Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Francescurn/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Francescurn and Heimgate exclusively contribute to the University of Cambridge article, the latter one only to a talk page discussion. They commented at, supporting Han344, who almost exclusively contributes to the Cambridge article. 15 (talk) 22:11, 12 June 2021 (UTC)
 * , Francescurn removes parts of the Cambridge article citing puffery on May 9 and gets reverted. Han334 removes the same part of the article a month later  and upon being reverted, starts a discussion on the talk page . Francescurn, after not having edited for a month, supports Han344 40 minutes after Han344 makes their post. Heimgate, whose account was created the same day, makes their first edit, thirds Han344 suggestion on the talk page. Heimgate and Francescurn have not edited any other page. 15 (talk) 11:42, 16 June 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 need more information and evidence than "they're editing the same pages". There are many legitimate groups of people who collaborate and try and improve articles. Can you provide diffs that show that they're editing the same content, adding the same content back, or making similar changes that show that these accounts are controlled by the same person? I just need evidence that shows that these accounts are being operated by the same person and in violation of policy.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   11:30, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   11:48, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * - TNT 😺 22:06, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I'd like some more eyes on this, please. Whatever is going on on the /64 here, there are a ton of accounts all quite concerned about puffery in articles about colleges, in particular Cambridge and Oxford. I note that the /64 is assigned to another college... --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106;&#x1D110;&#x1d107; 04:42, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * In my view, the following accounts are undoubtedly ✅ to Francescurn:
 * The following accounts are ✅ to each other and very to Francescurn:
 * I am quite convinced that these six accounts are the same person for behavioral reasons. There are a few additional accounts that appear on the same /64 range, but given the shared nature of the underlying network, I think it is quite plausible that they are different people—there are a few technical dissimilarities between some of them, and the behavior doesn't match the Francescurn accounts. For these reasons, I will block and tag the six Francescurn accounts and then close this case without further action. Mz7 (talk) 18:48, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * The following accounts are ✅ to each other and very to Francescurn:
 * I am quite convinced that these six accounts are the same person for behavioral reasons. There are a few additional accounts that appear on the same /64 range, but given the shared nature of the underlying network, I think it is quite plausible that they are different people—there are a few technical dissimilarities between some of them, and the behavior doesn't match the Francescurn accounts. For these reasons, I will block and tag the six Francescurn accounts and then close this case without further action. Mz7 (talk) 18:48, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I am quite convinced that these six accounts are the same person for behavioral reasons. There are a few additional accounts that appear on the same /64 range, but given the shared nature of the underlying network, I think it is quite plausible that they are different people—there are a few technical dissimilarities between some of them, and the behavior doesn't match the Francescurn accounts. For these reasons, I will block and tag the six Francescurn accounts and then close this case without further action. Mz7 (talk) 18:48, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I am quite convinced that these six accounts are the same person for behavioral reasons. There are a few additional accounts that appear on the same /64 range, but given the shared nature of the underlying network, I think it is quite plausible that they are different people—there are a few technical dissimilarities between some of them, and the behavior doesn't match the Francescurn accounts. For these reasons, I will block and tag the six Francescurn accounts and then close this case without further action. Mz7 (talk) 18:48, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * I am quite convinced that these six accounts are the same person for behavioral reasons. There are a few additional accounts that appear on the same /64 range, but given the shared nature of the underlying network, I think it is quite plausible that they are different people—there are a few technical dissimilarities between some of them, and the behavior doesn't match the Francescurn accounts. For these reasons, I will block and tag the six Francescurn accounts and then close this case without further action. Mz7 (talk) 18:48, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Ygz's only edit is removing the part from the lead that Han334 et al also removed. Similar reasoning applies to Tonla, although their edit was last month. 15 (talk) 10:47, 17 June 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

 * ✅. Also, though they're adding puffery to a college rather than deleting it. --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106;&#x1D110;&#x1d107; 17:22, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * both per Jpgordon's comment above. --Blablubbs&#124;talk 17:36, 17 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Closing per above. Mz7 (talk) 18:48, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets

 * ( original case name)




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

This user Han344 started a talk page discussion after being warned for potentially violating 3RR. This was replied to by two SPAs who both have no other edits outside that article and talk page. --Pontificalibus 17:13, 12 June 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

 * Merged this case to the case page for the oldest account. Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 08:32, 21 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Both already blocked, see . Closing. --Blablubbs&#124;talk 14:13, 22 June 2021 (UTC)