Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Vickydvignesh/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

All three of these accounts have been engaging in the exact same editing pattern on One Piece related articles, including removing a source that directly states the worldwide print copies of the manga series that came directly from the publisher and adding in their own figure based on a compilations of sources. The similarity in name between Vickyluffy and Amvicky makes it obvious that the two accounts are the same person. —Farix (t &#124; c) 15:26, 13 April 2017 (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

 * ✅, blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:54, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

WP:QUACK, quack. Same types of edits, same arguments that a reliable source is "wrong". —Farix (t &#124; c) 15:44, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
 * added as this is another brand new account making similar edits as previous socks. —Farix (t &#124; c) 15:47, 18 April 2017 (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
— Berean Hunter   (talk)  02:18, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Added page protections, indeffing socks and closing.

Suspected sockpuppets



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


 * Lots of intersections with one of the socks, Amvicky in weird areas, like anime, manga, and Indian Tamil-language cinema.
 * was a chronic misuser of the minor edit feature, as is
 * "Correcting Error" (with those caps) comes up a lot in RajaRajaCholan's and Amvicky's edit summaries. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 10:54, 17 September 2017 (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

 * - Seems pretty close for a duck call imo but not rock-solid, enough evidence for CU persists.  QEDK  ( 愛  •  海 ) 15:33, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't see anything to check against, everything in the archives is stale. Courcelles (talk) 04:35, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Definitely my bad, I must have imagined some green "not stales" the last time I went through the archives, probably need my sleep. What'd be your behavioural take on this. -- QEDK ( 愛  •  海 ) 12:32, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I'd consider a block on behavioural grounds, but as I've got to run it won't be coming down right now. Courcelles (talk) 19:58, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

— Berean Hunter   (talk)  20:50, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Indeffed based on behavior and closing.