Leoesb1032
- Leoesb1032 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
28 May 2013
- Suspected sockpuppets
- Matthewb103 ( 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
The account Matthewb103 was created the day after an RfC was created which was opposed by Leoesb1032. I did not see any concerns about this until today, when Matthewb103 placed a !vote in the RfC, then made an edit to Leoesb1032's user page, followed by an edit to Pope Francis' entry on the December 17 article. The article Pope Francis ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) was then edited a couple minutes later by Leoesb1032. The two overlaps (editing user page and sames subject) suggests the user forgot they were using an alternate account for the RfC, then switched back exposing the overlap. - Barek ( talk • contribs) - 21:31, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Comments by other users
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. Matthewb103 is my alternate account. What's the big deal? I'm not effecting Wikipedia by incorrect facts so what does it matter anyway? Leoesb1032 ( talk) 23:09, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
- comment if you are placing to votes with different accounts on the same RfC, then you are attempting to deceive others into thinking you are two separate people. Please also note blanking this page is not a good idea. Martin451 ( talk) 23:12, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
- I didn't know, I am sorry, on one device I was signed in as one account and on the other I wasn't. What is such the big deal. I'm not vandalizing pages so why does this matter? I'm sorry and I won't do it again. Give me a break, I've only been on Wikipedia for 1 month and I haven't read over all policies yet. I truly didn't mean it. Please stop taking this so seriously against me because in the very end, none of Wikipedia editing matters. Barek, please stop attacking me with everything I do. As I said, in the end, Wikipedia isn't going to matter. Your family and friends will. Leave a message on my talk page with your feelings about this please as soon as you can. Thank you. Leoesb1032 ( talk) 23:17, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
-
Clerk note: This is a pretty cut and dry case. I've indef blocked Matthewb103 account and blocking Leoesb1032 for one week, which will allow time for the RFC to continue. Feel free to strike comments from both accounts. Leo, using multiple accounts is a serious problem, and doing so in an RFC or other "voting-like" environment is particularly disruptive. I'm assuming the best of faith here and chosing to only block one week. We all make mistakes, but there are consequences when your mistake is to try to deceive others and skew a discussion. It does matter, and if it happens again, it will result in a longer block, or an indef block.
Dennis Brown /
2¢ /
© /
@ /
Join WER 23:51, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
07 July 2013
- Suspected sockpuppets
- Matthewb103 ( 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
In the prior sockpuppet investigation at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Leoesb1032/Archive, user Leoesb1032 admitted to using account Matthewb103 as a sock-puppet. Now, at User talk:Leoesb1032#Former Sockpuppetry Confession, they are renouncing their prior confession, which they now claim to have felt intimidated into making. They then posted at User talk:Barek#Re-opening via IP 68.84.125.66 (now blocked) to post on my talk page to draw attention to their renouncing of their prior confession.
I brought this up at WP:ANI#User who previously admitted to sock-puppetry now renouncing their admission, where it was suggested that an SPI was necessary to review - either to substantiate their claim of not using socks, or to endorse the prior WP:DUCK closure. - Barek ( talk • contribs) - 05:53, 7 July 2013 (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 requested - 
Self-endorsed by clerk for checkuser attention - Per my comments at ANI.
King of
♥
♦
♣ ♠ 06:07, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Confirmed that Matthewb103 was a sock of Leoesb1032; they are Technically indistinguishable. No comment on the given IP. I do not agree with any further sanctions as is this is all rather retrospective. But Leoesb1032, I would remind you that your initial honesty is what got you blocked for just a week, and not longer or even indefinitely. There was nothing to be gained by going back on your word.
