Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Orangemoody/Archive

19 January 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

I've blocked Tobo121 as an obvious undisclosed paid editor based on the endless rejected promotional AFCs. Something fishy went on at Orsto Ltd though which suggests sockpuppetry: Tobo121 creates draft, BalakReuter creates the article and Createn blanks the draft. There was similar crossover between Createn and Tobo121 here. SmartSE (talk) 17:34, 19 January 2016 (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

 * . This is going to take longer than I expected. I may not have findings until tomorrow.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:59, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry but I shouldn't have been so optimistic. No prediction as to a specific date.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:05, 21 January 2016 (UTC)


 * The following accounts are ✅ to each other and exhibit OM behavior:
 * (already blocked as OM sock)
 * The following accounts are ✅ to each other and exhibit OM behavior:
 * (already blocked as OM sock)
 * The following accounts are ✅ to each other and exhibit OM behavior:
 * I blocked all unblocked accounts. I'm not closing the case because Orangemoody clean-up needs to be done for the new OM socks listed.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:48, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the check. I've looked at all of the contribs and there are no live articles present written by these users. I stumbled across this user though who recreated Draft:Deep Patel previously created by Bosschib. They are active at the moment and have created quite a few spammy-ish articles on BLPs and companies. could you take another look? SmartSE (talk) 13:58, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
 * (already blocked as OM sock)
 * The following accounts are ✅ to each other and exhibit OM behavior:
 * I blocked all unblocked accounts. I'm not closing the case because Orangemoody clean-up needs to be done for the new OM socks listed.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:48, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the check. I've looked at all of the contribs and there are no live articles present written by these users. I stumbled across this user though who recreated Draft:Deep Patel previously created by Bosschib. They are active at the moment and have created quite a few spammy-ish articles on BLPs and companies. could you take another look? SmartSE (talk) 13:58, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
 * (already blocked as OM sock)
 * The following accounts are ✅ to each other and exhibit OM behavior:
 * I blocked all unblocked accounts. I'm not closing the case because Orangemoody clean-up needs to be done for the new OM socks listed.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:48, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the check. I've looked at all of the contribs and there are no live articles present written by these users. I stumbled across this user though who recreated Draft:Deep Patel previously created by Bosschib. They are active at the moment and have created quite a few spammy-ish articles on BLPs and companies. could you take another look? SmartSE (talk) 13:58, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I blocked all unblocked accounts. I'm not closing the case because Orangemoody clean-up needs to be done for the new OM socks listed.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:48, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the check. I've looked at all of the contribs and there are no live articles present written by these users. I stumbled across this user though who recreated Draft:Deep Patel previously created by Bosschib. They are active at the moment and have created quite a few spammy-ish articles on BLPs and companies. could you take another look? SmartSE (talk) 13:58, 22 January 2016 (UTC)




 * Behaviorally, as has already been pointed out to the user by another administrator, they act very much like a paid editor. Technically, though, the account is ❌ to any account in the list above or any account I have personally checked in the past.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:00, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
 * What is "Orangemoody clean-up"? Just deleting articles or something more? Should those be listed at WP:Long-term_abuse/Orangemoody/Accounts?  Vanjagenije  (talk)  19:48, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes. All the accounts above need to be added to that page in a new section (it looks like it goes by block date). Then editors come along and examine them to see what, if anything, needs to be done.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:18, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ and closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  21:44, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

23 January 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Comparing this editor who took over draft creation duties from Orangemoody sock on the hopelessly promotional Draft:Village Motors Group. All three editors were active on the draft within less than 24 hours:
 * 13:54, 16 October 2015: created by 119.154.129.37
 * 16:11, 16 October 2015 twiddled by Clownkong
 * 02:30, 17 October 2015 twiddled by Revolvar4500

The editor is creating a draft about a Brisbane used car dealer (!) and assumes the persona with some related uploads, but his writing style shown here is more in line with the Pakistani IP who created the draft.

suggested checking against who was active a week ago at Draft:Amcap Mortgage. Their edits were deleted but it would be possible to check if they are linked to. Brianhe (talk) 13:16, 23 January 2016 (UTC)

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

Hi, I am Revolver4500 and I am here to state that I am not using or have multiple Wikipedia accounts and I am not associated with the other entities mentioned here, that said... I don't appreciated been refer as "Pakistani" (this is like spitting on someone's face when you talk and besides I am not Pakistani, I am Australian) I am very new to Wikipedia and my account was open on 03/23/15 at 8:10 PM and not on 24hrs after the draft was created as per your accusation (I have an email confirmation from Wikipedia). I know the article still needs work and AGAIN I am doing my best to comply with Wikipedia, I should be more optimistic with Wikipedia but so far the Wikipedian authors haven't been that helpful. Brianhe Bbb23 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Revolvar4500 (talk • contribs)  12:14, 25 January 2016‎
 * This points raised above were about socking/meatpuppetry/COI indicators including 1) participating in a promotional Orangemoody draft article within hours of the others and 2) idiomatic writing style like "I don't appreciated". You have just turned it into a racial thing by talking about spitting on someone. Did you notice how you didn't answer #1? I did. – Brianhe (talk) 10:41, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Revolvar4500 is ❌. They did not edit Draft:Amcap Mortgage. They are apparently editing from where they say they're from. As for writing style, there are Pakistanis in Australia. I have no idea whether the editor is Pakistani, though.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:50, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Closing with no action.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  22:42, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

