Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jawico666/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Sock just drifted into the Help Desk, asked basically "Oh, is Jawico666 blocked here or just on Commons? Asking for a friend!" I hear the sound of a duck, and the original account could be blocked, IMHO, as NOTHERE. Orange Mike &#124;  Talk  22:05, 14 February 2022 (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
 
 * - For training. --Jack Frost (talk) 19:42, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
 * This is entirely unbelievable, almost to the point of NOTHERE / disruption given the username similarity, ridiculous story, and previous editing; as it is either the most ridiculous joe-job type situation I've heard, or sockpuppetry. - For confirmation and to check these are the only two accounts. --Jack Frost (talk) 12:42, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
 * - -- RoySmith (talk) 14:24, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅. Given their history on other projects (i.e. commons:Commons:Requests for checkuser/Case/Jawico666), requesting glocks. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:34, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah, there's more:
 * also ✅ and glock requested., mentioned in the commons case, also exists here, but has no edits (and the CU data) so not doing anything about that one for now. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:46, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Upon further examination, I'm unsure Oebelysk was a correct identification, so I've unblocked them. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:57, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
 * also ✅ and glock requested., mentioned in the commons case, also exists here, but has no edits (and the CU data) so not doing anything about that one for now. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:46, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Upon further examination, I'm unsure Oebelysk was a correct identification, so I've unblocked them. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:57, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
 * also ✅ and glock requested., mentioned in the commons case, also exists here, but has no edits (and the CU data) so not doing anything about that one for now. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:46, 16 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Upon further examination, I'm unsure Oebelysk was a correct identification, so I've unblocked them. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:57, 16 February 2022 (UTC)