WilliamH (
talk) 08:27, 7 July 2013 (UTC)- Thanks for the check. Closing. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:59, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
13 January 2014
- Suspected sockpuppets
- FranklynJimenez777 ( 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
User:Leoesb1032 has a history of socking, as User:Matthewb103 in April to May 2013, to support an RfC started by Leoesb1032 at Centralia mine fire. This time, User:FranklynJimenez777 was used in a good hand, bad hand manner to perform test edits, allowing Leoesb1032 to issue a warning, and then for FranklynJimenez777 to award a barnstar to Leoesb1032. The strangely formal English used in the barnstar is similar to that of Leoesb1032, not to mention that a new editor has somehow graduated from test edits to barnstar awarding within 25 minutes. FranklynJimenez777 did not award a barnstar to ClueBot NG for the second warning on his page and Leoesb1032 did not thank FranklynJimenez777 for the barnstar, though he engages with everyone else who edits his Talk page, but simply added the text to his User page. The FranklynJimenez777 account was created at 00:48, 12 January 2014 and edits started at 00:51, while there was a gap in Leoesb1032's editing between 00:24 and 01:03. Some of this evidence is circumstantial, I will admit, but considered together I find it rather good evidence. At the very least, we should look for sleeper socks as Leoesb1032 has used at one in the past. Woodroar ( talk) 06:01, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Comments by other users
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
- I was very sorry to hear that someone would actually accuse me of this. I learned my lessons long ago. I don't want to risk anything again. I have simply been trying to work as well on Wikipedia as I can. Please, I have done nothing wrong. I have also never given out a barnstar. Proof I was not a sockpuppet is that I used STiki to revert this users edit on the article and it would be extremely unlikely for me to even come across my own edit while using STiki
here I remember in my previous investigation,
User:Barek found my location and Matthewb103's location, so do this again. I promise we will not be in the same place.
Leoesb1032 (
talk) 13:26, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
- It wasn't me last time (I don't have access to the necessary technical tools to investigate); but if a clerk believes there is sufficient reasons to justify an investigation, a different admin who has the appropriate tools can compare the technical logs. ---
Barek (
talk •
contribs) - 18:27, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
- Do you know any admins that I could ask that have this log?
Leoesb1032 (
talk) 18:30, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
- If one of the SPI clerks see sufficient grounds to require such an investigation, this page will get flagged so that one of the admins with that access will see this page listed as needing investigated. These things can sometimes take a few days to get that far then to be processed, depending upon backlog and also considering that everyone involved are volunteers, and because of the sensitivity of the data being reviewed there are only a handful of users who even have access to the necessary tools. Feel free to make a general statement in this section to whomever eventually investigates, if you wish. --- Barek ( talk • contribs) - 18:44, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
- Do you know any admins that I could ask that have this log?
Leoesb1032 (
talk) 18:30, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
- It wasn't me last time (I don't have access to the necessary technical tools to investigate); but if a clerk believes there is sufficient reasons to justify an investigation, a different admin who has the appropriate tools can compare the technical logs. ---
Barek (
talk •
contribs) - 18:27, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
- It's very bizarre and suspicious that a brand new user would award a barnstar, not to mention know what a barnstar is, in less than a half-hour after their very first edit. [1]-- Oakshade ( talk) 18:38, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
- I affirm to you all that I am not a sockpuppet and I strongly urge any checkuser looking here to prove it by running location and clearing my username.
Leoesb1032 (
talk) 19:01, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
- Others will scrutinize. Two separate terminals alone doesn't mean someone isn't a sock (same city, one work and one residence for example). If you're not a sock, you have nothing to worry about. It's usually the ones who
heavily defend typically end up being socks.--
Oakshade (
talk) 04:02, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- This is the last comment that I will leave per Oakshade. I have proof in the contributions that I am not a sockpuppet. See here and here. These are the contributions for myself and my alleged sock. I edited at the same time as he did at 20:22 on the 11th, meaning I could have not signed in and out in less than 1 second. Leoesb1032 ( talk) 13:26, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- Others will scrutinize. Two separate terminals alone doesn't mean someone isn't a sock (same city, one work and one residence for example). If you're not a sock, you have nothing to worry about. It's usually the ones who
heavily defend typically end up being socks.--
Oakshade (
talk) 04:02, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
How is possible to edit at the same exact time as two different users? Leoesb1032 ( talk) 16:44, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- Easy: open up two web browsers. --
King of
♥
♦
♣ ♠ 16:46, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- Here is the problem with that statement. I couldn't have reverted an edit using STiki, then gone on to another brower page an made an edit using the other account all in one second. Explain how that would be possible. One other thing, let's have some common sense here. Why would I go to all the trouble to make a socked account, make a test edit on some page, edit that same minute on Stiki, just to throw you off and then just to give myself a barnstar. That's pretty stupid. I'm really not sure why I'm being accused of this. They say I shouldn't be worried if I'm innocent, but I'm beginning to feel a little worried.
