Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mission Q8/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets
I have been reverting unsourced material (an unsourced statistic) at Swiss Bowl (,, Mission Q8 has twice reverted the material the last with an abusive edit summary . They claims it is sourced but did not bother to elaborate as to where.

Following the last removal, a brand new user ORT5000 appears and reverts the edit again using an almost identically abusive edit summary

Further at Zurich, I removed an entire paragraph that was completely unreferenced. Following its restoration by (what I believe) is an unrelated user, I deleted it again as unsourced. It was restored again by Mission Q8 with an edit summary suggesting the original restorer was entitled to add unsourced content. This was removed again by another unrelated user confirming my right to do so as it was completely unsourced. The sock user ORT5000 restored the unsourced paragraph claiming That I was not correct to remove it (effectively claiming that it is acceptable to add unsourced content - just as Mission Q8 did).

For completeness, I did post a warning about adding unsourced content to Mission Q8's talk page pointing out that it is not everybody else's responsibility to source their edits. The post was deleted with a threatening edit summary.

The creation of the sock account and removal of the post to Mission Q8's talk page was made within minutes (actually eight) of the re-addition of unsourced content. Then exactly two minutes after ORT5000 stopped editing, Mission Q8 logged back into his own account and posted a 'welcome' notice to ORT5000's talk page thus further raising suspicions. 86.177.26.80 (talk) 17:37, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Comments by other users

 * Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Think common sense. Why do I need a sock-account to gang up on a poxy here-today gone-tomorrow hanger-on IP account? I strongly recommend not wasting anyone's time with a checkuser check, and instantly blocking the nuisance IP, then everyone can get on with their affairs. They are party to a dispute where they reject a number claiming it to be "unsourced", when the article has four other "unsourced" entries. --Mission Q8 (talk) 18:35, 9 July 2023 (UTC)


 * As I previously mentioned, in my reversions at Zürich, the IP editor has every right to remove unsourced content, especially when the editor adding it is just lazily throwing on a citation-needed tag to try to make the addition stick. Seasider53 (talk) 23:11, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The question of whether content be on display or not is not codified anywhere. There are hundreds of instances where a statement is not supported by a source but labelled with a cn tag. Some have been in places more than ten years, which is ok to remove if even an unregistered editor wishes to do, but something from the same month? That's just zealous. I don't see this unregistered user running all over the site pulling out every case of unsourced data, not even on one specific article where there are many listings without sources, and he just chooses the one added by Mission Q8. They're not here to build an encyclopedia, but just to be a nuisance. I'm so glad IPs are heavily restricted. --ORT5000 (talk) 04:12, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Agree. Looking at how razor thin the fanfare is of this deely murky and suspicious IP address, and how Seasider53 seems to be on hand all the time to defend the anon, I reckon the checkuser check should focus on them two accounts. Unlike you and me, I reckon it is one person at the controls there. --Mission Q8 (talk) 08:43, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Partly because of the continuing disruption by both accounts, I am blocking and tagging but leaving the CU request in place. Even if not socks, they are most likely meat puppets. Bbb23 (talk) 13:07, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * These two are ✅ to one another. They're editing out of a busy-ish range, and it's possible that there may be other accounts I've overlooked - come back if you see any similar behaviour. Reblocking as CU blocks, retagging, closing.  Girth Summit  (blether)  11:21, 11 July 2023 (UTC)