Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Robertpattinsons/Archive

09 October 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

User is involved in long term promotional/spam efforts. User first reported to AIV, who referred to AN/I. At AN/I, it was suggested that a checkuser would be prudent as the user appears to have at least one sock, and is related to a company specializing in SEO/marketing efforts. See MER-C's comment in linked AN/I section:

Original AIV:

LissaCoffey had a user page which copied Robertpattinsons', which was deleted by an admin as COPYVIO. LissaCoffey's only other contribution is to barnstar the primary's account. Robertpattinsons has alternatively claimed that LissaCoffey is their wife (Through linking to an aboutus.org site) and to be LissaCoffey (Through linking to a CNN iReporter by the same name.) User had previously linked to a different CNN iReporter, as noted at AN/I. -- ferret (talk) 16:48, 9 October 2013 (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

 * Whether it's socking or MEAT, the two accounts are ✅ on at least one shared IP. --Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 17:11, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I've indef blocked User:LissaCoffey for abuse of multiple accounts and User:Robertpattinsons for socking and for being a spam-only account. If one of the clerks could apply the proper tags I'd appreciate it. The userboxes and awards shown on the user page at User:Robertpattinsons would be truly impressive if we could believe anything there. He indicates that he has five years of service while his first edit was in December, 2012. EdJohnston (talk) 19:00, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Tagged User:LissaCoffey and User:Robertpattinsons. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:06, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
Robertpattinsons and JenifferHomes made almost identical unblock request via UTRS within a short time span, with only different years given(Robert, UTRS 56226, Jeniffer 56225) Mostly noting for the record as both are already blocked. 331dot (talk) 07:23, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Direct links:, . I concur the unblock requests were specifically identical in the way 331dot notes. --Yamla (talk) 07:27, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm interested in opinions here. Skiyomi joe-job, maybe? I haven't looked with checkuser tools yet because I'm not immediately sure it'd be worthwhile here. There's something dubious going on, though. --Yamla (talk) 07:30, 20 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the link, couldn't think of how to do that. I bet you are right as both accounts had not edited in years. 331dot (talk) 07:36, 20 March 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

 * I did a bit of rummaging around in the CU logs, and ran a couple of checks. I assume that they logged in to make their unblock requests, because neither account was stale, both are ✅ to one another, and also to:
 * FWIW, they're on a different IP from the one I looked at in the logs, but the geolocation is roughly the same. Will block the new account.  Girth Summit  (blether)  10:08, 21 March 2022 (UTC)
 * FWIW, they're on a different IP from the one I looked at in the logs, but the geolocation is roughly the same. Will block the new account.  Girth Summit  (blether)  10:08, 21 March 2022 (UTC)