Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/KindStrangerr/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Those accounts were created only to revert my edits on List of best-selling manga, without properly reading the notes I wrote to clarify the circulation and sales numbers that are properly sourced, and they made no other contributions other than reverting my edits. Mazewaxie ( talk  •  contribs ) 11:31, 12 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Now they are supporting each other arguments in Talk:List of best-selling manga. The timing in which those edits (1 and 2) happened it's rather suspicious. -- Mazewaxie ( talk  •  contribs ) 16:39, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

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

RafGL: Hello, my name's Raf and I created this account since I have been keeping up with the updates in the List of best-selling manga and have seen the whole mess around One Piece circulation copies. I have clearly stated my points several times, coinciding with KindStrangerr and providing enough information about how circulation copies and sold copies should not be mixed at all. I made my statements in User_talk:Mazewaxie and Talk:List_of_best-selling_manga. I'm completely against keeping this misinformation situation just for the sake of a single series. Nothing else to say.

--- Since I'm the accused here I'll explain my reasons. I opened the page a couple of days ago and noticed that One Piece was sitting at 475 million. This number tipped me off because I knew its most recent number wast 470million, so I checked the method that was used and found out it was adding Oricon numbers to Shueisha's revealed circulation number. As this is a completely incorrect method I decided to create this account and undo it, but since the other user insisted in being correct, I posted sources proving myself right.

Basically, the other user's argument is that the 470mln number does not include volumes 95 and 96, even though I have posted multiple sources explaining that it does. I will list them below:
 * 1) Volume 95 obi, stating the 460 million number: https://i.imgur.com/x7bL6ao.jpg
 * 2) Article stating this number includes volume 95: https://www.animenewsnetwork.com/daily-briefs/2019-11-07/one-piece-manga-has-460-million-copies-in-print-worldwide/.153030 In particular, look at the part stating "Eiichiro Oda's One Piece manga will have more than 460 million copies in print worldwide when the 95th volume ships on December 28".
 * 3) Volume 96 obi, stating the 470 million number: https://i.imgur.com/fckfwR8.jpg
 * 4) Article confirming the 470million number includes volume 96 number 1 (japanese): https://natalie.mu/comic/news/373930
 * 5) Number 2 (japanese): https://twitter.com/smartnews_ja/status/1246060160491098112
 * 6) Number 3 (english): https://www.animenewsnetwork.com/daily-briefs/2020-04-02/one-piece-manga-has-470-million-copies-in-print-worldwide/.158229 In particular, "Eiichiro Oda's One Piece manga has 470 million copies in print worldwide as of the release of the 96th compiled book volume on Friday".

Despite all this evidence stacked against him, he continues to claim these numbers do not include Volumes 95&96 and continues adding oricon sales numbers onto them, which is, as I said, an incorrect method, as they are by definition already included in circulation numbers, since you obviously cannot sell copies that haven't been printed.

I cannot speak for the other users undoing his submissions, however I know I have only used this account and trust you will find what I'm saying is true. (KindStrangerr)


 * This is not the place to discuss if I am right or you guys are right. In fact, I stopped reverting your edits, and took the matter to Talk:List of best-selling manga. This is just an investigation to know if you are the same person or not. It has nothing to do with the discussion about the One Piece sales. We have to wait for a clerk to examine the report. You can defend yourself here, but we don't have to discuss the sales number here too. -- Mazewaxie ( talk  •  contribs ) 17:29, 12 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Fine. Well, I have said what I had to say, either way. Me and RafGL are not the same person. (KindStrangerr)


 * The investigation concluded that you are indeed two different persons, so I apologize for suspecting about you. I'm sorry. -- Mazewaxie ( talk  •  contribs ) 10:10, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I ran check based on the evidence here, the check indicated that these accounts are ❌. Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:40, 14 June 2020 (UTC)