Leoesb1032 (
talk) 22:27, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- It is possible to prepare an edit under the alternate account, do the revert in STiki in the main account, and then switch over and save the edit. As for your second point, this is a well-known activity known as
WP:HAND. People do this to make their main account look good. --
King of
♥
♦
♣ ♠ 00:05, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- This is extremely far fetched to make the edit in less than one minute on two different accounts. And another compelling point is why I would prepare an edit but not save it then and go on to STiki, next. I had been on STiki nostop for the last few minutes and with the size of the edit the other guy made, I could have never done that in 1 minute between STiki edits. Our edits are overlapping implying we are not the same person. I really would appreciate it if a Checkuser would run location and prove that we are not even close together so I can get this over with. There is so much compelling evidence here that supports my case and no evidence besides prior history that makes me a sockpuppet.
Leoesb1032 (
talk) 01:12, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- From what it looks like, Franklyn is a man of God, and I know this sounds really silly, but from his contributions he only edited Christian pages and I think he gave me a barnstar because a key point of being a Christian is to respect others. And I know this sounds ridiculous, but it is the only way I can think of of why he gave me that barnstar.
Leoesb1032 (
talk) 13:35, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- I find it interesting that while you interacted everyone else who posted on your talk page, you didn't interact with Franklyn. Is there a reason for that?
Epicgenius (
talk) 14:59, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, he didn't comment on my edits or ask me anything. He just gave me a barnstar and I wasn't quite sure if to thank him or not. Again, I strongly urge any CheckUser to run the logs to prove Franklin an I are not in the same location. Even though Oakshade said that same city, you can only travel two different locations more than about 1/4 a mile, go inside, start up a computer and save an edit all in 1 minute.
Leoesb1032 (
talk) 16:04, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- If you wanted to thank him, you could just leave a concise comment below the barnstar posting.
Epicgenius (
talk) 16:40, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- Alright, thank you. Now if a CheckUser would please run location. I'm getting tired of this. I have never edited any of the pages that Jimmez has, except for my user talk and the reversion of his test edits. He doesn't use the same wording or edit the same genre as I do. My key point here is that it would almost be impossible to run across my own edit while using STiki, which to me, is proof I am not a sockpuppet. Leoesb1032 ( talk) 16:41, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- If you wanted to thank him, you could just leave a concise comment below the barnstar posting.
Epicgenius (
talk) 16:40, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, he didn't comment on my edits or ask me anything. He just gave me a barnstar and I wasn't quite sure if to thank him or not. Again, I strongly urge any CheckUser to run the logs to prove Franklin an I are not in the same location. Even though Oakshade said that same city, you can only travel two different locations more than about 1/4 a mile, go inside, start up a computer and save an edit all in 1 minute.
Leoesb1032 (
talk) 16:04, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- I find it interesting that while you interacted everyone else who posted on your talk page, you didn't interact with Franklyn. Is there a reason for that?
Epicgenius (
talk) 14:59, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- From what it looks like, Franklyn is a man of God, and I know this sounds really silly, but from his contributions he only edited Christian pages and I think he gave me a barnstar because a key point of being a Christian is to respect others. And I know this sounds ridiculous, but it is the only way I can think of of why he gave me that barnstar.
Leoesb1032 (
talk) 13:35, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- This is extremely far fetched to make the edit in less than one minute on two different accounts. And another compelling point is why I would prepare an edit but not save it then and go on to STiki, next. I had been on STiki nostop for the last few minutes and with the size of the edit the other guy made, I could have never done that in 1 minute between STiki edits. Our edits are overlapping implying we are not the same person. I really would appreciate it if a Checkuser would run location and prove that we are not even close together so I can get this over with. There is so much compelling evidence here that supports my case and no evidence besides prior history that makes me a sockpuppet.