27 January 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Finn45 is on your en-wiki version a confirmed Orangemoody sock. On nl-wiki this sock created Vision Direct promo about an english contactlenses website firm. After deletion Agentlion1 popped up and replaced it and also added the page to en-wiki, es-wiki and it-wiki. I deleted the page with us as an nl-wiki admin and immediately a place back request was done here. Clear cut Orangemoody behaviour it seems and all details and further socks are welcome so we can stop this everywhere. Thanx in advance. MoiraMoira (talk) 11:46, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Additional information: Agentlion1 had no access to viewing the deleted article at all though on nl-wiki claimed that his new version was significally different from the previous on by Finn45 (which was not the case). The Finn article had been placed a half year ago already(!). No declaring he was a "paid editor" were made on either it es or nl wiki versions. On wiki-nl the account was notified of the obligations on his talk page but did not do so instead simply asked for replacement of the article only elsewhere. MoiraMoira (talk) 13:16, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Vision Direct was re-created by a declared paid editor on en.wiki. I did some cleanup on it. Brianhe (talk) 11:53, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * First and foremost, this SPI needs to be decided by behavior, not technical evidence. However, some technical evidence may be of value.
 * Agentlion1 is using a proxy server. Agentlion1 is using the same user agent as, but the user agent is a common one.
 * Finn45 is . However, I have notes on some of their edits from last summer. Unfortunately, they are of no value now.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:05, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. The chosen user name, the behavior, the proxyserver used (so no company IP as claimed on the en-wiki user page with the fake paid editor claim "I work for the company" - see modus operandi "Only a few of the accounts have made any disclosure related to paid editing, and those which did failed to make complete disclosures") as well as the edit behavior suffices for me and I can take measures on my home wiki now. Could you please pass this on via the cu-international mailing list so I can notify our local checkusers as well? MoiraMoira (talk) 20:40, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I have blocked and tagged with a link to the case page on en-wiki the socks with us now. ITMT I have asked them to check for more socks with us. When something results I will pass it on to you here. Also may I add typical Orangemoody behaviour both on nl-wiki and it-wiki by being able to protest in fluent italian and fluent dutch with regards to the removal of the advertising article. No contactlenswebsite owner in the UK can do so... Also both on es, nl and it wiki the article was originally created by the stale account and later replaced by the new one. I can't block here of course but have added some info on another orangemoody sock on the accounts page ITMT. MoiraMoira (talk) 15:54, 28 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Question - I dealt with all and cross wiki all articles have been removed ITMT by fellow admins there - am still awaiting en-wiki admin closure or can I place this on the orangemoody list myself? Strangely enough it-wiki admin and steward Vituzzu placed a speedy here but that has been removed. MoiraMoira (talk) 09:14, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

02 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Recreated ChoiceTrade that was previously created by User:Leimakou. SmartSE (talk) 10:38, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

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


 * I've also added who uploaded the logo to Commons and created Draft:ChoiceTrade on 10 January . The current article ChoiceTrade is a verbatim copy of the draft right down to the capitalisation errors. Voceditenore (talk) 10:56, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Two IPs also edited the draft 190.201.220.163 and 126.82.184.84. They geolocate to Venezuela and Japan respectively. Proxy servers? Meanwhile, on February 2 when the article was created Pbver324 made 10 minor edits to other articles no doubt in an attempt to get autoconfirmed and move the draft to article space. However, two minutes after Pbver324's last edit, ReutarokJhalos registered an account and two minutes later  pasted the draft into article space. Voceditenore (talk) 11:31, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The following accounts are ✅ to each other:
 * All blocked.
 * The accounts with edits should be copied to the cleanup page.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:43, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I've G5d the article and the draft. The only other live edits are Pbver324's but they self-reverted. SmartSE (talk) 16:47, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Updated Long-term abuse/Orangemoody/Accounts and closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:35, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
 * All blocked.
 * The accounts with edits should be copied to the cleanup page.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:43, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I've G5d the article and the draft. The only other live edits are Pbver324's but they self-reverted. SmartSE (talk) 16:47, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Updated Long-term abuse/Orangemoody/Accounts and closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:35, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I've G5d the article and the draft. The only other live edits are Pbver324's but they self-reverted. SmartSE (talk) 16:47, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Updated Long-term abuse/Orangemoody/Accounts and closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:35, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

24 January 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

This came to my attention after seeing several slot machine articles created over the last couple of months. I briefly looked at them but did not review them for notability. However, today I looked into one deeper and discovered that they were created by different accounts, yet are of similar nature, making me believe they could be the same person using multiple accounts.

