Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Imachillguy/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets
Imachillguy registered their account in 2017 and has now made its first English Wikipedia edit to support Imachillguyman. They obviously are the same duck. There is some sort of deception. Please check for any more accounts that have been active in the past few months. Robert McClenon (talk) 06:19, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Comments by other users

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


 * Weird. I made the mistake of believing a signature rather than checking what the history said.  The sock signed the report as the dormant sockmaster.  Thank you, User:Bishonen, for blocking.  Like User:Girth Summit, I don't understand a lot of things that socks do, and, unlike User:Girth Summit, I am not paid to throw socks in the trash.  I had originally asked if there were any other socks using the same IP addresses.  Robert McClenon (talk) 14:18, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * , - I'm confused. Imachillguy has never edited, as far as I can see, and is long-since stale - meaning that nobody has even logged into the account on enwiki within the CU window. Why are we saying that it has edited/why is it blocked? Has a jo-jobbing troll been up to some high jinks, or am I missing something obvious?  Girth Summit  (blether)  12:45, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Girth Summit, Imachillguy is a sleeper sock of Imachillguyman — or, well, being the older account, I suppose it's a sleeper sockmaster. See for evidence of this, and for why Robert Mc initially thought Imachillguy had edited. When I blocked Imachillguyman, I thought it best to block the sleeper as well, lest it wake up. Imachillguyman is clearly aware of it — it's not a forgotten account.Bishonen &#124; tålk 12:56, 6 June 2024 (UTC).
 * Weird - looks like the 'Imachillguyman' account edited their signature so that it left the 'man' part out, to replicate the other account's username. Technically, I don't see any evidence incriminating the older account - it could just as easily be a joe-job troll. Don't know why one would bother joe-jobbing an unused account, but I don't understand a lot of stuff that socks do. I don't suppose it matters though - if an innocent person has had their unused, seven-years-old account blocked, I guess they can always create a new one. Girth Summit  (blether)  13:00, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Well, did you see my suggestion here, just above my block notification? Bishonen &#124; tålk 13:06, 6 June 2024 (UTC).
 * I have now. It could just as easily be the case that two people thought that would be a cool username, and one of them was intentionally fucking with us with regards to pretending to be the old account. The original Imachillguy made a few edits to zhwiki back in 2017; the new one has only edited here, and is a long way from China. Not that any of that proves anything, or really matters... Girth Summit  (blether)  13:24, 6 June 2024 (UTC)


 * We're exactly alike in that regard, ! I see no other accounts on their IPs. For what it's worth, I wouldn't have blocked for socking here - there is no policy that would prevent one from ditching an old account that you never used, and creating a new account with a similar name. They might well be someone else's sock, but no technical or behavioural evidence has been presented that would tie them to a blocked account, so I'd have no grounds for doing so. I have no view on, and take no issue with, Bishonen's not here block. Girth Summit  (blether)  14:25, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Closing - blocks already placed per nothere, no other accounts jumping out.  Girth Summit  (blether)  14:27, 6 June 2024 (UTC)