Leoesb1032 (
talk) 01:12, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- It is possible to prepare an edit under the alternate account, do the revert in STiki in the main account, and then switch over and save the edit. As for your second point, this is a well-known activity known as
WP:HAND. People do this to make their main account look good. --
King of
♥
♦
♣ ♠ 00:05, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- Here is the problem with that statement. I couldn't have reverted an edit using STiki, then gone on to another brower page an made an edit using the other account all in one second. Explain how that would be possible. One other thing, let's have some common sense here. Why would I go to all the trouble to make a socked account, make a test edit on some page, edit that same minute on Stiki, just to throw you off and then just to give myself a barnstar. That's pretty stupid. I'm really not sure why I'm being accused of this. They say I shouldn't be worried if I'm innocent, but I'm beginning to feel a little worried.
Leoesb1032 (
talk) 22:27, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- I keep noticing that Franklin's contributions keep going back and forth between 11 and 12 January. Why is this? Leoesb1032 ( talk) 13:59, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
-
Clerk endorsed - On the face of it, it doesn't really look indicative of sockpuppetry, but combine it with the user's history and the rather unusual awarding of a barnstar and it raises enough suspicion for a check IMO.
King of
♥
♦
♣ ♠ 16:35, 14 January 2014 (UTC) - I don't think I can run a check here. The Stiki edit looks legit to me and if it is then as I understand the tool a connection is extremely improbable, the wikilove button makes giving a barnstar trivial and it's designed to be very accessible, and the Cluebot message explicitly pointed out the automated nature. Without a reason to assume a pattern of socking I can't do a sleeper check either.
It's possible that there's something going on with FranklynJimenez777, but since I'm not really convinced and there isn't any apparent abuse to speak of that's not enough for me either. Seeing that nobody else wanted to act on it it seems I'm not alone with that assessment so I'll close this case, with no action taken. Sorry it took so long.
Amalthea 10:35, 30 January 2014 (UTC)
Leoesb1032
- Leoesb1032 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
28 May 2013
- Suspected sockpuppets
- Matthewb103 ( 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
The account Matthewb103 was created the day after an RfC was created which was opposed by Leoesb1032. I did not see any concerns about this until today, when Matthewb103 placed a !vote in the RfC, then made an edit to Leoesb1032's user page, followed by an edit to Pope Francis' entry on the December 17 article. The article Pope Francis ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) was then edited a couple minutes later by Leoesb1032. The two overlaps (editing user page and sames subject) suggests the user forgot they were using an alternate account for the RfC, then switched back exposing the overlap. - Barek ( talk • contribs) - 21:31, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Comments by other users
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. Matthewb103 is my alternate account. What's the big deal? I'm not effecting Wikipedia by incorrect facts so what does it matter anyway? Leoesb1032 ( talk) 23:09, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
- comment if you are placing to votes with different accounts on the same RfC, then you are attempting to deceive others into thinking you are two separate people. Please also note blanking this page is not a good idea. Martin451 ( talk) 23:12, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
- I didn't know, I am sorry, on one device I was signed in as one account and on the other I wasn't. What is such the big deal. I'm not vandalizing pages so why does this matter? I'm sorry and I won't do it again. Give me a break, I've only been on Wikipedia for 1 month and I haven't read over all policies yet. I truly didn't mean it. Please stop taking this so seriously against me because in the very end, none of Wikipedia editing matters. Barek, please stop attacking me with everything I do. As I said, in the end, Wikipedia isn't going to matter. Your family and friends will. Leave a message on my talk page with your feelings about this please as soon as you can. Thank you. Leoesb1032 ( talk) 23:17, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
-
Clerk note: This is a pretty cut and dry case. I've indef blocked Matthewb103 account and blocking Leoesb1032 for one week, which will allow time for the RFC to continue. Feel free to strike comments from both accounts. Leo, using multiple accounts is a serious problem, and doing so in an RFC or other "voting-like" environment is particularly disruptive. I'm assuming the best of faith here and chosing to only block one week. We all make mistakes, but there are consequences when your mistake is to try to deceive others and skew a discussion. It does matter, and if it happens again, it will result in a longer block, or an indef block.
