Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Infeby/Archive

21 March 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Editor recently had an account under the name and openly stated they work for an organisation INFE Network which the created and heavily contributed towards the article. The aforementioned article had been deleted, but the user has now created a new account and recreated the same article and again is heavily contributing towards it. Admin user issued a warning about conflict oif interest, regardless of whether they open a new account. The notice has clearly been ignored.  Wes Mouse  &#10002;  13:07, 21 March 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
There is little doubt that this is the same person, but there is no sockpuppetry, as the administrator who blocked Infeby explicitly invited the editor to create a new account with a different username. There are certainly problems with the editor, but sockpuppetry is not one of them. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:13, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

recently recreated INFE Network (see contribs), which was also created by and deleted multiple times for being non-notable, and promotional. Infeby had admitted to being the owner of the blogger site, and was blocked indef on 20 March 2016.  Wes Wolf Talk 01:15, 1 May 2017 (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
The accounts in the archive are. CU declined.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:06, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Sock indeffed and tagged. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  22:48, 9 May 2017 (UTC)