Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gbnproductions/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Both WP:SPA promoting the same individual. Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 18:26, 19 September 2016 (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

 * - Please compare these two SPAs - they were created within a few hours on the same day, and the master's username clearly indicates a COI. GABgab 22:24, 19 September 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅. Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:45, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Yet another WP:SPA that has created Gaetano Naccarato. has had multiple socks create this page. Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:16, 17 December 2016 (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
No reason given why a CU is requested. Declined.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:21, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
 * can you help me understand. has had multiple socks create this page.  is yet another WP:SPA that has re-created this page. Why doesn't that count as a reason for a CU? -- Zackmann08  (Talk to me/What I been doing) 00:43, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
 * First, that's not true. There has been a grand total of one sock prior to now. Second, you're just restating the evidence in support of a connection between the new account and the master. That's not a reason for requesting a CU. A couple of examples of why you might request a CU (there are others). In the history of the sock master, there are generally more socks found than the ones listed as suspected socks. A CU could turn up those socks. Another possibility is you have behavioral evidence that supports a block, but it's not as persausive as it could be. Obtaining technical evidence could either add further support the evidence or show that the accounts are unrelated. Regardless of the fact that you have not explained your request for a CU, which is required, I don't see any basis for doing a CU in this case. If a clerk feels otherwise and chooses to endorse a CU on their own, I would revisit my decision.--Bbb23 (talk) 03:44, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Sock blocked indefinitely. The version of the article created by the sock is substantively similar/identical to the version created originally by the master. ~ Rob 13 Talk 09:04, 1 January 2017 (UTC)