rosguill talk 00:50, 9 May 2020 (UTC)