Dennis Brown /
2¢ /
© /
@ /
Join WER 23:51, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
07 July 2013
- Suspected sockpuppets
- Matthewb103 ( 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
In the prior sockpuppet investigation at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Leoesb1032/Archive, user Leoesb1032 admitted to using account Matthewb103 as a sock-puppet. Now, at User talk:Leoesb1032#Former Sockpuppetry Confession, they are renouncing their prior confession, which they now claim to have felt intimidated into making. They then posted at User talk:Barek#Re-opening via IP 68.84.125.66 (now blocked) to post on my talk page to draw attention to their renouncing of their prior confession.
I brought this up at WP:ANI#User who previously admitted to sock-puppetry now renouncing their admission, where it was suggested that an SPI was necessary to review - either to substantiate their claim of not using socks, or to endorse the prior WP:DUCK closure. - Barek ( talk • contribs) - 05:53, 7 July 2013 (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 requested - Self-endorsed by clerk for checkuser attention - Per my comments at ANI.
King of
♥
♦
♣ ♠ 06:07, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
- Confirmed that Matthewb103 was a sock of Leoesb1032; they are Technically indistinguishable. No comment on the given IP. I do not agree with any further sanctions as is this is all rather retrospective. But Leoesb1032, I would remind you that your initial honesty is what got you blocked for just a week, and not longer or even indefinitely. There was nothing to be gained by going back on your word.
WilliamH (
talk) 08:27, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for the check. Closing. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:59, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
13 January 2014
- Suspected sockpuppets
- FranklynJimenez777 ( 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
User:Leoesb1032 has a history of socking, as User:Matthewb103 in April to May 2013, to support an RfC started by Leoesb1032 at Centralia mine fire. This time, User:FranklynJimenez777 was used in a good hand, bad hand manner to perform test edits, allowing Leoesb1032 to issue a warning, and then for FranklynJimenez777 to award a barnstar to Leoesb1032. The strangely formal English used in the barnstar is similar to that of Leoesb1032, not to mention that a new editor has somehow graduated from test edits to barnstar awarding within 25 minutes. FranklynJimenez777 did not award a barnstar to ClueBot NG for the second warning on his page and Leoesb1032 did not thank FranklynJimenez777 for the barnstar, though he engages with everyone else who edits his Talk page, but simply added the text to his User page. The FranklynJimenez777 account was created at 00:48, 12 January 2014 and edits started at 00:51, while there was a gap in Leoesb1032's editing between 00:24 and 01:03. Some of this evidence is circumstantial, I will admit, but considered together I find it rather good evidence. At the very least, we should look for sleeper socks as Leoesb1032 has used at one in the past. Woodroar ( talk) 06:01, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Comments by other users
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
- I was very sorry to hear that someone would actually accuse me of this. I learned my lessons long ago. I don't want to risk anything again. I have simply been trying to work as well on Wikipedia as I can. Please, I have done nothing wrong. I have also never given out a barnstar. Proof I was not a sockpuppet is that I used STiki to revert this users edit on the article and it would be extremely unlikely for me to even come across my own edit while using STiki
here I remember in my previous investigation,
User:Barek found my location and Matthewb103's location, so do this again. I promise we will not be in the same place.
Leoesb1032 (
talk) 13:26, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
- It wasn't me last time (I don't have access to the necessary technical tools to investigate); but if a clerk believes there is sufficient reasons to justify an investigation, a different admin who has the appropriate tools can compare the technical logs. ---
Barek (
talk •
contribs) - 18:27, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
- Do you know any admins that I could ask that have this log?
Leoesb1032 (
talk) 18:30, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
- If one of the SPI clerks see sufficient grounds to require such an investigation, this page will get flagged so that one of the admins with that access will see this page listed as needing investigated. These things can sometimes take a few days to get that far then to be processed, depending upon backlog and also considering that everyone involved are volunteers, and because of the sensitivity of the data being reviewed there are only a handful of users who even have access to the necessary tools. Feel free to make a general statement in this section to whomever eventually investigates, if you wish. --- Barek ( talk • contribs) - 18:44, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
- Do you know any admins that I could ask that have this log?
