Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Yarongueta/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Almost certain Yarongueta and Yoavsofer are socks of each other. They are similarly-named WP:SPAs created within a few days of each other. They have been used only to edit Glassbox in a way that was WP:PROMOtional and WP:COI. The first one seems to be. Zazpot (talk) 03:43, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Thanks. I agree those two accounts have not been used for several months.
 * Nevertheless, Wikipedia's guidance to editors about handling suspected sockpuppets is just to report them at WP:SPI, which is what I have done. AFAICT, neither WP:HSOCK, WP:SPI, WP:SOCK, nor WP:Sockpuppet_investigations/SPI/guide require a sock to be fresh in order to be report-worthy.
 * I suppose the reasoning is: better that sockpuppeting is caught late (and noted in the account/block logs) than that it is not caught at all. A sock is a sock, active or not.
 * Also, the two accounts reported above turned the Glassbox article into something of an WP:ADVERT. I was on a wikibreak when that happened; but now that I am back, one item on my to-do list is to make the article more encyclopaedic. I therefore would not be surprised if those accounts (or new socks of their sockmaster) become active in the future to try to reinstate the current promotional tone of the article.
 * Thanks again, Zazpot (talk) 03:07, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
 * , thanks for explaining. Zazpot (talk) 10:21, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Thanks for the report. You're probably right but the two accounts look very stale – they last edited in January. Is there something I'm missing? Best, KevinL ( aka L235 · t · c) 00:15, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, I get that. We generally discourage reports where every editor is substantially stale: WP:BLOCKPREVENTATIVE generally requires that misconduct be recent to support a block. And reports of issues this old tend to take a lot of administrative time on issues that are relatively unlikely to recur and often involve more intricacies than filers expect: for example, in this case, there could be a question of sockpuppetry vs. meatpuppetry, as well as whether these accounts were WP:ILLEGIT or if, for example, the user simply forgot their password. Because most of the benefits of keeping a record of potential sockpuppetry are already accomplished by the existence of this report, and because these accounts are stale, I'm closing this. Best, KevinL ( aka L235 · t · c) 05:15, 9 December 2020 (UTC)