Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JimKrause/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

All are single purpose accounts aimed at the deletion of Draft:John_Bourgeois, first when it was in mainspace and then in draft where it was moved by the closing admin. First the IP made a proposed deletion, then started the AFD and the ip commented and voted delete and then the  has appeared to start a mfd on the draft, using very similar language and arguments as JimKrause and the ip. Here is the dif of the ips prod rationale shown here then JimKrause starting the afd as shown here, then the ips afd comment shown here mfd started by Bregnac shown here. The prod rationale by the ip is exactly the same as the AFD rationale by JimKrause and so it seems they are the same and have broken policy by socking an extra vote on the AFD. Atlantic306 (talk) 16:44, 25 September 2018 (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 master is. CU declined.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:52, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Far too stale to take any admin action, even if they are the same user, which is far from clear. Closing. TonyBallioni (talk) 06:11, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Three users who are editing almost exclusively in WP:AfD. The common touch-point between the three is WP:Articles for deletion/John Bourgeois and related discussions. Behavior and depth of understanding of wiki processes makes it impossible to believe claims of being new users. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:19, 6 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Hmm, I see this isn't the first time I've been involved here. See Administrators' noticeboard/Archive297  That history notwithstanding, I'm convinced there's socking going on here, so an official SPI seems in order.   the objection in that previous discussion was I had no specific suspected socks.  Now I do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RoySmith (talk • contribs) 18:30, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Agree that these accounts are most likely the same person but I can't really pin it down. In the recent Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:John Bourgeois I warned about a sockpuppet early on and later canvassed Bearcat who had commented on the earlier AFD but Bregnac didn't canvass the other delete voters namely ,  and  , indicating that they are connected, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 17:22, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * For Bregnac, no abusive activity.  For Sandals1, . None of this precludes a behavioural evaluation, but I would suggest that isn't warranted.  AGK  &#9632;   08:34, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:49, 15 November 2018 (UTC)