Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Superyoungmanrexon/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets
This new account is recently created to edit Thanus Karan Swamy which is not notable person and its purpose was to remove CSD and push this article on wikipedia. How a newly created account just came to edit for this person? This both accounts might be sock of eachother. DIVINE  📪  19:05, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

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


 * another IP which might be connected with same sock is in the game now. DIVINE   📪  07:45, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * It's certainly possible, but no need to pull out the big guns at this stage. I left them both uw-agf-sock and we'll see where things go from here.  -- RoySmith (talk) 22:00, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm confused by this close. The master has done nothing else on Wikipedia besides trying to create this dreadful spam page ("There are a lot of renowned names in the market when it comes to entrepreneurial ventures. One of the many names is a young talent who is, at present, the CEO of a company Red-Dragon his name is Thanus Karan Swamy"). The second account was used to remove a speedy tag from the article. That's not an innocent mistake or misunderstanding of policy - it's clear abuse of multiple accounts.  Spicy (talk) 05:59, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree with Spicy's take on this, well said. – Athaenara  ✉  07:31, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I also agree with Spicy, and honestly think either could be blocked as a spam-only account regardless of socking. As to IP27, I think they're more likely to be (SPI) based on overlap with . But haven't thought too hard about that.  --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she/they) 08:16, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
 * My take on this is that one of two things will happen. Either we'll have no more problems from them, in which case, we're good.  Or, there will be further problems, in which case they will generate additional evidence to justify a block, in which case we're also good.  There's very little downside to extending a little WP:AGF and WP:ROPE at the same time.  And, my declining to run CU on them doesn't preclude another admin from taking their own action if there's other reasons to block. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:18, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I profoundly disagree. The downside is wasting the resources of the ever-stretched-thin NPP and AfC processes on a user who has shown zero intent to contribute productively to Wikipedia. I've indeffed Superyoungmanrexon as a spam-only account. Very tempted to do the same with Burstout007, but without CU evidence of socking I can't quite say they've worn out their welcome here, so I'll hold off for now. --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she/they) 15:31, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm satisfied that Burstout007 is either sock or meat as well. . --Blablubbs (talk) 18:00, 10 June 2022 (UTC)