Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Leibnizcreation/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Rald richie edited the redirect at Draft:Gallene Sciences after Leibnizcreation moved it to Draft:GalleneSciences. GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 22:33, 1 November 2017 (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 devices are quite different. Meatpuppetry is probably more likely. ~ Rob 13 Talk 02:23, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
 * If this is meatpuppetry, it's poorly executed and not particularly disruptive. Closing without action. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:37, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Yet another variation of Gallene Sciences as Gallene Sciences Pvt Ltd. If not sock, definitely meat. CHRISSY MAD ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  17:46, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I previously picked up a style and content match between some of the users in Group 3:
 * I queried it on their talk pages but none of them responded. Their edits have a strong political focus. I don't know if this is the place to discuss it, but see Gupta family, State_capture and Bell Pottinger for context. Zaian (talk) 07:22, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I queried it on their talk pages but none of them responded. Their edits have a strong political focus. I don't know if this is the place to discuss it, but see Gupta family, State_capture and Bell Pottinger for context. Zaian (talk) 07:22, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I queried it on their talk pages but none of them responded. Their edits have a strong political focus. I don't know if this is the place to discuss it, but see Gupta family, State_capture and Bell Pottinger for context. Zaian (talk) 07:22, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I queried it on their talk pages but none of them responded. Their edits have a strong political focus. I don't know if this is the place to discuss it, but see Gupta family, State_capture and Bell Pottinger for context. Zaian (talk) 07:22, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I queried it on their talk pages but none of them responded. Their edits have a strong political focus. I don't know if this is the place to discuss it, but see Gupta family, State_capture and Bell Pottinger for context. Zaian (talk) 07:22, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I queried it on their talk pages but none of them responded. Their edits have a strong political focus. I don't know if this is the place to discuss it, but see Gupta family, State_capture and Bell Pottinger for context. Zaian (talk) 07:22, 1 January 2018 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Group 1 – the following accounts are ✅ to each other:
 * TenzaZangetsu is older than the master by about five hours.
 * Group 2 – the following accounts are ✅ to and ❌ to Group 1:
 * Group 3 – the following accounts are ✅ to each other, ❌ to Groups 1 and 2:
 * Group 4 – the following accounts are ✅ to each other, ❌ to Groups 1 and 2, and to Group 3:
 * is ✅ from Group 3. However, it is a very old account with very little technical data, and I'm hesitant to block without a behavioral analsyis.
 * I've blocked all the unblocked accounts without tags except Roth3nyk.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:41, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * This is at least four distinct people. There fairly strong behavioural patterns within each of these groups not shared by the others. As such, they are probably not related. I've separated group 4 into its own investigation at Sockpuppet investigations/Helleoos‎, and reported group 2 at Sockpuppet investigations/Berklondo for record keeping. I've held off on group 3 for now, because I have some concerns. FashionFreak and the five accounts listed above by Zaian have very clear behavioural commonality. The other four don't fit these patterns and don't seem to have anything in common to each other either. Bbb23, if you're sure this is one person based on technical evidence, I'll defer to you here, but there's enough to make me wonder about potential false positives. Roth3nyk is probably unrelated. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:10, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm reasonably confident that all the accounts in Group 3 are one person. I agree with your conclusion about Roth3nyk, and I'd leave the user alone. Thanks very much.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:21, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Group 3 – the following accounts are ✅ to each other, ❌ to Groups 1 and 2:
 * Group 4 – the following accounts are ✅ to each other, ❌ to Groups 1 and 2, and to Group 3:
 * is ✅ from Group 3. However, it is a very old account with very little technical data, and I'm hesitant to block without a behavioral analsyis.
 * I've blocked all the unblocked accounts without tags except Roth3nyk.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:41, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * This is at least four distinct people. There fairly strong behavioural patterns within each of these groups not shared by the others. As such, they are probably not related. I've separated group 4 into its own investigation at Sockpuppet investigations/Helleoos‎, and reported group 2 at Sockpuppet investigations/Berklondo for record keeping. I've held off on group 3 for now, because I have some concerns. FashionFreak and the five accounts listed above by Zaian have very clear behavioural commonality. The other four don't fit these patterns and don't seem to have anything in common to each other either. Bbb23, if you're sure this is one person based on technical evidence, I'll defer to you here, but there's enough to make me wonder about potential false positives. Roth3nyk is probably unrelated. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:10, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm reasonably confident that all the accounts in Group 3 are one person. I agree with your conclusion about Roth3nyk, and I'd leave the user alone. Thanks very much.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:21, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Group 4 – the following accounts are ✅ to each other, ❌ to Groups 1 and 2, and to Group 3:
 * is ✅ from Group 3. However, it is a very old account with very little technical data, and I'm hesitant to block without a behavioral analsyis.
