Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SeikoEn/Archive

15 September 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Users share identical sphere of interests and together involve in an edit war adhering to the same position, e.g.. Their rhetoric and language style are also hard to distinguish, cf. ,. This looks like a misuse of another account for advancing a POV. Glebchik (talk) 20:09, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

Maybe of interest: User:Vitaly N. extensively cites and praises User:SeikoEn here. --Voyevoda (talk) 21:23, 15 September 2011 (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

 * Based on behavior and other factors, I think it's possible they're the same. Having said that, these accounts aren't all that new, so I'm adding a checkuser to see if they're the same before we take any action. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 01:23, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ Vitaly N. = SeikoEn, straight match. - Mailer Diablo 10:32, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Master gets 48 hrs, Vitaly N. indef. - Mailer Diablo 10:45, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

17 April 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Both accounts were registered at the time when SeikoEn became inactive after being topic-banned from edits relating to Ukraine. All their activity is similar to one of SeikoEn (and his previous sock Vitaly N.), i.e., has to do with articles on Ukrainians (involving POV-pushing). They also share the same rhetoric (and even phraseology and spelling errors, e.g., "Be objectiv!"), accusing opponents (or any other users who disagree with him) in Anti-Ukrainianism, vandalism, fascism etc., cf., Olexiy Parker, , SeikoEn/Vitaly N.: , UAKasper:. Recently, both of these accounts have taken part in the poll about the famous Ukrainians' montage and have voted for same persons. They also use same phrases in the edit summary. Looks like an obvious case of sock-puppetry for evading a topic ban. glossologist (talk) 15:37, 17 April 2012 (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 accounts in the archive are, but the following are the same:
 * TN X Man 15:55, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Is it possible to conclude that these accounts belong to SeikoEn (and block them as socks) by using the duck test? It's fairly obvious here. You can ask Future Perfect at Sunrise, who has set the topic ban, for a confirmation. --glossologist (talk) 16:04, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Given the proven identity of the two new accounts with each other (which means there has been illicit sockpuppetry between them if nothing else), together with their blatantly disruptive battleground attitude and the obvious similarities with the older SeikoEn account, I think we can safely declare them duckoform, and accordingly duckify (duckhilate? enduckon?) them. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:34, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Accounts duckisized, marking for close. TN X Man  17:53, 17 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Accounts duckisized, marking for close. TN X Man  17:53, 17 April 2012 (UTC)