Leoesb1032 (
talk) 18:30, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
- It wasn't me last time (I don't have access to the necessary technical tools to investigate); but if a clerk believes there is sufficient reasons to justify an investigation, a different admin who has the appropriate tools can compare the technical logs. ---
Barek (
talk •
contribs) - 18:27, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
- It's very bizarre and suspicious that a brand new user would award a barnstar, not to mention know what a barnstar is, in less than a half-hour after their very first edit. [1]-- Oakshade ( talk) 18:38, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
- I affirm to you all that I am not a sockpuppet and I strongly urge any checkuser looking here to prove it by running location and clearing my username.
Leoesb1032 (
talk) 19:01, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
- Others will scrutinize. Two separate terminals alone doesn't mean someone isn't a sock (same city, one work and one residence for example). If you're not a sock, you have nothing to worry about. It's usually the ones who
heavily defend typically end up being socks.--
Oakshade (
talk) 04:02, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- This is the last comment that I will leave per Oakshade. I have proof in the contributions that I am not a sockpuppet. See here and here. These are the contributions for myself and my alleged sock. I edited at the same time as he did at 20:22 on the 11th, meaning I could have not signed in and out in less than 1 second. Leoesb1032 ( talk) 13:26, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- Others will scrutinize. Two separate terminals alone doesn't mean someone isn't a sock (same city, one work and one residence for example). If you're not a sock, you have nothing to worry about. It's usually the ones who
heavily defend typically end up being socks.--
Oakshade (
talk) 04:02, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
How is possible to edit at the same exact time as two different users? Leoesb1032 ( talk) 16:44, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- Easy: open up two web browsers. --
King of
♥
♦
♣ ♠ 16:46, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- Here is the problem with that statement. I couldn't have reverted an edit using STiki, then gone on to another brower page an made an edit using the other account all in one second. Explain how that would be possible. One other thing, let's have some common sense here. Why would I go to all the trouble to make a socked account, make a test edit on some page, edit that same minute on Stiki, just to throw you off and then just to give myself a barnstar. That's pretty stupid. I'm really not sure why I'm being accused of this. They say I shouldn't be worried if I'm innocent, but I'm beginning to feel a little worried.
Leoesb1032 (
talk) 22:27, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- It is possible to prepare an edit under the alternate account, do the revert in STiki in the main account, and then switch over and save the edit. As for your second point, this is a well-known activity known as
WP:HAND. People do this to make their main account look good. --
King of
♥
♦
♣ ♠ 00:05, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- This is extremely far fetched to make the edit in less than one minute on two different accounts. And another compelling point is why I would prepare an edit but not save it then and go on to STiki, next. I had been on STiki nostop for the last few minutes and with the size of the edit the other guy made, I could have never done that in 1 minute between STiki edits. Our edits are overlapping implying we are not the same person. I really would appreciate it if a Checkuser would run location and prove that we are not even close together so I can get this over with. There is so much compelling evidence here that supports my case and no evidence besides prior history that makes me a sockpuppet.
Leoesb1032 (
talk) 01:12, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- From what it looks like, Franklyn is a man of God, and I know this sounds really silly, but from his contributions he only edited Christian pages and I think he gave me a barnstar because a key point of being a Christian is to respect others. And I know this sounds ridiculous, but it is the only way I can think of of why he gave me that barnstar.
Leoesb1032 (
talk) 13:35, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- I find it interesting that while you interacted everyone else who posted on your talk page, you didn't interact with Franklyn. Is there a reason for that?
Epicgenius (
talk) 14:59, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, he didn't comment on my edits or ask me anything. He just gave me a barnstar and I wasn't quite sure if to thank him or not. Again, I strongly urge any CheckUser to run the logs to prove Franklin an I are not in the same location. Even though Oakshade said that same city, you can only travel two different locations more than about 1/4 a mile, go inside, start up a computer and save an edit all in 1 minute.
