Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Iampbsocks/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Both users were created at the same exact minute (Iampbsocks log, Line Bri logs) and are vandalizing the same article Self-Actualization; in order from earliest to latest, these edits can be found at: 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. They both could be blocked as VOA, but I'm suspicious that there might be sleepers and/or reasons to block the IP of the users so as to prohibit new account making. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 05:19, 9 October 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
'''This case is being reviewed by Tamzin as part of her training as a clerk. Please allow her to process the entire case without interference. You may pose any questions or concerns either on her talk page or on this page.'''
 * . . AIV could probably handle this, but since we're here, and since these are ducks clearly created with malice aforethought to disrupt, for indefinite blocks of both accounts. Normally I wouldn't ask for an indef of the master (which is technically Line Bri), but I don't see any evidence of being here to build an encyclopedia, and furthermore have a suspicion that this ain't this user's first rodeo.  --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she/they) 06:03, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Both now VOA-blocked by EL C. Why would it be fishing to check these two, considering that you also state that you have a suspicion that this ain't this user's first rodeo?  --Blablubbs (talk) 13:14, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
 * It was just a general thought as part of the rationale to indef rather than warn or tempblock; not something I'd be willing to hang an endorse on. I'd be open to endorsing based on a clearly-articulated reason to think a CU would find a master (per the "sock of someone" exception to NOTFISHING), but my comment was in response to the request for a sleeper check that did not state a reason to think there are sleepers. --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she/they) 14:30, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Closing. Since no action was taken as a direct result of this, I leave it to the next clerk's discretion whether to archive or G6. --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she/they) 02:16, 10 October 2021 (UTC)