Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Emmy Expert/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Possible sock of user previous blocked for similar behavior; mass image "updates", as with Emmy Expert, and to many of the same articles. New images are not necessarily more recent, however, which somewhat contradicts Emmy Expert's m.o. — TAnthonyTalk 16:21, 25 August 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

 * - We can't connect named accounts and IPs using CU, sorry. GABgab 17:01, 25 August 2017 (UTC)
 * There's too much crossover for it to be a coincidence. Both Emmy Expert and the IP editor blocked two weeks. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:27, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Like Emmy Expert, this new account is changing/"updating" images on articles related to actors and film accolades lists. I think you can see from their contribs that the two accounts are performing similar edits, but it was these changes on the Andrew Robinson (Neighbours) article that captured my attention: Emmy Expert and The Noire Kid. Updating an image the moment a more recent one becomes available or is changed in the subject's infobox. If the behaviour isn't that obvious, please let me know and I'll provide more diffs. JuneGloom07 Talk  22:04, 11 February 2018 (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

 * . NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 15:38, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

This IP is up to the same Emmy Expert behavior, updating images in multiple articles with no purpose or explanation — TAnthonyTalk 14:31, 19 March 2018 (UTC)
 * FYI this IP was previously blocked in October 2017 for 48 hours for this behavior.— TAnthonyTalk 22:32, 19 March 2018 (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
IP edits too old. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 10:51, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Same editing behavior (unnecessary and persistent replacement of Commons images of celebrities with "more resent" versions, with no justification or edit summary) — TAnthonyTalk 17:55, 20 March 2018 (UTC)


 * FYI, I left a comment on Film Enthusiast's talk page explaining why his/her editing has attracted the attention of a few editors and why updating images can be controversial. He/she has denied being Emmy Expert and has since seemed to begin initiating talk page discussions instead of boldly replacing images. To me this editor seems to be somewhat more experienced with the process of editing than you'd expect from an account created 13 days ago, but I now have doubts that this one is Emmy Expert. However I'm not crazy about the fact that he/she removed the talk page conversation later the same day. — TAnthonyTalk 18:15, 23 March 2018 (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

 * I already ran a checkuser on this editor. See User talk:NinjaRobotPirate.  The behavioral evidence is fairly strong, but it's not conclusive.  The technical data was, to quote myself, " at best".  I would welcome input from a SPI clerk. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:50, 20 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Then shouldn't the SPI case status template be updated to reflect the requested clerk assistance? ToThAc (talk) 17:51, 21 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't have a specific request of a clerk beyond the default request that they look at the evidence. I don't know if any of them are familiar with the case, but hopefully someone will offer an opinion. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:06, 22 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Passing by, my observation is similar to ; the editing style is different despite of the overlaps, could be disguise but it's uncharacteristic of Emmy Expert. Alex Shih (talk) 16:13, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Closing with no action based on comments thus far - seems unlikely we'll get any more as it's been over a week since the last one.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:48, 2 April 2018 (UTC)