Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Strathisla1/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Continuous unsourced edits and vandalism to Matthew_Gordon-Banks despite previous bans and warnings not to edit. Self declarations have been made in the pages talk section. In the edit history Charlbury4 talks in first person, suggesting they are the subject. Other accounts created by the subject (connected contributor) have been banned in the past for the same reasons. Moist towelett (talk) 17:54, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Comment/request: "Strathisla1" hasn't contributed since 2015 and was never blocked until this week. "Bulldog4" was blocked indefinitely in 2017: a first block, because "Clearly not here to contribute to the encyclopedia". Bulldog4's edits were indeed worrisome and it was right that they were censured. But they strike me as would-be improvements (however wrongheaded); they're not at all the kind of stuff that has me select "Clearly not here to contribute to the encyclopedia" when blocking trolls, drunks, madmen and the like. On his talk page, Bulldog4 was invited to appeal the block, but he did not do so. At 17:54, 23 May 2019, User:Moist towelett posted an allegation of sock-puppetry at User talk:Charlbury4. Moist Towelett did so via the standard template. This invites the reader "to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation". Experienced readers will understand that this is to be done here, but the reader who's inexperienced or rattled may not get this. At 19:48, 23 May 2019, Charlbury4 posted an informative and polite response on his talk page. One is free to dispute some of its content or to point out that it glosses over this or that, but it strikes me as at least worth consideration and a civil response. However, I see no sign that anyone has looked at it. At 21:19, 23 May 2019, User:ST47 posted a template saying that Charlbury4 was blocked indefinitely, without any mention of what Charlbury4 had written on that same user talk page three hours earlier. I ask ST47 to consider what Charlbury4 wrote. -- Hoary (talk) 00:08, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello. I did read the post on Charlbury4's talk page where they admit to sockpuppetry. Bulldog4 had been blocked for not here to contribute to the encyclopedia, as they were attempting to remove criticism from their own Wikipedia entry - removing sourced content - giving explanations such as obviously the sources are wrong and very quickly moving to personal attacks and also here. The current user admits that all three accounts are theirs (and therefore that they are evading a block), and even if they hadn't, 2 of the 3 accounts claimed to be the subject of the Wikipedia article and the 3rd is obviously POV/COI too. I'd be open to considering an unblock request, but the subject of the block needs to initiate that. (And in case you're reading User:Charlbury, that would be using the unblock template on your user talk page, not by creating another new account.) I expect the community would want to see a commitment not to edit articles where they have a conflict of interest anymore. But that's not a discussion for here. If the user wants to try following the policies, they need to ask to be unblocked. ST47 (talk) 00:43, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * . The proper master is Strathisla1, can a clerk please move the case? I'll use Strathisla1 as the master for the tags. ST47 (talk) 21:21, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Cabayi (talk) 08:48, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * repeating 's ping of (omitted the 4). Cabayi (talk) 08:48, 24 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Moved, post-move fixes, closing. Cabayi (talk) 08:49, 24 May 2019 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Edits on the page Matthew_Gordon-Banks are similar to vandalism in the past. Moist towelett (talk) 13:09, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , Unless you can provide diffs as requested below, this will need to be closed. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:55, 18 May 2021 (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 need more information. Can you provide diffs that show that these two accounts are controlled by the same person?  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   15:51, 10 May 2021 (UTC)


 * No response to requests for more info, closing. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:08, 23 May 2021 (UTC)