Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ProCheater1780/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Basically, an absolute 'duck': Currently the sock has only made c. 20 edits and minimal revert-warring, but this is entirely consistent with how the master used to return from blocks - a few small, similar, probing edits before starting full on edit wars. -- Begoon 07:20, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Edits to same niche Malaysia related articles: Prime Minister of Malaysia, Yang di-Pertuan Agong, Government of Malaysia etc...
 * Typically makes series of rapid small edits, then edit wars if reverted.
 * Likes to add coats-of arms:, , ,
 * Likes to alter infobox "native name" parameters:, ,
 * Makes exactly the same obscure edit with 2 accounts: ,

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Note: I originally posted this to Deskana's talk page after he posted his findings, and he suggested it was best for me to post it here, even though the case is marked "closing", so that the closing clerk/admin could take it into account when combining technical/behavioural data.
 * I understand that the technical evidence was only "possible", but honestly, this is the same user, absolute dead-set duck. Take a look at the latest edits to Malaysia, where they make, and immediately self-revert the same edits to the native-name parameter, and Prime Minister of Malaysia/Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia, where they misuse infobox params to insert Coat of Arms, just as previously - and just the editing overlaps in general. Ok, it's not terribly disruptive yet, but it's certainly block evasion. -- Begoon 21:53, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree with Begoon as based on all the contributions made by Mrsbanny is all related to articles once heavily targeted by ProCheater1780. This certainly falls under a block evasion. Molecule Extraction (talk) 07:36, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I'd call it evaluated on a purely technical basis, as the evidence is far from conclusive. I think it'd be best to keep a close eye on the user rather than blocking them on shaky evidence. --Deskana (talk) 10:53, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I don't find the evidence all that shaky. . Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 22:31, 27 February 2018 (UTC)