Article recently moved to the main space for slot machine named Twin Spin. Article was created on the 24th of January by User:Omamme. Subject had previously created an article on AdPushup (since deleted – two variations of the name have been deleted) and was the subject of a COIN thread created by @Brianhe on September 30, 2015.

You will see from the COIN thread the article on AdPushup was from the case of Orangemoody editing of Wikipedia. That leads me to believe that this is a paid-for article, hence Twin Spin is likely involved in the same type of paid editing. While it may not be the same situation as Orangemoody, the appearance that this is a paid editor is rather clear – at least to me.

The other article is Mega Fortune, another slot machine. This one was created on January 2, 2016 by User:Slotslover. If you look at the article for Mega Fortune and Twin Spin, you can see the similar layout, reference, and writing style. While this is still only circumstantial, here is where they are connected.

Both the Mega Fortune and Twin Spin articles have links to the website Netent. Netent is an online casino software provider. The article for the company was created on 9-8-15 by User:Milko Zec who was blocked on January 1, 2016 for spam. In my opinion, that completes the circle. All articles are created relatively within the same time frame, just a few months. They have similar writing style and are all referenced to Netent and connected to paid editing.

On a final note, I believe there was also a deletion discussion about another slot machine article during this same time. However, I cannot recall the name or the editor involved. Hopefully someone reviewing this remembers and can locate it as I am sure it can be added to the list. CNMall41 (talk) 09:20, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * This diff gives some history of the OM connection, apparently another article was acted on "before Orangemoody came to light". - Brianhe (talk) 09:33, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Added who was apparently [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/AdPushup&diff=prev&oldid=675770827 involved] with the article noted just above this line, and CU blocked about a month ago. - Brianhe (talk) 09:55, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Interestingly, the IP was also active at Aptara, which is noted in this COIN case. One of the other editors named there was, a known OM sock. - Brianhe (talk) 10:13, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - Please, compare those three accounts.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:24, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Group 1 – the following accounts are ✅:
 * Group 2 – the following accounts are ✅ and technically ❌ to Group 1:
 * I've blocked all the unblocked accounts, and I agree with the other editors that these accounts exhibit OM behavior. I'd appreciate it if the clerk would merge this case into the OM case. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:07, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Merged and closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  10:55, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Group 2 – the following accounts are ✅ and technically ❌ to Group 1:
 * I've blocked all the unblocked accounts, and I agree with the other editors that these accounts exhibit OM behavior. I'd appreciate it if the clerk would merge this case into the OM case. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:07, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Merged and closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  10:55, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I've blocked all the unblocked accounts, and I agree with the other editors that these accounts exhibit OM behavior. I'd appreciate it if the clerk would merge this case into the OM case. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:07, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Merged and closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  10:55, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I've blocked all the unblocked accounts, and I agree with the other editors that these accounts exhibit OM behavior. I'd appreciate it if the clerk would merge this case into the OM case. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:07, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Merged and closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  10:55, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

06 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Very similar recreation at:
 * Draft:AMCAP MORTGAGE of content deleted which was created by blocked sock User:Don1122.
 * Draft:ROMANIAN FLOWERS of content deleted which was created by Redcross1122.

Sultan1122 uploaded images used on Draft:ROMANIAN FLOWERS and Draft:Wedding Wire, the latter of which was created by User:Redcat1122. Also note similar usernames. MER-C 11:19, 6 February 2016 (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 four accounts are ✅ to each other and to Don1122. Blocked.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:58, 6 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Added to Long-term abuse/Orangemoody/Accounts. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  19:16, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

09 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Attempted to get Draft:CENTRI Technology published into an article that deleted as a creation by long-term abuser Orangemoody. Mr. Guye (talk) 02:34, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Contributed significantly to draft intended to be published into a previously deleted promotional article by long-term abuser Orangemoody. Mr. Guye (talk) 02:36, 9 February 2016 (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

 * Technically, there's nothing that connects this to Orangemoody.--Bbb23 (talk) 04:55, 9 February 2016 (UTC)
 * We don't have a great policy in place for this sort of editing, but we should be quite careful making these 'connections' as we are connecting discrete groups of editors with vaguely similar motive, nothing more. NativeForeigner Talk 07:16, 10 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Closing the case with no action.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  11:38, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

