Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jvcquemus/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets
Similar edit summary behavior like "last warning". And also issuing of warning to User talk:Jvcquemus despite having no interactions previously.  — Paper9oll  (🔔 • 📝)  04:57, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Because I had given the original account a warning before it's on my watchlist and I saw this strange edit pop up on it today. Since it seemed strange to post an edit warring notice on an account that has been blocked for months, I decided to look into the editor a bit. Even a brief look at the two gives me a strong feeling it is the same person avoiding their block, behaviour is the same, blanks their talk page upon warnings (or anything really, but espescially warnings), is hostile and aggressive and edits in the same areas, most of it music related. I believe what happened here was that Enprovence wanted to try posting a edit warring notice as they are currently involved in an edit war, and I suppose being unaware of the sandbox feature decided to just post it on their old blocked account thinking no one would see it anyway, but instead shone a spotlight on themselves leading to this report. Given their behaviour, they might be blocked anyway before this investigation is complete, but would still be good to have it confirmed and see if this is the first instance. TylerBurden (talk) 04:58, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

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

Wow, we made reports at the exact same time, what are the odds eh. Agreed completely that it is very likely a sock. --TylerBurden (talk) 05:02, 24 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Lol, what a coincidence, I refreshed the page, and saw a new extensive report. But ya, this user behavior is very suspicious and quite familiar to what I encountered previously.  — Paper9oll  (🔔 • 📝)  05:05, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree User:Enprovence is likely a sock and should be blocked indefinetly anyways. Chip3004 (talk) 05:37, 24 May 2022 (UTC)


 * For convenience I am consolidating both your reports into one. JBW (talk) 08:12, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Before seeing this report I had already blocked Enprovence temporarily for edit-warring and personal attacks. I have now found numerous connections between the two accounts, going well beyond the points mentioned above, and easily enough to make sockpuppetry clear. I shall therefore extend the block to indefinite. I don't think a checkuser is needed. JBW (talk) 08:17, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
Restoring previous sock content. Please check if there are any more sock created.  — Paper9oll  (🔔 • 📝)  07:02, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * For someone belittling people editing Wikipedia, they sure do want to edit Wikipedia. This is some persistent socking right here. Quacking like a duck loudly so should hopefully be blocked fast. --TylerBurden (talk) 07:11, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Also, this individual should just have their talk page permissions revoked upon blocks straight away, they spew disgusting abuse at anyone dealing with them. TylerBurden (talk) 07:14, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * hasn't been tagged. TylerBurden (talk) 03:30, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - given the rapid creation of accounts it seems reasonable to check if there are others/see if a rangeblock is possible. Spicy (talk) 14:25, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ plus . . TonyBallioni (talk) 22:38, 26 May 2022 (UTC)