Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jermboy27: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
Undid revision 1171241804 by Bbb23 (talk) okay
Tags: Undo Reverted
Comment (using spihelper.js)
Tag: Reverted
Line 60: Line 60:


====<big>Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments</big>====
====<big>Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments</big>====
*Blocked and tagged the named accounts. Will check out the IPs in a bit. [[User:Bbb23|Bbb23]] ([[User talk:Bbb23|talk]]) 22:08, 19 August 2023 (UTC)


----<!--- All comments go ABOVE this line, please. -->
----<!--- All comments go ABOVE this line, please. -->

Revision as of 22:08, 19 August 2023

Jermboy27

Jermboy27 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log· investigate · cuwiki)

Populated account categories: confirmed · suspected

For archived investigations, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jermboy27/Archive.

A long-term abuse case exists at Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Jermboy27.


19 August 2023

– A user has requested CheckUser. An SPI clerk will shortly look at the case and endorse or decline the request.

Suspected sockpuppets

Same focus on road sign drafts, including recreation of Draft:Road signs in Macau. Similar name to recent socks (Ilovesigns626, Windows11lover1999, etc.) Эlcobbola talk 21:44, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • Blocked and tagged. Leaving the CU request to look for others, particularly because this account has not edited on Commons, so Elcobbola would not have been able to run a check. Bbb23 (talk) 22:01, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

19 August 2023

– A user has requested CheckUser. An SPI clerk will shortly look at the case and endorse or decline the request.

Suspected sockpuppets

Targeted a number of road signs articles, notably adding the nolines attribute to galleries while also having made meaningful contributions. I've reverted a number of the changes, but not all. These may or may not be the same user, I have included them due to extremely similar behaviour. For the 4th user I had assumed good faith, explaining so on their talk page.

Some of the articles affected (a number of which were previously affected by the same sockmaster):

Behaviour includes:

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments