Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Patrick L. Stephen/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Account created shortly after puppeteer was blocked, and went almost immediately to a page of the puppeteer which had been sitting in the puppeteers' userspace, and moved it to mainspace, see history here. And of course the similarity in username.  Onel 5969  TT me 15:14, 26 January 2021 (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

 * Sock blocked by . Closing.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 23:11, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

On March 27, I had a minor conflict with the IP about some peculiar edits to User talk:216.115.113.29. This eventually led to me clearing the ancient messages from this page. Amonguslover showed up today and reinstated the old messages, which caused me to investigate further. The page has recently been edited in much the same way by which is globally locked as a sock of Patrick L. Stephen and furthermore, Amonguslover has has tried unsuccessfully to edit User:Ned is Freddie (CU blocked as a sock of PLS) and User:Hehrrbrbr (blocked for plain old vandalism, but their edits look like something from the same sock drawer). Several of PLS's socks have been CU blocked, so I'm requesting a check for sleepers or otherwise detection-avoinding accounts. Obviously, no comments on the IP, whose /64 range will probably be blocked again soon anyway. Favonian (talk) 14:07, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The plot thickens! Amonguslover also created User talk:DeltaQuad (user), a talk page of a blocked impersonation account. Now, DeltaQuad is the former name of, the CU who swung the hammer on several of the PLS socks. Guess the tagging of that account counts as an hommage. Favonian (talk) 14:23, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * They are not being overly concerned about the privacy aspect. Favonian (talk) 15:55, 5 April 2021 (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

 * – per filer. Please look for sleepers. Thanks and best, Blablubbs&#124;talk 14:26, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Also, please check for collateral on the /64 – not asking for any connection to an account, but it's clearly them and very likely essentially static, so it's good for an extended hardblock if there are no legitimate users on it (or a softblock if there are). Blablubbs&#124;talk 14:43, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Amonguslover is to Patrick L. Stephen, but there is a device match. This combined with all of the behavioral similarities noted above makes this pass the WP:DUCK test for me. ., but to answer 's question, there would be little to no collateral damage if that /64 range is hard-blocked. Mz7 (talk) 01:43, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * since previous socks have been locked. Mz7 (talk) 01:47, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * 2600:6c5a:7f:ff94::/64 blocked on behavioral evidence. All done; closing. Favonian (talk) 05:40, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , per Mz7's answer above, there wouldn't be any significant collateral if the /64 was hardblocked – would you mind bumping the block up to hard? Blablubbs&#124;talk 08:57, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * With serene pleasure, . Favonian (talk) 09:01, 6 April 2021 (UTC)