Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jjanhone/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

See User talk:Jjanhone. These single-purpose IPs and one account have appeared to remove the paid contributions tag from paid editor Jjonhone's creations, who has recently strenuously resisted them being on her work. The IPs geolocate to Finland, where Jjonhone is also based. Jjonhone denies any knowledge on her talk page, but her explanation—So I've not told that my customers can edit the template but that any volunteer editor can do it [...] I guess there are people who has seen the tag on the article and clicked either the Talk page or the Template link. So maybe they've followed my tip or the template's tip "any editor is justified in removing the tag without warning."—stretches credulity. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 16:15, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''


 * One more: . --MarioGom (talk) 16:24, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Again, one more: . --MarioGom (talk) 16:30, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * This one is probably meatpuppet, unless the reported user socked for years: . --MarioGom (talk) 16:35, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Mmmareee and A1krosti are incriminating for indicating meatpuppetry as they had both edited the articles before - A1krosti many times - suggesting that they could be employees of the company. That these 13 accounts/IPs would all have made these edits within 48 hours without any off-wiki coordination seems extremely unlikely to me. SmartSE (talk) 17:36, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * It's the same with having edited a related article to the one they removed the tag from. SmartSE (talk) 17:42, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Reading the quote in the initial report, I think it is obvious and explicit that the reported user suggested customers to engage in UPE to remove these tags, and some of them just did it. MarioGom (talk) 17:46, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Ah ok - just wanted to be clear that I never suspected it to be sockpuppetry. is also incriminating as they removed the tags from two related articles. SmartSE (talk) 17:52, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Noting that the reason I haven't blocked/ran a check myself is that, while I've only interacted with Jjanhone in an administrative capacity, she has said that she feels like she is being hounded, so I thought this would be better handled by somebody new. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 16:19, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I am endorsing for the accounts, we obviously know that a CU cannot publicly connect IPs and accounts. VAXIDICAE💉  16:34, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Because of my involvement, I won't really say anything about the outcome officially in my capacity as a clerk but whichever clerk does evaluate this should take a look at the masters talk page, this seems like meat puppetry for paid advocacy and I would advocate for treating it as we do sockpuppetry. VAXIDICAE💉  17:46, 26 March 2021 (UTC)


 * . Same country, close-ish geolocations, different ranges and user agents.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   17:16, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm thinking meatpuppetry campaign - fairly confident that these are different people, but they're blatantly working toward the same agenda of scrubbing UPE tags from articles edited by Jjanhone. I find it difficult to believe that Jjanhone is not in some way connected to this. all; IPs and Jjanhone for a week, A1krosti indef as UPE, other named accounts indef as meatpuppets. GeneralNotability (talk) 17:56, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , The two IPv6's are not blocked. Was that intentional? -- RoySmith (talk) 04:47, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , both /64s should be rangeblocked. GeneralNotability (talk) 13:14, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , Doh! Missed that, sorry. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:02, 27 March 2021 (UTC)