Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Windows.dll/Archive

18 October 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

User:Christy Walton was blocked yesterday as a possible impersonator (or non confirmed account) of Christy Walton. User:Windows.dll was blocked for 72 hours for edit warring. When this block expired, he or she posted an autoblock template: with the message "Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Christy Walton". " Considering that Windows.dll claims to live in Maine, and that the real Christy Walton lives in Wyoming, and taking into account that Windows.dll had edited User:Christy Walton before these blocks occurred, it seems to be likely that Windows.dll is the editor behind the Christy Walton account, and has thus violated Wikipedia policy (impersonating a real person). (No diffs since the user page was deleted, but it only has four edits so not hard to find for any admin looking at this).

Confirmation of this (or an explanation of where my reasoning is off and which innocent explanation is also possible) would be welcome.

Whether there is any connection between this situation and the fact that the same IP 65.175.243.48 has been blocked in June as being used by sockmaster User:Ryanjay1996 is unclear to me, but ay be relevant for checkusers and clerks seeing this. Fram (talk) 11:07, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

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


 * Perhaps deleted contributions contain details that warrant this request. Otherwise I am not seeing overlapping use or deceptive use that wouldn't be appropriate for an undisclosed alternate account. No indication of evading the 72 hour block either. Before a checkuser accesses the personal information that this request requires, The abusive use of an alternate account should be described, IMO. - 76 Strat String da Broke da (talk) 11:35, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 * If Windows.dll has created the account Christy Walton, which claimed to be "the" Christy Walton, then he or she has violated WP:IMPERSONATE, and used that fake account to edit the article on the real Christy Walton, making it appear as if the source for these edits was a reliable primary source for these edits. The fact that these edits introduced a non-existant personal website lend weight to the idea that this was perhaps not the real Christy Walton.
 * So, if you have one account blocked for 72 hours for disruptive editing, and it turns out that the day before that block you were being disruptive with another, undisclosed and policy-violating account, then that 72 hour block may well be extended to a much longer one. Of course, if these two accounts are not the qame editor, then such a block extension would be highly unfair. And on the other hand, if both accounts were operated by an already indef blocked sockmaster, then an instant indef is the logical result. Fram (talk) 11:50, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 * You admit on the user's talk page: that you "may be missing a perfectly valid innocent explanation for this." I believe that you are. More importantly it proves that you can fathom good faith explanations. Therefor the fish smell you opined about is more than likely a metaphoric precursor to the fishing expedition you are attempting to arrange. I've looked a second time at the edits in history; the connections to disruption and abusive-use, are tenuous at best. And they predicate bad faith assumptions. I am here to observe the proper handling of this account, and I intend to scrutinize the matter to ensure adherence to both the letter and spirit of our governing instruments. Cheers - 76  Strat String da Broke da (talk) 12:56, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Care to provide that explanation that you believe I am missing? All I see now is some empty rhetoric and a fairly ridiculous edit summary from your part. Fram (talk) 13:05, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Reaper Eternal states: "I'd say that it is extremely likely that Windows.dll operated the Christy Walton account." I agree with that assessment. You, Fram, stated: "If Windows.dll has created the account Christy Walton, which claimed to be "the" Christy Walton, then he or she has violated WP:IMPERSONATE". I do not see this impersonation "claim". The extrapolations necessary to suggest a direct claim are in fact tenuous. While a connection to Ryanjay1996 would erode AGF, their last edit was March 14, 2012, so I am reluctant to believe it is reasonable to expect conclusive results. I could easily be wrong to that regard, and if a checkuser says without equivocation that they are linked, I'll accept that as true. If my edit summary impressed you as ridiculous, then I successfully summarized my intent, for I do believe you have taken a ridiculous leap of bad faith. And I know as well that I hold a minority view. But I do hold the view and I'm not an empty suit. Cheers - 76 Strat String da Broke da (talk) 15:38, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - Endorsing. We already know they share an IP, but checkuser could help find any other accounts, since the IP has been used for puppeting in the past. Furthermore, useragent info may help. I'd say that it is extremely likely that Windows.dll operated the Christy Walton account. This will also let us know if the master is really the already-blocked puppetteer . Reaper Eternal (talk) 13:08, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Based on further investigations into the behavior and based on the IP sharing, I am 100% positive that Windows.dll made Christy Walton. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:14, 18 October 2012 (UTC)


 * ✅ ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:54, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Confirmed as each other or as ? Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:58, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Confirmed as one another. Ryanjay1996 and socks are editing from a different part of the world. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 18:09, 18 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Blocked the master one week for puppeting, and sock blocked indefinitely. Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:14, 18 October 2012 (UTC)