Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cresix/Archive

02 January 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

I highly suspect 74.185.26.228 of being User:Cresix. If in fact the same person is operating both the IP and the account then there are clear acts of finagling going on. One such example is here where the IP instates his vote in a poll, followed by an extensive argument supporting a decision to merge:. A day later, user Cresix just so happens to join the same poll, also instating the exact same vote into the poll, as shown here. This is combined with a different argument that essentially says and argues the same thing as the IP. Not to be confused, one of the user's comments in the previous link reads "See my comments above in contesting the merge"; he is referring to this earlier edit, not the edit made by the IP user, as the user claims no relation to the IP (see below).

The IP address and the Cresix account are found editing on an entirely different article quite awhile later, both making a series of similar edits. Here's Cresix's edits on the Mabel Simmons article, basically adding citation tags to specifically everything I've added:, , , and. Here are the IP's edits the following day, sticking citation tags specifically to information I've added:. Mind you, Cresix has shown difficult behavior on the article in the past with regards to editing and sourcing, as shown here: here.

Both the IP and the account user(s) have denied being the same person and ever even hearing of each other, as show here and here, despite having made similar edits and similar votes within the same time period on different wikipedia articles.

As a last note, I am IP address user: 173.0.254.226 and am best reached at the talkpage of that account as I do most of my editing under my IP address, turning to accounts to use some of the features of wikipedia that require users to have accounts. Thank you! AmericanDad86 (talk) 15:31, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' Beyond the fact that this is an insipid and baseless attempt by 74.185.26.228 (AKA AmericanDad86) to harass someone who has done nothing more than have a content dispute with him, isn't there some standard (if no more than a sense of decency) that an editor be informed about a sock investigation against him? No surprise, however, that 74.185.26.228/AmericanDad86 was conveniently ignorant of that expectation of fairness among Wikipedians. If someone had bothered telling me about this sock report, I would have offered to assist in any way possible, but of course 74.185.26.228/AmericanDad8 knew that there was no substance to the report, so he resorted to underhanded but failed attempts at secrecy to avoid someone calling his bluff. I also find it revealing that AmericanDad86 didn't acknowledge on his talk page that he also edits anonymously until one day before he made this report. Cresix (talk) 03:13, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Checkusers will not disclose the connection between an IP and an account per the privacy policy. This case will have to be decided based on behavior alone. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:05, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Looking at behavior, I do not see anything that definitively links these two editors, except perhaps agreeing on some points. Closing. Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;  Join WER 14:54, 7 January 2013 (UTC)

10 May 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Dpanel created his account on 9 June 2012 and immediately bluelinked his userpage and talkpage. He then didn't do much for a month.

However, on 22 August 2012, Cresix, Dpanel, and 65.51.152.194 all edit war against on Everybody Dies (House).

On 9 May 2013 (yesterday), Cresix and Dpanel edit war against on Hugh Jackman.

Finally, big oopsie.

He claims no knowledge of the other account. Reaper Eternal (talk) 13:39, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

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

Funny! I had similar strong suspicions with regards to this user and sockpuppetry back when we crossed paths very early on this past January. We were engaged in an editing dispute when I realized I was suddenly disputing against a second party who came out of absolutely nowhere. Mind you, this second party in question wasn't trying to solve our dispute but doing exactly what Cresix was doing which was: posting after literally every sentence of an article when there was already a large tag at the very top of the page that read this article needs further sources.

The editing was entirely disruptive. Because of the similar disruptive editing between Cresix and the second party account, I decided to investigate and look into the editing histories of both users. Sure enough, they'd both made similar edits on the same pages. And I also found that the accounts had helped each other out in various circumstances. One case involved voting the same way in a poll, stating essentially the same thing and agreeing with each other. Cresix denied knowing anything at all about the alternate account.

Chances are the user is abusing sockpuppets in yet another case being complained about by other users now as well. But good luck, however, because when I tried bringing this to the attention of checkusers, one came here and simply refused to reveal if the accounts were both made by Cresix. And then the discussion was closed like that. AmericanDad86 (talk) 14:24, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * , borderline ✅. . -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  14:16, 10 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Based on the combination of rather obvious behavior and checkuser results, I am blocking Cresix for a week for using a sockpuppet to circumvent 3RR. Closing. Reaper Eternal (talk) 14:26, 10 May 2013 (UTC)