Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kepler-577b/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

All accounts, except Kepler-705b were created on December 26. 705b was created on December 30. There appears to be nothing to indicate WP:SOCKLEGIT. User:S0091 left messages on the talk pages of Gj3470b and 577b. Because the same type of edits continued under with the 705b account, I feel like this is a WP:SCRUTINY deal. Requesting CU to determine if there are any sleepers that I missed. Also the 560b account has only made 1 edit so CU would be helpful to make sure it's a puppet.  Bait30  Talk 2 me pls? 03:12, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm not an astronomy person, but it appears that 1229b makes constructive edits in the mainspace. And you're right, the other accounts only appear to be making test edits in their own or each other's userspaces. I pinged Lithopsian because they appear to have had multiple interactions with 1229b and they could provide evidence if there is any. Otherwise, you're right and this should be closed.  Bait30   Talk 2 me pls? 04:39, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I have interacted with Kepler-1229b in relation to a number of articles. They have edited intensively in a fairly narrow subject area that I patrol since the account was created about a week ago.  I would call the edits constructive but, without meaning to bite any newbies, not always productive.  Much of my involvement has been reverting edits for common problems such as sourcing, notability, etc.  Entries at both User:Kepler-1229b and User talk:Kepler-1229b, now deleted, give hints of possible COI or involvement with multiple accounts although on the face of it nothing that looks sinister.   may be able to shed more light.  Lithopsian (talk) 13:58, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * may be able to shed more light. I just saw some of Kepler-1229b's edits and noticed that they appeared to be using multiple accounts, so I put a message about it on their talk page. They replied that they "did disclose these connections", and didn't reply when I asked where they did this. SevenSpheresCelestia (talk) 20:18, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * The home page briefly looked like this No further explanation.  .  Lithopsian (talk) 21:17, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I was trying to create an article. Kepler-1229b talk — Preceding undated comment added 00:02, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

I want to be of help to Wikipedia, not vandalize it. I focus on exoplanets at the moment because some of the articles such as List of brown dwarfs and List of exoplanets detected by radial velocity are mixed-up or outdated and I want to update the articles. I may switch to a different topic in the near future. Also the other accounts are inactive at the moment. I am also not using the account abusively. Thank you for your feedback. Kepler-1229b talk — Preceding undated comment added 17:04, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm going to go ahead and close this investigation, but please take some time to read our policy on using multiple accounts, i.e. Sockpuppetry. What you're doing here is on the ragged edge of "certainly unusual, possibly a violation of the rules, but doesn't actually appear to be intentionally disruptive".  What I (strongly) suggest you do is stick with using just one account, and in any case, list all of these accounts on your user page so everything is open and above board.  I'm rather more concerned about this edit.  If you have a WP:COI, you need to declare it.  Having done so, removing the declaration from your user page certainly arouses the suspicion of your fellow editors that you're trying to hide something.  Again, I strongly suggest that you put the COI declaration back, so everybody knows where you stand.  Everybody understands that our rules are complex and can be difficult to understand, so we bend over backwards to accommodate new editors who inadvertently make mistakes.  As long as you make an effort to accept advice, you're fine.  -- RoySmith (talk) 13:53, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Bait30 - Other than to edit their own user pages, have any of these accounts engaged in deceptive or disruptive sock puppetry that violates policy? The fact that these accounts exist with similar usernames does not constitute a violation of Wikipedia's sock puppetry policy unless they've performed actions that actually do (such as voting as multiple people in the same AFD, or contributing disruptively to an article). I need that kind of evidence and diffs before any action can be taken here at all.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:10, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I've explained our policies on socking and COI above. Closing with no action taken, per WP:BITE. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:55, 31 December 2020 (UTC)