Revision as of 07:44, 26 May 2021 editBlablubbs (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Administrators66,160 edits Comment (using spihelper.js)← Previous edit | Revision as of 08:09, 26 May 2021 edit undoBlablubbs (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Checkusers, Administrators66,160 editsm fix indentsNext edit → | ||
Line 43: | Line 43: | ||
:*{{re|Blablubbs}} I recommend closing this for lack of evidence.--] (]) 22:37, 25 May 2021 (UTC) | :*{{re|Blablubbs}} I recommend closing this for lack of evidence.--] (]) 22:37, 25 May 2021 (UTC) | ||
::*{{ping|Gidonb}} I have reviewed the diffs you interpolated since I recommended closure, and I see nothing that indicates a connection between Catchpoke and the master or their socks. As {{U|Blablubbs}}'s request states, you must present ''comparison'' diffs, meaning diffs of Catchpoke's edits alongside diffs of the master-socks' edits that demonstrate a behavioral connection. Instead, you focus only on those edits of Catchpoke's that bother you, like weirdly claiming that calling you a "hypocrite" is "cursing". It's not, but, regardless, if you could show that the master/socks have called editors who disagree with them hypocrites, ''that'' would be some evidence of a connection. For these reasons, I am closing this report. If Blablubbs disagrees, they are welcome to reopen it.--] (]) 05:36, 26 May 2021 (UTC) | ::*{{ping|Gidonb}} I have reviewed the diffs you interpolated since I recommended closure, and I see nothing that indicates a connection between Catchpoke and the master or their socks. As {{U|Blablubbs}}'s request states, you must present ''comparison'' diffs, meaning diffs of Catchpoke's edits alongside diffs of the master-socks' edits that demonstrate a behavioral connection. Instead, you focus only on those edits of Catchpoke's that bother you, like weirdly claiming that calling you a "hypocrite" is "cursing". It's not, but, regardless, if you could show that the master/socks have called editors who disagree with them hypocrites, ''that'' would be some evidence of a connection. For these reasons, I am closing this report. If Blablubbs disagrees, they are welcome to reopen it.--] (]) 05:36, 26 May 2021 (UTC) | ||
:::*{{yo|Bbb23}} Sorry, I was meaning to get to this{{snd}}no objections to the close from my side. --]|] 07:44, 26 May 2021 (UTC) | |||
----<!--- All comments go ABOVE this line, please. --> | ----<!--- All comments go ABOVE this line, please. --> |
Revision as of 08:09, 26 May 2021
Zero sharp
Zero sharp (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Populated account categories: confirmed
For archived investigations, see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Zero sharp/Archive.
20 May 2021
– This SPI case is closed and will be archived shortly by an SPI clerk or checkuser.
Suspected sockpuppets
- Catchpoke (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
WikiCleanerMan (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
I see a similar account setup as their previous socks, similar interests, and similar editing patterns. gidonb (talk) 04:40, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
- Hi Blablubbs, I'm not an expert on Zero sharp and do not remember him as an editor. This is definitely a weakness versus the other banned editors for whom I found sockpuppets over the years (notably Haham Hanuka and Wikixx), who I remember well as editors. Nevertheless, last time when I saw an out-of-the-blue meritless nomination for the Israeli subject domain I thought that this might be a sockpuppet and it was identified by others as Zero sharp's. Here we have a similar nomination by a new user who came around shortly after Zero's previous sockpuppets were blocked. In the history I see again a deep interest in yoga, erasing of a vandalism notice, and cursing, so I thought I'd notify again for professional consideration. This is the stronger case. I have stricken through the weaker case that showed fewer similarities. In any case, this is not a crusade against anyone and there are no objectives other than to keep WP a safe and fair place for everyone. Best, gidonb (talk) 02:02, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
- User started an "ANI" procedure after I reported him. In this procedure he seems to express concern that his IP might be checked. gidonb (talk) 02:39, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Comments by other users
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
gidonb, all this over a template discussion? There is no evidence I'm a sockpuppet of a user I've never heard of. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 18:39, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
- I am involved in the TfD discussion with the three editors mentioned here. From there, I have no clue that sockpuppetry would be happening. I also note that in that discussion OP gidonb was casting BF/PA arguments. -DePiep (talk) 17:01, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
