Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Vice regent/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets

 * ( original case name)


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

First of all 11 first edit of the user were minor edit to gain autoconfirmed status on Indian topics similar to VR interest(e.g ). Also he used pretty advanced tools in his first edit he used shortdesk helper and hotcat in their third edit

The user has made 33 edits and already have 8 pages overlap with VR

In Talk:Islam and blasphemy Skilfingar supported Vice regent ,

In Violence in the Quran, the new account Skilfingar used edit summary with wiki markup "Not supported by secondary sources, see WP:OR"  which unusual for new user  also he removes the same text as VR.

He posted only one once on talk page and used the same phrase "seems to be" similar to VR ,. No one else used the same phrase on this talk page Shrike (talk) 07:57, 21 November 2021 (UTC)


 * @TonyBallioni Does it mean you didn't check it against no other user so for example if the master edited from the same city you couldn't detect it? Shrike (talk) 10:08, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

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

The phrase "seems to be" is commonly used, including by Shrike. Shrike has filed checkusers before for WP:fishing or with insufficient evidence.VR talk 07:02, 26 November 2021 (UTC)


 * First of all many of my investigation was closed when socks where blocked ,, But it doesn't answer question how that "new" account suddenly jumps in and revert the article to your preferred version. Could you explain how newly created account have the same interest as you and support you and then disappears? Shrike (talk) 09:22, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
 * A few successes against obvious WP:DUCKs is not an entitlement to weaponize SPI against those whose with opposing views.
 * Based on Shrike's logic, I could build a similar case for Free1Soul being Shrike's sock. Just as Skilfingar's first 10 edits were minor to get autoconfirmed, most of Free1Soul's first 500 edits were minor to get extended confirmed (required for I-P conflict). Then immediately after they start voting as the same side as Shrike in these discussions: (For the record, I do not think Free1Soul is Shrike's sock)
 * Or a more reasonable explanation is that (1) controversial topics like Islam and Israel attract new users, (2) two users with shared interests will likely have a large overlap and (3) users follow each other around.VR talk 15:05, 26 November 2021 (UTC)
 * Shrike, this is a good time to say something like "OK, I'm sorry". Drmies (talk) 22:18, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * @Vice regent Ok, I am sorry Shrike (talk) 05:31, 10 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks I appreciate it.VR talk 15:05, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I ran a check on Skilfingar because I believe there is enough evidence that they are likely a sock of someone acting in violation of policy to warrant a check. That check returned no other accounts - this does not indicate that they are not a sock, simply that no accounts edited on the same static IP during the CU retention period.I do not think there exists enough evidence to run a check on Vice regent, and I have not done so. That being said, if they were the accused sock, it is extremely likely I would have seen them when I ran my check there. Closing without action. If the accused sock is behaving disruptively in a way that requires administrative attention, please consider other noticeboards such as WP:ANI. TonyBallioni (talk) 01:49, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Unclosed because I noticed afterwards there was an extra space in the title. Could a clerk merge this with: Sockpuppet investigations/Vice regent? That appears to link to another SPI of a different account that is somehow related? I can't follow the details there, but if someone could figure out how best to handle this in terms of paperwork, I'd appreciate it. Thanks for your help :) TonyBallioni (talk) 01:54, 5 December 2021 (UTC)

 
 * , correct. I checked the account and determined that it edited solely from a static IP that didn't show any sign of being a VPN or other type of masking technology. I then ran a check on that IP to see if there were any other users associated with it, and there weren't. I don't think there's a need to do a range check on a clearly static IP, and if Vice regent was the suspected sock, it would be extremely likely they showed up on the check. If you have another proposed master, feel free to file an SPI with clear diffs, and a comparison check can be run. TonyBallioni (talk) 19:38, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * - for training. --Jack Frost (talk) 09:08, 5 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Acknowledging the unusual history there in relation to Bless sins, could an adminclerk please histmerge this case to Sockpuppet investigations/Vice regent (without the leading space)? I can do the cleanup. Thanks, --Jack Frost (talk) 03:01, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Ping to, since he seems to be around these days :) TonyBallioni (talk) 01:38, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ Sro23 (talk) 22:15, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Case merged. Note left at top of page to explain the history. Sockpuppet investigations/ Vice regent redirected here. Re-closing. --Jack Frost (talk) 21:45, 10 December 2021 (UTC)