Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/EstellaAdora/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets

 * ( original case name)


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

I will be happy if I'm wrong on this one but per WP:DUCK this seems to be a prima facie case of sockpuppetry. EstellaAdora is a new editor who created the article Nia Faith Betty, which is currently up for deletion. As a first article it attracted attention as it seemed to be overly promotional in nature. Editor has defended her article and CarlaSanchez416, a newly created account, has as their very first (and only at this time) action in opposing the deletion nomination. WCM email 09:43, 1 November 2021 (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'm not going to CU an account with a single edit and no case history. I see their AfD comment has already been tagged as suspect.  I suggest dropping uw-agf-sock on their user pages and let it go at that.  We can always take another look later. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:36, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Apologies to for the toe-treading, we must have been looking at this at the same time. I did run a check, because I two dubious !votes in that AfD discussion, which needs to be nipped in the bud before it gets out of hand.  appears to be ❌, but  is ✅ to, which was apparently created in an attempt to skew the AfD discussion.   Girth Summit  (blether)  13:53, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Not a problem. I'm just worried that if we keep doing this, people will start to wonder if I'm really your sock. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:00, 1 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Ha - I expect our 'editor interaction analyser' results would be alarming... Girth Summit  (blether)  14:02, 1 November 2021 (UTC)