Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lisan1233/Archive

13 August 2017

 * this was originally filed at Sockpuppet investigations/Aknanaka

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Similar editing in Incorporation of Tibet into the People's Republic of China in a short time. O1lI0 (talk) 03:47, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
 * See also this. The editing time was too close. The theme was too similar.--O1lI0 (talk) 05:19, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Comments by other users
The reasons why I made the edits are listed at the talk page. It is very clear that anyone who think the same will edit in the same way. Please provide more evidence. Esiymbro (talk) 03:55, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
 * 
 * I found from these editors that someone or a group of people tried to use different accounts or methods to delete specific content.And you are one of them.So many one-time account or Sockpuppet has the same purpose is suspicious.--O1lI0 (talk) 04:08, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
 * From teahouse: Because they know Chinese. A Chinese word is right in the first line, and the translation is wrong. So there is nothing suspicious: Everyone who see the article would notice that.
 * But only my opinion. You may want to ask those other editors if they have a different reason to edit. Esiymbro (talk) 05:09, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Socks will evolve and have learned to edit on a target with different accounts.There are two effects that make socks harder to find and create the illusion that many people support some of the arguments.If the account is short-term or one-time use will be more difficult to check.At this stage I judge socks based on similar edits, because the socks will eventually finish his purpose, and be certain that some socks are used to creating new accounts (like Whoeverer / 007perspect). I will try to find, but the evidence may be harder and harder to collect.--O1lI0 (talk) 17:30, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 23:57, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
 * - clerk is confused - which case is this meant to be filed under, Sockpuppet investigations/Born A or Sockpuppet investigations/User-4488? Both of those cases started from here, and I'm not sure that they were supposed to have been split. any idea? And, which accounts did you check? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 02:05, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
 * No comment about any splits or merges, but generally, the oldest account is what it's named under. Also I checked both Esiymbro & Lisan1233 and ran it against the accounts in the archive. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 05:13, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * See Sockpuppet investigations/UserDe. ~ Rob 13 Talk 14:16, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Could you look into this further? This has been on hold for several months. ~ Rob 13 Talk 04:01, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Nope, still confused. I'm closing with no action: I still don't know which user these accounts are alleged to be socks of and I can do no further investigation, and there's pretty much nothing I can do about a three-month-old case anyway. Both accounts are still reasonably active; if you think there is still sockpuppetry going on, please file a new report, but please check which case you're filing under first. I can't investigate when I don't know who I'm investigating. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:58, 29 November 2017 (UTC)


 * just in case anyone else who runs into this needs to try to follow my logic, this is the only finding I can give: neither of these accounts exhibit the behaviour of a sockpuppet generally, and no evidence is offered that they are sockpuppets of each other. They were checked here against I still don't know which case, and were also checked separately against User-4488 and found unrelated. So all I can say about it is that they're probably not anyone's sockpuppet. I'm moving this report to its own case because there is no evidence of these accounts being related to anything. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:14, 29 November 2017 (UTC)