Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Donkey Kong Fanatic

Donkey Kong Fanatic

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

For archived investigations, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Donkey Kong Fanatic/Archive.

01 April 2018

– This SPI case is closed and will be archived shortly by an SPI clerk or checkuser.

Suspected sockpuppets

E to the Pi times i (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
E^pi*i batch (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Monolithica (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

E to the Pi times i has declared connections to Donkey Kong Fanatic and E^pi*i batch.

E to the Pi times i and Monolithica have very similar interests in the same maintenance tasks as evidenced by:

— JJMC89 (T·C) 06:15, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

These aren't common maintenance interest. A new account, Monolithica, with the interest in doing the same things as E to the Pi times i seems very unlikely. — JJMC89 (T·C) 16:46, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

@JJMC89: When you link to Special:Permalink/833541104#User:Monolithica as evidence that we have "[unlikely] similar interests", one must note that on the very same requests page, I said "One can also see the backlog of issues I've been collecting" (diff; this talk is also relevant). Monolithica themselves said "I'd only just come across those (incorrect) examples (here) in the last few hours." (diff). The "similar interests" evidence is neither sufficient nor very convincing to support the sock puppet allegations. E to the Pi times i (talk | contribs) 23:12, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

First three are obviously legitimate alternative accounts (clearly explained at user:E_to_the_Pi_times_i). No evidence provided regarding Monolithica. Case closed. Vanjagenije (talk) 09:48, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Monolithica is Unrelated to the other accounts. However, Monolithica is Technically indistinguishable from R. Anthony (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) and Possilikely (a mix between possible and likely) to Altman (talk · contribs · count). Based on my own behavioral analysis, I would add the two accounts to the Altman SPI, but further confirmation by a clerk or someone familiar with the Altman case wouldn't be amiss. I'm foregoing any blocks until the analysis is complete.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:29, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Bbb23: I concur. Both accounts demonstrate interest in human rights, aeronautics, as well as the basic grammar copyediting, similar to other socks in the archive. Sro23 (talk) 01:41, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Sro23. I've blocked the two accounts without tags. Please add them to the Altman case (doesn't need a merge) and tag them. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:49, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Closing. Sro23 (talk) 02:08, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]