Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lomerezco/Archive

Evidence submitted by NoHenry
Vandalism on the Rosa Blasi page similar to several other previously banned accounts, including the above named puppetmaster NoHenry (talk) 16:11, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Conclusions
Blocked and tagged. MuZemike 21:10, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by NoHenry
Vandalism on Rosa Blasi similar to several other previously banned users, including named puppetmaster. NoHenry (talk) 00:29, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Conclusions

 * Blocked and tagged. NW ( Talk ) 00:31, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by NoHenry
Vandalism on Rosa Blasi page similar to several previously banned accounts. NoHenry (talk) 22:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Conclusions

 * Blocked and tagged. NW ( Talk ) 22:40, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

03 December 2010

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every six hours.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Vandalism on Rosa Blasi identical to previously banned accounts NoHenry (talk) 20:26, 3 December 2010 (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

 * Blocked and tagged per WP:DUCK. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 20:35, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

13 April 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Vandalism on Rosa Blasi similar to previously banned accounts. NoHenry (talk) 15:19, 13 April 2011 (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
✅ that and  are the same as each other. is a match. All of the accounts in the archive are. TN X Man 15:34, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I've blocked the two confirmed accounts, and I blocked the third per WP:DUCK. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 22:54, 13 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Tagged -- DQ  (t)   (e)  18:29, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

26 April 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Vandalism on Rosa Blasi similar to previously banned accounts. NoHenry (talk) 15:05, 26 April 2011 (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
match to. TN X Man 18:02, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 03:06, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

10 February 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Vandalism on Rosa Blasi identical to several previously banned accounts NoHenry (talk) 18:18, 10 February 2014 (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

 * Suspected sock blocked indef as vandalism-only account, closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:05, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

08 November 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Vandalism on Rosa Blasi similar to previously banned accounts. NoHenry (talk) 17:06, 8 November 2014 (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

 * Vandalism of a more or less similar kind, on the article mostly attacked by this sockpuppeteer, does suggest that this may be another sockpuppet. However, the vandalism is not so similar to any of the edits by earlier accounts that I have seen to make it certain, and one edit that looks vaguely similar is not enough to go on. I would ask for a CheckUser, but of the sample of past sockpuppets that I have looked at, all are long since stale, so a CheckUser is not possible. Under the circumstances, the only thing to do is to close this case without any action, but if the same account continues in a similar way, I will be very willing to block as a vandalism-only account, whether or not it is a sockpuppet. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 19:33, 8 November 2014 (UTC)