Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Chaseline/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets
This WP:SPA's first edit is at Talk:Storm Daniel where they are already referring to WP:CONTENTSPLIT,. It is not clear who they might be a sock of, but this is absolutely not typical for a new user. All their other edits are similarly concentrated around this very particular subject. No earlier history disclosed.Jasper Deng (talk) 10:23, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Comments by other users

 * Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


 * I added the IP above since its only edit was modifying a comment that it claimed was made by itself (Jsfigura). I would also second that this person's familiarity with policies seems too great for a brand-new editor. New editors usually don't start out by participating in talk page discussions and AfDs. Noah, AATalk 16:15, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm frustrated by this conversation and I don't believe I need to explain my edits, but I suppose I will. I started out commenting on the talk page discussion because I was searching for a Derna Dam Collapse article as a reader, and didn't find one. I thought the coverage of the catastrophe within the Storm Daniel article was poorly structured. In the spirit of Be bold I decided to contribute to the discussion and to edit the standalone Derna Dam article once another user created it. Jsfigura (talk) 21:04, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
 * The IP was never what I wanted to compare with; that was added by Noah. I was hoping a master could be found for the account (only). Please reconsider your decision to decline CU; unusual behavior for a new user has always been considered grounds to check.--Jasper Deng (talk) 18:08, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi. I'm am a person, and not a sockpuppet. I took the time to familiarize myself with the guidance to editors before commenting, particularly because the Derna Dam disagreement has some procedural nuance. This weekend was the first time I contributed to Wikipedia. I suppose I could consider it flattering that people consider my comments good enough to accuse me of being a sockpuppet. This experience was quite frustrating - being bitten by two users seemingly because of a run-of-the-mill disagreement about an article split and because my first contributions were high quality. Thank you for swiftly closing this case. Jsfigura (talk) 21:05, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - this is probably just the user editing logged out (possibly by accident?) — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 17:33, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
 * My mistake — I've set this back to pending — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 18:11, 20 September 2023 (UTC)


 * I agree that it's very unusual behaviour for a new account, but there is no other activity on their IP they are using, or on its immediate range. Absent any proposed older master to compare against behaviourally, I'm closing this without further action.  Girth Summit  (blether)  18:45, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
I originally filed a standalone case because of the shear fishiness of filing a bad-faith SPI on their first edit, with my original rationale being "This user's first (and as of this writing, only) edit is to file a bad-faith SPI against . New users do not typically file SPI's. I don't know who this is a sock of but CheckUser should help." Now they have commented on that SPI referring to this case, with both users doing not-new-user things on their first edits. New users do not typically immediately refer to older cases. I am therefore re-filing the case under Jsfigura. Jasper Deng (talk) 21:34, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Adding Jasper Oeng, an impersonation attempt against me, for the timing and jumping right into Wikipedia processes a new user does not normally know of.--Jasper Deng (talk) 21:43, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm not feeling well today and have to see this crap? I feel absolutely disrespected by an allegation that says this account is a sockpuppet of ANY account, let alone User:Andrew5 who I have CONTINOUSLY tried to remove from Wikipedia. This is my first and only account on Wikipedia and it will ALWAYS be that way because I don't want, nor do I need more than one account. Additionally, I'm currently editing articles that I'm interested in right now and there is nothing wrong with that, so to say that my patterns were similar to how someone else is editing is appalling to me. Please find whoever this is because I'm VERY pissed off by this. Chess  Eric  18:39, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Comments by other users

 * Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
 * Andrew5 is another possibility. Brand-new account knowing about navigating Wikipedia policy and starting with adversarial behavior right off the bat. TornadoLGS (talk) 21:40, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Impersonation and move/redirect vandalism are characteristic of, who may be connected to Kingshowman. TornadoLGS (talk) 21:47, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * a check on Chaseline and Jasper Oeng. MarioGom (talk) 09:47, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Chaseline and Jasper Oeng are ✅ to each other. There is not enough evidence to confirm a master, but technical and behavioural details suggest they may be BuickCenturyDriver. for Jsfigura due to lack of evidence - in fact I can't see any good reason why this report is here nor why they were being investigated in the first place. There have been some merges and so maybe the history isn't showing the full story, but as far as I can tell no evidence has been provided to suggest sockpuppetry by Jsfigura other than that they're a new user, and that is not sufficient grounds for a sockpuppetry investigation. Checkusers will not investigate a new account just because they're a new account - we are forbidden by policy from doing so. An SPI filer must provide evidence that a new account is behaving similarly to a specific older account, and in situations where it's not obvious you must also explain how they are violating the sockpuppetry policy. Then and only then will a checkuser investigate. Reporting Chaseline for immediately filing meritless admin reports would merit an investigation in my opinion (because there are many long-term trolls who only do this) but I have no idea how Jsfigura got tied up in this, and after I move this report to the correct location I am going to delete all of the Jsfigura filings. Thank you. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:31, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * please note this case was moved without redirection per my comment above. sorry you were falsely accused of wrongdoing. There was no merit to the bad faith report against you, the report has been removed as far as we are permitted by policy, and no investigation has occurred. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:38, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I saw. Thank you! BTW, I’m still not feeling well. LOL! Chess  Eric  02:16, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks. . MarioGom (talk) 15:17, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
 * When making that move you made the case confusing by implying that the IP was a suspected sock of Chaseline when it belonged to Jsfigura. Could you fix that by any chance, or love the archive back to the correct place (or delete it) to avoid confusion? Thanks! 72.68.134.26 (talk) 19:20, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Please make sure someone sees the above comment prior to archival. 72.68.134.26 (talk) 20:12, 6 November 2023 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
This user's first (and as of this writing, only) edit is to file a bad-faith SPI against. New users do not typically file SPI's. I don't know who this is a sock of but CheckUser should help. Jasper Deng (talk) 21:25, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
 * ( original case name)

Comments by other users

 * Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
 * The lack of a specific sock master should lead to instant dismissal, similar to Sockpuppet investigations/Jsfigura.--Chaseline (talk) 21:27, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
 * No, it will not. A CheckUser is going to be run. In fact, this comment suggests you are the same user as them so now I am merging this case into theirs.--Jasper Deng (talk) 21:29, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm not even feeling well today, and I've got to deal with this? I must say that this is probably the most disrespected I've EVER felt on Wikipedia. I've seen to it to get rid of SEVERAL sockpuppets on Wikipedia, so what makes you think that I'M one of them? I hope your accusation to make me upset made you satisfied because I don't think you'll ever get the chance to do that again. As for me, I'm going to continue to make the good faith edits that I want to make on this account, which is the only account that I will EVER have on here.  Chess  Eric  22:26, 29 October 2023 (UTC)


 * I have re-filed this case at Sockpuppet investigations/Jsfigura. This case should be merged into/redirected there. I'm not doing it myself lest I break the bot.--Jasper Deng (talk) 21:35, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll comment here that actions for one of the socks reported at the Jsfigura casepage (as I say on that page) shows a possible match for Kingshowman/Typhoon Namer 325. TornadoLGS (talk) 03:26, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * See above — TheresNoTime (talk • they/them) 14:12, 31 October 2023 (UTC)