11 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Recreation of Draft:Advantage One Tax consult, Inc. (AO Tax) with very similar content. Page was originally created by blocked sock User:Frontrow1122. Also similar username. MER-C 07:49, 11 February 2016 (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 following accounts are ✅ to :
 * Blocked and awaiting clean-up.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:04, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * No live edits remain. SmartSE (talk) 13:09, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Tagged and closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  14:44, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * No live edits remain. SmartSE (talk) 13:09, 11 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Tagged and closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  14:44, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

21 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

User created an article Draft:A.M. SNiPER which shows no signs of notability and was previously deleted because of being created by a sock of Orangemoody. Lakun.patra (talk) 16:09, 21 February 2016 (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 following accounts are ✅ to each other:
 * As for being related to Orangemoody, it's, though it could also easily be some separate form of COI/paid editing. I'd encourage someone to look over WaterWorld Themed Waterpark (Ayia Napa) to ensure there's proper notability. Mike V • Talk 17:37, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * As for being related to Orangemoody, it's, though it could also easily be some separate form of COI/paid editing. I'd encourage someone to look over WaterWorld Themed Waterpark (Ayia Napa) to ensure there's proper notability. Mike V • Talk 17:37, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * As for being related to Orangemoody, it's, though it could also easily be some separate form of COI/paid editing. I'd encourage someone to look over WaterWorld Themed Waterpark (Ayia Napa) to ensure there's proper notability. Mike V • Talk 17:37, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * As for being related to Orangemoody, it's, though it could also easily be some separate form of COI/paid editing. I'd encourage someone to look over WaterWorld Themed Waterpark (Ayia Napa) to ensure there's proper notability. Mike V • Talk 17:37, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * As for being related to Orangemoody, it's, though it could also easily be some separate form of COI/paid editing. I'd encourage someone to look over WaterWorld Themed Waterpark (Ayia Napa) to ensure there's proper notability. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 17:37, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

OM evidence: see establishing Manc1234 is OM.

Prof Aleiscter addition to Steven Holcomb exactly matches Orangemoody sock Manc1234's sandbox.
 * Manc1234 - text in sandbox:
 * Prof Aleiscter - addition to article:

Other behavioral evidence withheld due to WP:BEANS. ☆ Bri (talk) 20:27, 4 August 2017 (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

 * As you stated above, we linked Manc1234 earlier this week to Orangemoody. If that account isn't directly related to Orangemoody, he certainly took a page from that playbook.
 * Prof Aleiscter is ❌ to Manc1234. Closing. Katietalk 02:22, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Recreated Danish Sait which was created by, listed at Long-term abuse/Orangemoody/Accounts with CU linkage. Created in one edit formerly created in sandbox in one edit as if by copy/paste from another source.

Second editor Sumeetz similarly recreated Arr4's article in one edit. They are active on a bunch of low-grade paid-ish stuff too like and  as userpage indicates.

Submitted ☆ Bri (talk) 22:48, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Clarification on OM connection. Arr4 is a CU confirmed OM actor. Any of his deleted pages being recreated by new & oddly experienced accounts are suspect. The OM SPI archive is full of recreations, such as the 02 February 2016 editor(s) active at ChoiceTrade. ☆ Bri (talk) 02:46, 27 August 2017 (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

 * Could you comment on why you believe this is specifically OrangeMoody rather than just another undisclosed paid editor? ~ Rob 13 <sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">Talk 02:24, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
 * A company who pays for an article once is likely to pay for it again, which can draw in another paid editor. That's my main concern with declaring this behavior sufficient by itself for a determination of sockpuppetry. It's enough for a CU to compare against existing Orangemoody data; requested. ~ Rob 13 <sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">Talk 05:33, 27 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Wikieditorksd and Sumeetz are ❌ to one another. I also can't see any technical link to known Orangemoody socks, although it might be worth getting a second opinion from a CU who's more familiar with the case. Yunshui <sup style="font-size:90%">雲 <sub style="font-size:90%">水 11:42, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Closing with no action. There isn't enough to go on here to conclude either sockpuppetry or paid editing. ~ Rob 13 <sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">Talk 17:57, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

This find by suggested linking Karen Hilderbrand, SALTed, to Karen M. Hilderbrand. But I see that it's Karen Mitzo Hilderbrand, which led me here. This appears to be an uncaught sockpuppet of Orangemoody with a few more UPE articles. – Muboshgu (talk) 16:50, 14 January 2022 (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 account hasn't edited edited in over 3 years. At SPI, accounts this stale are usually just left alone. What action(s) are you wanting to be taken here? Sro23 (talk) 17:47, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
 * , confirming that its a sock and blocking it, considering this sockmaster was behind such a major case that there's a Wikipedia article about it. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:01, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Also whether or not the article should be G5. – Muboshgu (talk) 18:16, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Closing with no action taken. There's no point investigating an account which hasn't edited in 3-1/2 years.  If there's an article that needs deleting after all this time, WP:AfD is the place. -- RoySmith (talk) 21:15, 16 January 2022 (UTC)