Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Martijnd/Archive

08 June 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Various new(ish) users have all turned up at Articles for deletion/Odoo (2nd nomination), which seems strange for this many people to show up at once. Not sure if this is sockpuppetry or MEAT, but CU should be able to solve this (if not behaviour evidence alone). Note I have no opinion on their comments in the AFD Mdann52 (talk) 16:33, 8 June 2015 (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 technical evidence is . . If the clerk determines that these accounts are socks or meat, which is still a violation of WP:SOCK, the AfD should be reopened (it was closed by a non-admin as keep) with at most only one of the four accounts' !votes. Either the closer can do it or a clerk can do it. If the latter, the closer should be notified as a courtesy.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:11, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
 * My NAC was reverted by the nominator (contrary to the NAC guideline), and then closed as delete by admin User:JzG who saw the (then again) open AfD, in spite of the four keep votes cast by the red-linked users under scrutiny here. I'm not going to challenge JzG's closure. Kraxler (talk) 15:59, 10 June 2015 (UTC)


 * It's hard to prove anything here without CU results. Behavioral evidence is not enough. The result if the AfD was changed to "delete". Nothing more to do here. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  10:06, 11 June 2015 (UTC)