 * I've blocked all the unblocked accounts without tags except Roth3nyk.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:41, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * This is at least four distinct people. There fairly strong behavioural patterns within each of these groups not shared by the others. As such, they are probably not related. I've separated group 4 into its own investigation at Sockpuppet investigations/Helleoos‎, and reported group 2 at Sockpuppet investigations/Berklondo for record keeping. I've held off on group 3 for now, because I have some concerns. FashionFreak and the five accounts listed above by Zaian have very clear behavioural commonality. The other four don't fit these patterns and don't seem to have anything in common to each other either. Bbb23, if you're sure this is one person based on technical evidence, I'll defer to you here, but there's enough to make me wonder about potential false positives. Roth3nyk is probably unrelated. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:10, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm reasonably confident that all the accounts in Group 3 are one person. I agree with your conclusion about Roth3nyk, and I'd leave the user alone. Thanks very much.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:21, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Group 4 – the following accounts are ✅ to each other, ❌ to Groups 1 and 2, and to Group 3:
 * is ✅ from Group 3. However, it is a very old account with very little technical data, and I'm hesitant to block without a behavioral analsyis.
 * I've blocked all the unblocked accounts without tags except Roth3nyk.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:41, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * This is at least four distinct people. There fairly strong behavioural patterns within each of these groups not shared by the others. As such, they are probably not related. I've separated group 4 into its own investigation at Sockpuppet investigations/Helleoos‎, and reported group 2 at Sockpuppet investigations/Berklondo for record keeping. I've held off on group 3 for now, because I have some concerns. FashionFreak and the five accounts listed above by Zaian have very clear behavioural commonality. The other four don't fit these patterns and don't seem to have anything in common to each other either. Bbb23, if you're sure this is one person based on technical evidence, I'll defer to you here, but there's enough to make me wonder about potential false positives. Roth3nyk is probably unrelated. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:10, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm reasonably confident that all the accounts in Group 3 are one person. I agree with your conclusion about Roth3nyk, and I'd leave the user alone. Thanks very much.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:21, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * is ✅ from Group 3. However, it is a very old account with very little technical data, and I'm hesitant to block without a behavioral analsyis.
 * I've blocked all the unblocked accounts without tags except Roth3nyk.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:41, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * This is at least four distinct people. There fairly strong behavioural patterns within each of these groups not shared by the others. As such, they are probably not related. I've separated group 4 into its own investigation at Sockpuppet investigations/Helleoos‎, and reported group 2 at Sockpuppet investigations/Berklondo for record keeping. I've held off on group 3 for now, because I have some concerns. FashionFreak and the five accounts listed above by Zaian have very clear behavioural commonality. The other four don't fit these patterns and don't seem to have anything in common to each other either. Bbb23, if you're sure this is one person based on technical evidence, I'll defer to you here, but there's enough to make me wonder about potential false positives. Roth3nyk is probably unrelated. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:10, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm reasonably confident that all the accounts in Group 3 are one person. I agree with your conclusion about Roth3nyk, and I'd leave the user alone. Thanks very much.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:21, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * This is at least four distinct people. There fairly strong behavioural patterns within each of these groups not shared by the others. As such, they are probably not related. I've separated group 4 into its own investigation at Sockpuppet investigations/Helleoos‎, and reported group 2 at Sockpuppet investigations/Berklondo for record keeping. I've held off on group 3 for now, because I have some concerns. FashionFreak and the five accounts listed above by Zaian have very clear behavioural commonality. The other four don't fit these patterns and don't seem to have anything in common to each other either. Bbb23, if you're sure this is one person based on technical evidence, I'll defer to you here, but there's enough to make me wonder about potential false positives. Roth3nyk is probably unrelated. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:10, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I'm reasonably confident that all the accounts in Group 3 are one person. I agree with your conclusion about Roth3nyk, and I'd leave the user alone. Thanks very much.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:21, 3 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I've separated the remaining group into its own investigation at Sockpuppet investigations/Breryl. Closing. Sir Sputnik (talk) 02:01, 3 January 2018 (UTC)