Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wareon/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

was blocked for socking and decided to take it upon themself to G5 several articles of Kashmorwiki like 1, 2, 3, 4 apart from several others. These edits were challenged. Subsequently, an IP: 106.197.17.133 started G5'ing a few more articles created by Kashmorwiki such as 5, 6, 7, 8 apart from several others. This IP was blocked and prima facie it appears to be a logged in-logged out editor. VV 11:33, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I do not have data to discard an alternative hypothesis. Sorry. VV 11:58, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
 * On the contrary, from the 'Editor Interaction Analyser', I see an overlap of 11 articles. That is solid enough for a sock-block. VV 12:08, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I understand what you are saying. I randomly picked over a dozen G5 edits and cannot find another editor who tried to G5 Kashmorwiki's articles apart from the IP in question. Occam's razor is my position. VV 12:42, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I have placed the uw-login template on the user's talk page based on the discussion below. VV 13:28, 9 May 2021 (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

 * - What makes you think that this is Wareon as opposed to someone else (or potentially an IP editor, though that strikes me as less likely)? I wouldn't be surprised if there are some other people who have strong opinions on G5, grudges against Kashmorwiki, or both.  You reverted many of the tags with the comment "Logged out editor indiscriminately tagging articles" – did you have anyone specific in mind there? --Blablubbs&#124;talk 11:52, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
 * The overlap isn't particularly convincing to me because there's a simple good-faith explanation for why it may occur: They were both independently working off the same list of article creations. I note that all the IP edits are mobile edits while Wareon has made a total of 6 mobile edits over the last 2+ years, and that all of the IP edits use edit summaries, which Wareon did not use any when tagging. There was also some sockfarm untagging articles, I wouldn't be surprised if they were doing some GHBH thing. The IP itself isn't actionable at this point; range- or single IP blocks on that range and ISP probably won't do much good. The question is whether we have enough to conclusively connect it to Wareon to sanction them, and I'm not sufficiently convinced of the link to endorse sanctions because there are lots of alternative explanations. I'm inclined to close this with no action, but ping I'd appreciate a second opinion if you have time.  --Blablubbs&#124;talk 12:22, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , would uw-login be useful? It's a gentle reminder to the forgetful, a "we see you" to the guilty. Cabayi (talk) 12:48, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks – I'm not sure, because I sort of consider uw-login to be a milder alternative to a sanction, and I'm not sufficiently convinced of the link here. If you don't think the evidence is conclusive enough either, I'd lean towards just closing with no action taken, but I don't have any strong objections if someone wants to place a uw-login. --Blablubbs&#124;talk 13:12, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Closing. --Blablubbs&#124;talk 13:29, 9 May 2021 (UTC)