Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Reaper7/Archive

Reaper7

Reaper7 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

04 April 2015

Suspected sockpuppets

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

User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
Editor interaction utility

Zenostar has a 3 year history with only 97 edits, on which he has edited only 13 talk pages. Of those 13, in 3 of them - on totally unrelated subjects - he has supported Reaper7's arguments (or vice versa):

Oncenawhile (talk) 11:51, 4 April 2015 (UTC) Oncenawhile (talk) 11:51, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

More than half of Zenostar's entire edit history (i.e. 44 out of 97) have been on pages which Reaper7 has edited (per the user compare report above). That, plus multiple talk page interactions on unrelated topics in such a short edit history, seems like a very significant coincidence. Oncenawhile (talk) 21:08, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

He might be his admirer. I really doubt if a sock puppet would make messages like this one. OccultZone (Talk • Contributions • Log) 21:42, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

Clerk note: @Oncenawhile: Supporting each other three times is not really a great piece of evidence. This case will be closed unless you find something really convincing. Vanjagenije (talk) 20:37, 9 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Behavioral evidence is weak. Both accounts are Stale for the CheckUser. Closing the case with no action. Vanjagenije (talk) 18:31, 15 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]