- His edit summary states "JIC" or Just in case. That is not how a sockpuppetry investigation works. There needs to be evidence as stated on the main page. There must be immediate evidence provided and as gidonb states, "I see a similar account setup as their previous socks, similar interests, and similar editing patterns". That is pretty vague which of course won't be investigated per the rules. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:46, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
- I've informed Catchpoke on his talk page. You can find it here. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:59, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
- The summary Just In Case came with a change from "he" to "they". It means that I'm not 100% sure of the gender of a person in a discussion. gidonb (talk) 23:39, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
- What a spurious nomination by a hypocrite.Catchpoke (talk) 02:54, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for being so careful in your wording, Gidonb. Now would you please comply with the CU request for diffs? -DePiep (talk) 10:11, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
- What a spurious nomination by a hypocrite.Catchpoke (talk) 02:54, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
- The summary Just In Case came with a change from "he" to "they". It means that I'm not 100% sure of the gender of a person in a discussion. gidonb (talk) 23:39, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
- I've informed Catchpoke on his talk page. You can find it here. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 21:59, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
- I propose this investigation be closed, Blablubbs. It's been four days and no evidence has been provided because Gidonb is only here to cause drama because Catcpoke and I don't agree with him on the Tfd linked above. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 19:28, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
- I have shown strong commonalities between a disruptive user and a known sockpuppeteer for whom I have detected a sockpuppet in the past. Whether they are the same, this is a similar case, or all is coincidental is for the analyst to decide. Also, I have never tied between the discussion and the investigation here. On the contrary, I participated in the discussion as if this investigation did not exist while you kept trying to introduce it. Facts do matter. 16:14, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
- Facts do matter. But you have not provided any facts so far. But I don't see why anyone would open this investigation when it transpired from the Tfd. I don't see why you would've suspect me in the first place. --WikiCleanerMan (talk) 16:35, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
- I have shown strong commonalities between a disruptive user and a known sockpuppeteer for whom I have detected a sockpuppet in the past. Whether they are the same, this is a similar case, or all is coincidental is for the analyst to decide. Also, I have never tied between the discussion and the investigation here. On the contrary, I participated in the discussion as if this investigation did not exist while you kept trying to introduce it. Facts do matter. 16:14, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
- This SPI now is part of an ANI report. Please, Blablubbs or any other CU editor: why has this claim not been thrown out already? -DePiep (talk) 20:00, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
- @Gidonb: Additional information needed. In order to facilitate and expedite your request, please provide diffs to support your case. Please give two or more diffs meeting the following format:
- At least one diff is from the sockmaster (or an account already blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet of the sockmaster), showing the behaviour characteristic of the sockmaster.
- At least one diff per suspected sockpuppet, showing the suspected sockpuppet emulating the behaviour of the sockmaster given in the first diff.
- In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided. Around one sentence is enough for this. --Blablubbs|talk 19:25, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Blablubbs: I recommend closing this for lack of evidence.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:37, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Gidonb: I have reviewed the diffs you interpolated since I recommended closure, and I see nothing that indicates a connection between Catchpoke and the master or their socks. As Blablubbs's request states, you must present comparison diffs, meaning diffs of Catchpoke's edits alongside diffs of the master-socks' edits that demonstrate a behavioral connection. Instead, you focus only on those edits of Catchpoke's that bother you, like weirdly claiming that calling you a "hypocrite" is "cursing". It's not, but, regardless, if you could show that the master/socks have called editors who disagree with them hypocrites, that would be some evidence of a connection. For these reasons, I am closing this report. If Blablubbs disagrees, they are welcome to reopen it.--Bbb23 (talk) 05:36, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Bbb23: Sorry, I was meaning to get to this – no objections to the close from my side. --Blablubbs|talk 07:44, 26 May 2021 (UTC)
Categories: