Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nic Roldan/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

User Nic Roldan is exclusively editing the article Nic Roldan. While this is going on, VisitBlighty pops up and their first edit is to remove the COI tag that had just been placed by a patroller. There are other, older contribs from stale potential socks that have only edited this page, too. Aspening (talk) 20:14, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''


 * I think this close is premature. VisitBlighty's account creation, their editing of the Nic Roldan page, and this report being made all happened before the user Nic Roldan was blocked. Therefore, this does not appear to be a case of legitimate account recreation. It appeared to me that the VisitBlighty account was an alternate account being used by Nic Roldan to avoid scrutiny for removing the COI tag, and that's why I made this report. Aspening (talk) 01:01, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
This is not socking. Nic Rolas soft-blocked and permitted to create a new account. Hence VisitBlighty. Closing with no action.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:19, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I understand your point. I noticed it myself. However, look at this practically. Nic Roldan is already blocked. You're seeking to have VisitBlighty blocked. Assuming that the two accounts are owned by the same person, I don't think a block is warranted because of the soft block, regardless of the timing. That said, I have left a stern warning on VisitBlighty's Talk page about his WP:COI. You are welcome to report any violation of my warning to me directly. Also, obviously, if a third account is created, you may reopen this case.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:38, 27 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Just noting before I archive that I concur with 's reasoning here – this is very problematic, but we're not at the point of a blockable offence yet; let's hope they contribute constructively on the article's talk page. --Blablubbs&#124;talk 11:32, 27 May 2021 (UTC)