Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/WiccaWeb/Archive

Evidence submitted by Jæs
Holy sockpuppet case from the dead, Batman! In late 2007, an editor suspected User:WiccaWeb and User:Proxy User of being one and the same. The closing administrator at the time suggested meatpuppetry may have been the more likely situation, but because both accounts ceased editing, the case was closed inconclusively. Since then, User:Proxy User resumed editing somewhat regularly, while User:WiccaWeb has only edited sparingly, with nine edits total, including three deletion discussions. In each of those three, User:Proxy User also casted a !vote (or was the nominator), and in each of those three cases, the two shared the same viewpoint. Of the remaining six edits User:WiccaWeb has made since the initial report, four overlap with articles User:Proxy User has also edited, although the potential !vote stacking in deletion discussions is obviously more problematic. Both accounts apparently denied any connection with each other at that time, but the fact that User:WiccaWeb has had a 75% overlap in edits with User:Proxy User — and a 100% overlap in deletion discussions — across completely unrelated articles really blows past the limits of "coincidental" incredulity. The all but certain appearance of a sleeper account, or close friend, who can be called upon to assist in close deletion discussion debates is the big problem here, though. jæs (talk) 04:28, 22 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I also note the unusual (and actually uncharacteristic) tag team vandalism between User:WiccaWeb and User:Proxy User recently at the beignet article. jæs (talk)  05:02, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Requested by jæs (talk) 04:28, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

everyone here except from is. Will need to be decided on behavioural evidence. SpitfireTally-ho! 11:49, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * as has politely been pointed out to me by J, I messed up. The case is not stale after all. However, is stale, and will need to be decided based on the behavioural evidence (if deemed necessary, considering they haven;t edited for such a long time) SpitfireTally-ho! 01:55, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

a previous suspected sock puppets case on the users and  was eventually closed due to a lack of activity at the time. It seems that the editors have since been laying low, but continuing to edit. I would appreciate a check on the link between and  per the evidence presented in the previous case, and per this and this. Thanks SpitfireTally-ho! 01:55, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ that ProxyUser and WiccaWeb are technically identical. appears to be the same also. --jpgordon:==( o ) 00:00, 24 April 2010 (UTC)