Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sianzun/Archive

05 October 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Both "Sian" accounts plus the IP improperly changing names in Kattel Bridge without providing sources. Master was repeatedly overwriting a redirect at Zomi with content previously flagged as a copyvio which got the article protected. Now they seem to have misinterpreted that as a block, and created a new account to evade it. I added The Zomi here because this user was making similar edits at Zomi some time ago (blanked page & replaced with copyvio'd content, same as above) and may be related. Ivanvector (talk) 14:56, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Reply to Clerk: Sianzun began requesting edits with the Edit protected template on a page which was not protected, immediately after having been warned about 3RR. My conclusion vague theory was that this indicated they considered themselves to have been blocked. I get that it was not a very good theory, and it would be more likely that they thought the page was protected, or much more likely they just didn't know what they were doing. Given the CU results this SPI is probably moot anyway. Ivanvector (talk) 20:10, 19 October 2014 (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 Zomi is stale, so the purpose of the CU is to see if there is a connection between the master and Siansiam. The puppet has made only one edit, and although he changed the name of the bridge, as did the master, the changes weren't identical. The stale puppet has far more editing history, including a bunch of deleted contributions. I would be more inclined to block the stale account based on behavior if there is a technical indication indicating that the master has a predilection for creating multiple accounts. As an aside, I don't get Ivan's conclusion that the protection was interpreted as a block.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:05, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
 * The following accounts are to be related:
 * PhilKnight (talk) 19:55, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
 * PhilKnight (talk) 19:55, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
 * PhilKnight (talk) 19:55, 19 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Based on the CU, I'm taking no action against any of the accounts.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:47, 19 October 2014 (UTC)