Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Volcanicsnow/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

was blocked on 2019-07-03. Here, indicates they've been recruited by a friend to continue editing Draft:Fiorano Software (they specifically address that that is the page they are talking about here and here). We have previously established that and  were likely sockpuppets of Neverenough5 and the account was previously blocked on that basis. So, we know Volcanicsnow was recruited by Neverenough5 in violation of WP:MEAT. My question is, is this actually an outright violation of WP:SOCK. That is, are they the same user? If so, I should move the sockpuppetry tags around to indicate Volcanicsnow is the new sockmaster. If not, my opinion is that Volcanicsnow shouldn't be blocked so long as they stop trying to edit on behalf of a blocked user. Yamla (talk) 11:02, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Here, requests db-self, thereby claiming to be the original author of the page (. --Yamla (talk) 12:14, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

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

I hereby declare that i am not the same user, I am a super old user of Wiki dating back to 2011, in any case as far as editing a post on behalf of the "friend" is concerned i had only joined in because i thought the page was incorrectly marked for review even when it was not advertising a product or promoting anything and was just telling the world about a company's existence. The purpose was to bring that to the notice of the admin that it didn't violate a policy if its not promotional, i had not done any edits to the content of the page except for what i thought was wrongly removed, i have already asked my friend to request deletion of the page as i did realize after the review that as per Wiki Policy they didn't have much citations to make it notable. I do feel that when a user is posting a page and it does not violate some severe policies the admin or other contributors may suggest changes rather than marking for review for policy violation and banning users, I do understand there are millions of requests everyday but the sole purpose of Wiki is to be a know it all right ? If we keep marking users for ban without seeing the purpose behind the page, we are actually losing out on a lot of genuine content. Thats what i feel, if you still wish to continue the investigation God be with you. Volcanicsnow (talk) 12:43, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The following three accounts are ✅:
 * Neverenough5
 * Onaroif
 * The question as to whether Volcanicsnow is a sock or a meat puppet cannot be definitively answered. However, they are one or the other, and, in my view, more likely meat. I've blocked the two unblocked accounts without tags.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:56, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Close per the above. The SandDoctor  Talk 17:59, 17 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Close per the above. The SandDoctor  Talk 17:59, 17 August 2019 (UTC)