Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sunilseth15/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

There was enough behavioural evidence to tie Desibee55 and Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant (and therefore Carriearchdale) together but I'm requesting a CU for specifically Shyam Hewitt since the evidence occurs off site. Mkdw talk 21:46, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Shyam Hewitt and Desibee55 are both WP:SPA and have both seemingly engaged in undisclosed paid editing on different articles : Richard B. Herman and Alex Becker.
 * Shyam Hewitt and Desibee55 have both used images uploaded to Wikipedia that were released from the same flickr account. The flickr account has only three images and whose seeming purpose is only to provide images for Wikipedia articles. One of the images clearly has a copyright watermark suggesting that they've been falsely flagged as being able to be released under a CC license.
 * Desibee55 and Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant both edited the article Richard B. Herman
 * Carriearchdale has been banned by the community. Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant was tied to this account.
 * Adding Carlieson to the list after this SPA created an article about the individual in the last photo from the flickr account. Mkdw talk 21:59, 19 July 2016 (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 following accounts are ✅ to each other:
 * Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant is ❌ to the above accounts.
 * Based on the location that Carriearchdale was supposedly editing from, the confirmed accounts are ❌ to Carriearchdale.
 * This is copied from Sockpuppet investigations/Carriearchdale. All tagged. Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:40, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Please see Special:Permalink/730817529 for details on community ban and articles created by this sock farm. Mkdw talk 18:06, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant is ❌ to the above accounts.
 * Based on the location that Carriearchdale was supposedly editing from, the confirmed accounts are ❌ to Carriearchdale.
 * This is copied from Sockpuppet investigations/Carriearchdale. All tagged. Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:40, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Please see Special:Permalink/730817529 for details on community ban and articles created by this sock farm. Mkdw talk 18:06, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant is ❌ to the above accounts.
 * Based on the location that Carriearchdale was supposedly editing from, the confirmed accounts are ❌ to Carriearchdale.
 * This is copied from Sockpuppet investigations/Carriearchdale. All tagged. Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:40, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Please see Special:Permalink/730817529 for details on community ban and articles created by this sock farm. Mkdw talk 18:06, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant is ❌ to the above accounts.
 * Based on the location that Carriearchdale was supposedly editing from, the confirmed accounts are ❌ to Carriearchdale.
 * This is copied from Sockpuppet investigations/Carriearchdale. All tagged. Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:40, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Please see Special:Permalink/730817529 for details on community ban and articles created by this sock farm. Mkdw talk 18:06, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant is ❌ to the above accounts.
 * Based on the location that Carriearchdale was supposedly editing from, the confirmed accounts are ❌ to Carriearchdale.
 * This is copied from Sockpuppet investigations/Carriearchdale. All tagged. Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:40, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Please see Special:Permalink/730817529 for details on community ban and articles created by this sock farm. Mkdw talk 18:06, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant is ❌ to the above accounts.
 * Based on the location that Carriearchdale was supposedly editing from, the confirmed accounts are ❌ to Carriearchdale.
 * This is copied from Sockpuppet investigations/Carriearchdale. All tagged. Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:40, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Please see Special:Permalink/730817529 for details on community ban and articles created by this sock farm. Mkdw talk 18:06, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant is ❌ to the above accounts.
 * Based on the location that Carriearchdale was supposedly editing from, the confirmed accounts are ❌ to Carriearchdale.
 * This is copied from Sockpuppet investigations/Carriearchdale. All tagged. Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:40, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Please see Special:Permalink/730817529 for details on community ban and articles created by this sock farm. Mkdw talk 18:06, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Fouetté rond de jambe en tournant is ❌ to the above accounts.
 * Based on the location that Carriearchdale was supposedly editing from, the confirmed accounts are ❌ to Carriearchdale.
 * This is copied from Sockpuppet investigations/Carriearchdale. All tagged. Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:40, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Please see Special:Permalink/730817529 for details on community ban and articles created by this sock farm. Mkdw talk 18:06, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

This one is checkuser stale, but it created GoodCall which was subsequently deleted as part of the spam campaign by this sockmaster. BethNaught (talk) 10:39, 2 August 2016 (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 see little point in blocking an account that hasn't been used in six months. If the account resumes activity, you can of course refile.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:14, 2 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I think in a typical SPI we wouldn't block, but in light of the community ban against the editor, including all of their alternate accounts, I've gone ahead and blocked the account. There's fairly substantial behavioural evidence tying this one to the others. Mkdw talk 16:07, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Account which made one vaguely promotional page >2 years ago reactivates to question the deletion by me of one of the sockfarm's articles. This sleeper pattern fits some other socks and is very suspicious. Given this pattern, can we also have a general check for any other previously stale socks which may have reactivated. BethNaught (talk) 20:25, 7 September 2016 (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

 * Schreids is ❌.
 * is ✅, but this isn't a sleeper, but rather looks like an account I missed earlier. Blocked and tagged. No other unblocked accounts seen. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:18, 7 September 2016 (UTC)