Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sportsfanrob/Archive

Sportsfanrob

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

11 January 2021

Suspected sockpuppets

• 86.0.200.183 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Clear behavioral connection. User has block-evaded by editing pages that Sportsfanrob has edited before, including Robot Wars, 2020-21 European windstorm season, List of years in British television, etc. ~ Destroyeraa🌀🇺🇸 13:43, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Here: The suspected master - Sportsfanrob - loves editing about Robot Wars. The IP also loves editing about Robot Wars. Sportsfanrob also loves editing about 2021 in British television. The IP does too. Rob has also edited about Tenable before, as shown on his talk page. The IP also loves editing about Tenable. To conclude this, the IP that Rob used to sock on before, 82.20.190.222 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) is located in Swindon, England, where 86.0.200.183 is located. Thus, Oshwah and other admins, it is clear that this IP is Sportsfanrob evading his block. Thank you. ~ Destroyeraa🌀🇺🇸 21:47, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

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

• Checkuser cannot confirm accounts to IP addresses. Only accounts to accounts. Declining... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 02:46, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
• Ip blocked for 3 months. Closing. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:05, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

---

24 February 2021

Suspected sockpuppets

• James1416 (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.

The two users in question here both like to edit articles relating to a year in television or radio, and film production companies. They also like to edit about extratropical cyclones. Sportsfanrob edited List of programmes broadcast by Bravo and James1416 edited List of programs broadcast by Discovery Family. Sportsfanrob also edited 2021 in British television, along with the years 2007, 2006, 2020, and countless other years in British TV. James edited 2021 in home video, along with 2020. Both editors make mostly unsourced edits such as this, this, this, and this. Both editors have made unconstructive edits on weather articles, such as vandalism and adding blatantly false information. ~ Destroyeraa🌀🇺🇸 02:13, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

Comments by other users

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

While their edits are similar, I don't think they are the same user, since James1416 started editing in August before Sportsfanrob stopped editing in October. James1416 didn't edit sports articles at all looking through the contributions. And, James1416 isn't as active as Sportsfanrob. Oshwah this is the behavioral investigation I presented to you - I would like to become a SPI clerk trainee. MarioJump83! 13:35, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

Have either of the accused parties talked to each other or referenced each other? If not, then I can't see any reason why sockpuppets would be created. EvanTaylor1289 (talk) 13:40, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@EvanTaylor1289: What has that got to do with the price of cheese ? Nick (talk) 14:07, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Nick: Am I missing something or does this have nothing to do with cheese? EvanTaylor1289 (talk) 14:18, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@EvanTaylor1289: It's an idiom, and in any case, the price of cheese is more relevant than whether you can see any reason why sockpuppets would be created. Nick (talk) 14:23, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Nick: Ah, thanks for clarifying that idiom - having multiple accounts is only against policy if it is done with malicious intent. While the accused parties could be the same person, they could have multiple accounts for e.g. privacy reasons. If there is no evidence of malicious intent, I think we should assume good faith and stop the investigation EvanTaylor1289 (talk) 14:30, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@EvanTaylor1289: if you can point out where the phrase "malicious intent" appears on Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry, I'll buy you some cheese. Nick (talk) 14:36, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@Nick: The phrase doesn’t appear on that WikiLink - however, what generally distinguishes “Inappropriate uses of alternative accounts” from “legitimate uses” is intent - “inappropriate uses of alternative accounts” lists ways to use alternative accounts that are all centred around deception, evasion of policy, malicious argument tactics or “using more than one afministrator account”. These are all characterised by malicious intent. “Legitimate uses”, on the other hand, lists uses which have no malicious intent. Therefore, unless if there is evidence that the accused parties are using multiple accounts inappropriately (i.e. with malicious intent), then there is no reason for the investigstion to continue EvanTaylor1289 (talk) 14:57, 27 February 2021 (UTC)

@EvanTaylor1289: There are many reasons why sockpuppets would be created. I kindly suggest that you stop defending a known sockmaster. ~ Destroyeraa🌀🇺🇸 02:41, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

I will say this: the behavior similarities may not be identical, but they are close enough that it appears to be the same person. The topics of interests are essentially the same, and both accounts are responsible for the same kinds of disruptive editing on the articles where they were active. Also note that after Sportsfanrob abandoned his account in October 2020 in favor of socking, the other account, James1416, returned in November 2020, after roughly one month of "inactivity". So the time frame also supports them being the same person. Given the behavioral connections, I think we have enough grounds for an indef block. But however this investigation goes, the sockmaster needs to be indeffed. Sportsfanrob engaged in socking multiple times after his first block, and I see no reason why the sockmaster account should be left unblocked at this point. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 17:51, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

• The master account is too  Stale for data to be pulled, and there are no past logs that I can pull to help. This will need a behavioral investigation... ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 07:50, 24 February 2021 (UTC)

• I am not convinced that these are the same person. Closing without action. GeneralNotability (talk) 02:40, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

---