Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JacksonViking/Archive

28 July 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

This diff is very strong WP:DUCK evidence of of edits similar to JV. Same subject area, false edit summary, insertion of questionable language are all his traits. User:JacksonViking is currently on an indef. block. John from Idegon (talk) 18:27, 28 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Discovered this after this initial report. This may all relate to the socks of User:Francespennysworth11, per history of editing on the same article and involvement in (initially at least) by JacksonViking in inserting the same content as this sockmaster and all his socks. John from Idegon (talk) 18:36, 28 July 2015 (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

 * - In order to facilitate and expedite your request, please provide diffs to support your case. Please give two or more diffs meeting the following format:
 * 1) At least one diff is from the sockmaster (or an account already blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet of the sockmaster), showing the behaviour characteristic of the sockmaster.
 * 2) At least one diff per suspected sockpuppet, showing the suspected sockpuppet emulating the behaviour of the sockmaster given in the first diff.
 * 3) In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided. Around one sentence is enough for this.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  20:11, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Actually, please just withdraw this. There is something going on, but I am not sure who is who and what is what.  Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 21:11, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Filer withdrew the case. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  21:17, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Per Duck. Same articles edited (Jackson, Michigan area high schools), same content added (controversy section on Jackson High School (Michigan)), same pattern of making vandalism (here) or unconstructive/disruptive (here) edits at the same time as making a constructive minor edit. Same pattern of participation, but not actually engaging in constructive dialog on talk page. See Talk:Jackson High School (Michigan) for examples from both master and puuppet. John from Idegon (talk) 23:38, 18 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

 * My first impression was that this fell just short of a DUCK case: a very strong likelihood of sockpuppetry, but not absolutely obvious. Looking more closely, though, I saw further evidence, such as a common interest in editing articles about basketball players. The likelihood of a new editor coming along, happening to discover controversial content in editing history of an article two years ago, starting an edit-war to restore that controversial content (just as the old blocked account had edit-warred on the same content), using similar tricks to try to hide the nature of the editing, and just happening to also have other similar editing interests, is really a lot to swallow, so John from Idegon appears to be right about the sockpuppetry. In addition, there are other problems with the new account, such as blatant vandalism, and the fact that it was clearly created to evade article protection in order to continue an edit war started via IP edits. I have therefore blocked the account Jaycon729. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:15, 23 May 2017 (UTC)