Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Naturalist2/Archive

Naturalist2

Naturalist2 (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Report date November 13 2009, 01:04 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets

Mikegmsg (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Why-Fi (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Evidence submitted by 7

All of these accounts are SPAs focusing on reverting removal of one image from one page. Especially the account Mikegmsg which sits completely inactive for long periods of time but then quickly reverts the image removal after multiple distinct editors have removed it.

I am also concerned that the account that added the image to the article may be involved as their editing history timing has plausible gaps when these accounts are in use, but I have not listed them here because they appear to make strong other contributions and the timing of the edit gaps is not so close as to convince me beyond a reasonable doubt. Also requesting CU because there are multiple IPs (although geographically diverse) that have performed similar rollbacks to add the image back in, including 166.198.253.34 and 85.226.218.25 - but I would like a checkuser to review and rule out those who are not involved from potentially other accounts related to this same user. 7 01:04, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users

CheckUser requests

Checkuser request – code letter: F (Other reason )

Current status –

Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below. Requested by 7 01:04, 13 November 2009 (UTC) - Reason for request listed above in initial evidence. [reply]

Clerk endorsed – As anyone can blindly revert, as well as the slightly different edit by Why-Fi, I think a technical check could be helpful here. MuZemike 20:33, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

While Naturalist2 (talk · contribs) is Stale, the other two accounts mentioned above are Unrelated to each other. In fact, they geolocate to very different places - Alison ^❤ 00:52, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps I should have listed this as a Mikegmsg SPI - because it is really his activity that I noticed. Sitting inactive for long periods, and then quickly reverting with no other edits. I just happened to be on Naturalist2 when using TW to log the SPI. Is it possible to detect any unlisted socks of Mikegmsg? 7 01:52, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I checked and I can't find any associated with that account, sorry - Alison ^❤ 01:56, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok - thanks. I guess just a very inactive editor who is very protective of that image. Oh well. Shall I remove the SPI notes from their page (and apologize?) or is there a different procedure to close this out. Thank you. 7 02:00, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A clerk should be around soon to close the report and a bot will archive it, don't worry. Probably best just drop a note on their talk page - I'll remove the tags in a minute :)) - Alison ^❤ 02:04, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

Tags removed; closing per Alison. Could you drop the note on the users' talk pages? Thanks, NW (Talk) 19:35, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.