Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Zemaye1/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets
In the wake of the IP's block from the Talk:Great Barrington Declaration, these two accounts have shown up to make the same points, with the same sort of misunderstandings of what makes for a reliable source and with similar writing style. Also some related comments at Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents MrOllie (talk) 18:10, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

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

Great Barrington Declaration was quiet for months. User talk:65.175.199.251 starts making a high volume of edits on Great Barrington Declaration and Talk:Great Barrington Declaration. Then was pblocked from both. Then suddenly and  appeared editing the same article talk page.

All SPAs. Discussing the same topic (whether the article should be labeled as "fringe").

I know you guys don't checkuser IPs to usernames, but maybe you can CU the two usernames to each other.

Guess it could also be meatpuppetry. Would be good to get an expert to take a look. – Novem Linguae (talk) 19:48, 2 June 2022 (UTC)


 * . Thanks for investigating. Does nto apply to someone evading a block though? The timeline here is that the IP got blocked, then the two other accounts arrived immediately after. – Novem Linguae (talk) 22:44, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I saw the IP timeline. My philosophy on this is that if they really are socks, they will provide plenty of additional evidence all on their own which will more strongly justify an investigation.  But for the moment, I'm going to AGF and see what happens. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:50, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I've merged some comments from Novem Linguae, who filed the same case at WP:Sockpuppet investigations/65.175.199.251. Spicy (talk) 20:44, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I agree that it's suspicious, but I don't think CU is justified based on the minimal editing history here (technically, nto applies). I'm going to close this with no action taken.  If the two accounts continue to edit in a way that more strongly suggests socking, please file a new report. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:57, 2 June 2022 (UTC)