Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ladnavfan

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Hersfold (talk | contribs) at 18:25, 26 August 2009 (Report date August 26 2009, 14:43 (UTC): fix). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Ladnavfan

Ladnavfan (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/Ladnavfan/Archive.


Report date August 26 2009, 14:43 (UTC)
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by Toddst1
  • Similarity of names:
  • Fachette.expert is based on Fachette which appears to be a hoax or grossly mistranslated meal. The article was created by the author on 00:58, 24 August 2009
  • Ladnavfan is based on Ladnav which appears to be either a hoax or completely NN publication. The article was created by the author 10:47, 24 August 2009
  • Timing of creation of accounts
  • 00:08, 24 August 2009 Fachette.expert (talk | contribs | block) new user account ‎
  • 10:11, 24 August 2009 Ladnavfan (talk | contribs | block) new user account
  • The only editors contributing to Fachette were Ladnavfan and Fachette.expert[1]
  • Ladnavfan appears to not be a new user as the editor's 14th edit was to file a MFD on an obscure article in Mathsci's user space so I suspect there are other socks as well.

Toddst1 (talk) 14:44, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This appears to be related to an ongoing Arbcom case somehow. See User_talk:Hersfold#More_on_Abd-WMC_case. Toddst1 (talk) 15:30, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users


Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

{{RFCU}} is deprecated. Please change the case status parameter in {{SPI case status}} to "CURequest" instead.

Checkuser request – code letter: F (Other reason )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.

We've had several new users popping up at random throughout this case and one confirmed instance of socking; there's enough of a suspicion here that I'm going to go ahead and run a quick check to see if there's any relation between these two or other accounts that have appeared. Hersfold (t/a/c) 17:37, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fachette.expert (talk · contribs) is Red X Unrelated to this or any other suspect accounts at the arbitration case. Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:25, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is  Confirmed that Ladnavfan (talk · contribs) is the following users:
IPs and useragents are all exactly identical. Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:25, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Conclusions
  • It seems to me that the accounts are somewhat likely to be operated by the same individual, but that, absent any more conclusive evidence (such as checkuser confirmation), it is impossible to satisfactorily confirm the link. Unless I am missing something, neither of the accounts seem to be engaging in disruptive behaviour (the MfD aside - and that should be dealt with on ANI or by an administrator operating outside of any investigation into sockpuppetry). Consequently, I would move to close this investigation as inconclusive - but I would observe that if the accounts are linked, the operator would be well advised to use only one of them to edit in future. I welcome the input of other administrators. AGK 15:24, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This case has been marked as closed. It will be archived after its final review by a Clerk or Checkuser.

{{SPIclose}} is deprecated. Please change the parameter in the {{SPI case status}} to "close" instead. Accounts listed as "confirmed" above blocked and tagged. Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:25, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]