Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Golden/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets
Golden was blocked for sockpuppetry in the past. Both Golden and Olympian edit in the same articles, usually same or similar edits. The interaction analysis tool is off the charts. Olympian will often restore sources and content added initially by Golden, some examples -, , , , , , ,. A CheckUser should apply to see if there is connection. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 23:01, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

The global account information shows Golden’s account creation on 5th October 2019 and Olympian’s on 21st October 2019. Despite having created their account in 2019, Olympian only started editing in 2021 [oldest contributions] during the time when Golden was indefinite blocked for sockpuppetery. I believe Olympian is a sleeper sock of Golden, and the huge interaction analysis show various articles not just Armenian villages. Golden was also confirmed to be using a VPN per comment from the latest SPI , this would be probably useful during the CheckUser. KhndzorUtogh (talk) 07:55, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Comments by other users

 * Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

I didn't realise restoring sourced information that was removed under erroneous premises constituted sockpuppetry. I have most of these villages watchlisted as I've been in the process of adding their subdivisions/municipalities and cleaning up their infoboxes, so when I saw KhndzorUtogh's more than 50 edits in my feed, I went into their contributions to assess the rest and found cause to revert all but a handful. In most cases, KhndzorUtogh misrepresented the sources, claiming that they didn't support certain content when in fact they did, and I was conscientious enough to quote the parts of the source supporting the restored wording in my edit summaries. Here are just a few examples of KhndzorUtogh's blatant misrepresentations in their edit summaries:. In summary, this case by KhndzorUtogh is clearly an example of bad faith and an attack to prevent their own disruptive edits from being examined. – Olympian loquere 00:22, 28 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi, I just sent you an email regarding your query. Regards, – Olympi<b style="color:#fca903">an</b> <b style="color:#a3a0a0">loquere</b> 11:09, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * CU says that the two listed accounts are ❌; however, I would be interested to hear from what their relationship is with the account  - is that an undeclared alternate account?    Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  10:34, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm satisfied with the explanation provided by email. Looking at several factors aside from the CU data, I'm persuaded that the users of these accounts are unlikely to be the same person. Closing.  Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  12:54, 28 February 2023 (UTC)