Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HailyMarie/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Account User:HailyMarie was created 16 February 2017 at 19:12. The account User:SVIFF was created 16 February 2017 at 21:59, and blocked at 06:39, 17 February 2017. An interaction analysis speaks volumes. Both are SPA's solely for the purpose of promoting a film festival and a small-time member of it. Their edits effectively dove tailed. HM created the Christina July Kim article at 21:57 on 16 Feb; three minutes later, SVIFF removes the 'new unreviewed article' tag. Similarly, HM created the Silicon Valley International Film Festival article at 22:39 on 16 February, and at 22:42, SVIFF removes the 'unreviewed article' tag again.

I think that personally I suspect MEAT rather than socking, as the styles of writing differ slightly- HM's seems better that SVIFF's, although admittedly the latter didn't write much prose to compare. 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 mentioned 'public relations team' as beng responsible, and I feel that's correct. But whether it's one or two individuals, the concerted nature of the editing is clear; they might as well be in the same room. O Fortuna! ...Imperatrix mundi.  11:03, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Support the appearance of these accounts being closely related. Editing with the same narrow promotional agenda. 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 00:42, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
I'm going to close this without further action. One of the accounts is already blocked, and the articles involved have been deleted. Although there's definitely some kind of connection between the accounts (they claim to be coworkers), I'm not sure there's been enough disruption to block. I'm also taking into account the lack of recent activity. If there's further disruption or promotion, reopen the case, and we can take another look. For now, it seems to have more-or-less resolved itself. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:34, 9 March 2017 (UTC)