Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Factual items/Archive

Evidence submitted by Favonian
Their primary objective is to load Franklin Square, New York with external links to assorted local organizations. These have been removed by various editors (including me). When 1stAmendment approaches the 3RR limit, Factual items steps in here. Not sure if they are sock or meat puppets. Favonian (talk) 21:27, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Auto-generated every six hours.
 * User compare report

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
All three accounts are ✅ as being the same. TN X Man 21:56, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for a quick response. Master blocked for a week, socks indef. Favonian (talk) 22:07, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

29 November 2010

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every six hours.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

The first SPI ended with the two sockpuppets being blocked indefinitely and the master sent off for a week. In spite of stern warnings, the very obvious sock Someoneislying was created. It was blocked indefinitely and the master was upgraded to that status as well. Then Blooski was created, did the usual thing and was blocked indefinitely. Likewise with 76.173.237.144, though only blocked for a week. All these have been processed under the WP:DUCK SOP. Now Ilitt1, an account created in January 2009 but dormant since March 2010, awakens and carries out the modifications to Franklin Square, New York and West Hempstead, New York, which have previously been added by Factual items and the socks as part of their edit war. Ilitt1's previous contributions before the slumber have all been to these and related articles. The question is: sock or meat puppet?

Just for the record, I have no stake in the edit war, but the behavior of Factual items has really been quite disruptive. Favonian (talk) 10:44, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

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

It seems that the user Ilitt1 is at it again - this user removed another chunk from the article Franklin Square. Is it possible to get a permanent ban? 24.218.125.150 (talk) 07:35, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
However, is ❌. TN X Man 16:12, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * - Could be a match; alternatively there could be other sleepers here we're not seeing. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 13:12, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * No comments on the IP, but ✅ the following:
 * Users blocked by . Nakon  16:20, 29 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Hm, interesting. I'm inclined to block Ilitt1, as their edits are identical to Factual items. Could be meatpuppetry, or perhaps editing from a different location. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 16:23, 29 November 2010 (UTC)