Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Phoebe.Ashley/Archive

17 December 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

User:Phoebea37 only edit was voting on AfD discussion here. Looks like a sock. Kindly block. Thanks  Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk)  10:10, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm adding Phoebe.Ashley to the case. As Vanjagenije states, RoosterCreative does not exist as a user. This is in connection with Articles for deletion/Khalid Aziz (2nd nomination), where Phoebe.Ashley commented but signed as RoosterCreative, then Phoebea37 also placed another similar comment, unsigned and later removed the comment after this SPI was filed. Following those events, Phoebe.Ashley commented again as herself (diff combining three edits). —David Eppstein (talk)
 * - just to clarify, User talk:RoosterCreative did exist, but apparently requested a rename of their account (see the request here). The account confusion could be just a first-time slip of an unexperienced user though (not sure either way). GermanJoe (talk) 07:37, 20 December 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

 * - User:RoosterCreative does not exist.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  20:28, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * - See .  Vanjagenije  (talk)  19:40, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
 * - This seems rather obvious for the need for CU...am I missing something? --  Amanda  (aka DQ) 13:40, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Sock indeffed, master blocked for 10 days. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  01:34, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Given Phoebe.Ashley has only been registered for 2 weeks a 10 day block for two edits to an AfD seems pretty harsh. I probably would have warned or blocked for 24-48 hours. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Callanecc (talk • contribs) 08:44, 26 December 2015 (UTC)