Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JervisCottonBelly/Archive

16 August 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

They all created similar articles with their usernames as the title one after another each a couple minutes apart. The writing styles are similar too. GlacialFrost  (Talk)  05:18, 16 August 2015 (UTC)  GlacialFrost   (Talk)  05:18, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I've notified the named parties of this discussion. Since the articles have been speedily deleted, it's hard to tell whether the writing styles are similar.  I don't really see a need for further action here; it's somewhat likely the accounts are related, given similarities in their creation of articles, but it could also be coincidental.  There's no hard evidence either way, and I don't think a CheckUser is needed in a case involving such new accounts and behaviors that are fairly common among new editors who write promotional articles.  In any event, since the accounts are so new, I would suggest a "wait-and-see" attitude.  If similar behaviors between the accounts persist, a return to SPI would be warranted.  North of Eden (talk) 01:29, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The writing styles in the deleted articles really aren't that similar. In fact, there are quite pronounced differences (Johnjamessings is verbose, uses peacock terms and spells correctly, Tommyrocks is more neutral, use txt-style abbreviations and formats his paragraphs differently, JervisCottonBelly is exceeedingly succinct compared to the other two). There's no indication that these accounts are in any way related. No action needed with regards to this SPI; promotional editing can be handled through the usual channels. Yunshui 雲 水 07:57, 17 August 2015 (UTC)