Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sir Thiago/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

In this AfD, a second, no-previous-contributions account appeared, as red-inked as the editor whose opinion the second one supports, and said almost the same things. Then a third one. The worst part is that I agree with "their" position! But I care about integrity in Wikipedia more than I care about some AfD. I'm hopeless this way. The Gnome (talk) 14:18, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Well, I was making the same report as above. I will delete that one and place my comments up here:

These new users' only contributions are detailed support for the sockmaster's position in an AfD discussion (LordPedro and IPCL). LordPedro account was created at was created at 9:42 am, made one edit posted at 10:06 am. The ICPL account was created three minutes later, and posted their only edit to this obscure AfD 15 minyes later. Both accounts properly pipe linked essays and guidelines in their very first edits, and discussion style is similar to the sockmaster. Note the the affected article was created by the sockmaster, and almost all edits revolve around it.  Scr ★ pIron IV 15:04, 24 May 2018 (UTC)


 * I was going to file an SPI report, but I feel like Sir Thiago was a good faith contributor (plus I'm a bit busy today) . I brought the issue to his talk page and advised him against sockpuppetry without being aware of this report. And while he did not explicitly admit to using sockpuppets, he removed their comments from the AfD a while later before getting blocked, which I took as a good faith gesture. How about we give this potentially useful contribuor a second chance? Fitzcarmalan (talk) 15:34, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I won't be the one to agree to reinstate a confirmed sockpuppet, at least not for anything less than a cooling period of a minimum of six months. The damage socks are doing is significant. Not all contributors are alert to the practice, nor do they have the time and inclination to waste time on investigation requests. So they commingle honest input with dross. Take care. -The Gnome (talk) 15:48, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. I can definitely relate to that. Fitzcarmalan (talk) 16:03, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
✅, blocked and tagged. is encouraged to seek therapy for their hopelessness. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:19, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Sir Thiago initially registered as Sir Portuga, and edited only the Ottoman-Portuguese War article. After being blocked for sockpuppetry, the account Sir Portuga was created and edited the same article.  Scr ★ pIron IV 14:15, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * There goes the good-faith assumption. -The Gnome (talk) 08:24, 27 May 2018 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
✅, blocked, tagged, closed.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:56, 25 May 2018 (UTC)