Leoesb1032 (
talk) 16:04, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- If you wanted to thank him, you could just leave a concise comment below the barnstar posting.
Epicgenius (
talk) 16:40, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- Alright, thank you. Now if a CheckUser would please run location. I'm getting tired of this. I have never edited any of the pages that Jimmez has, except for my user talk and the reversion of his test edits. He doesn't use the same wording or edit the same genre as I do. My key point here is that it would almost be impossible to run across my own edit while using STiki, which to me, is proof I am not a sockpuppet. Leoesb1032 ( talk) 16:41, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- If you wanted to thank him, you could just leave a concise comment below the barnstar posting.
Epicgenius (
talk) 16:40, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- Yes, he didn't comment on my edits or ask me anything. He just gave me a barnstar and I wasn't quite sure if to thank him or not. Again, I strongly urge any CheckUser to run the logs to prove Franklin an I are not in the same location. Even though Oakshade said that same city, you can only travel two different locations more than about 1/4 a mile, go inside, start up a computer and save an edit all in 1 minute.
Leoesb1032 (
talk) 16:04, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- I find it interesting that while you interacted everyone else who posted on your talk page, you didn't interact with Franklyn. Is there a reason for that?
Epicgenius (
talk) 14:59, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- From what it looks like, Franklyn is a man of God, and I know this sounds really silly, but from his contributions he only edited Christian pages and I think he gave me a barnstar because a key point of being a Christian is to respect others. And I know this sounds ridiculous, but it is the only way I can think of of why he gave me that barnstar.
Leoesb1032 (
talk) 13:35, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- This is extremely far fetched to make the edit in less than one minute on two different accounts. And another compelling point is why I would prepare an edit but not save it then and go on to STiki, next. I had been on STiki nostop for the last few minutes and with the size of the edit the other guy made, I could have never done that in 1 minute between STiki edits. Our edits are overlapping implying we are not the same person. I really would appreciate it if a Checkuser would run location and prove that we are not even close together so I can get this over with. There is so much compelling evidence here that supports my case and no evidence besides prior history that makes me a sockpuppet.
Leoesb1032 (
talk) 01:12, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- It is possible to prepare an edit under the alternate account, do the revert in STiki in the main account, and then switch over and save the edit. As for your second point, this is a well-known activity known as
WP:HAND. People do this to make their main account look good. --
King of
♥
♦
♣ ♠ 00:05, 15 January 2014 (UTC)
- Here is the problem with that statement. I couldn't have reverted an edit using STiki, then gone on to another brower page an made an edit using the other account all in one second. Explain how that would be possible. One other thing, let's have some common sense here. Why would I go to all the trouble to make a socked account, make a test edit on some page, edit that same minute on Stiki, just to throw you off and then just to give myself a barnstar. That's pretty stupid. I'm really not sure why I'm being accused of this. They say I shouldn't be worried if I'm innocent, but I'm beginning to feel a little worried.
Leoesb1032 (
talk) 22:27, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- I keep noticing that Franklin's contributions keep going back and forth between 11 and 12 January. Why is this? Leoesb1032 ( talk) 13:59, 24 January 2014 (UTC)
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
-
Clerk endorsed - On the face of it, it doesn't really look indicative of sockpuppetry, but combine it with the user's history and the rather unusual awarding of a barnstar and it raises enough suspicion for a check IMO.
King of
♥
♦
♣ ♠ 16:35, 14 January 2014 (UTC)
- I don't think I can run a check here. The Stiki edit looks legit to me and if it is then as I understand the tool a connection is extremely improbable, the wikilove button makes giving a barnstar trivial and it's designed to be very accessible, and the Cluebot message explicitly pointed out the automated nature. Without a reason to assume a pattern of socking I can't do a sleeper check either.
It's possible that there's something going on with FranklynJimenez777, but since I'm not really convinced and there isn't any apparent abuse to speak of that's not enough for me either. Seeing that nobody else wanted to act on it it seems I'm not alone with that assessment so I'll close this case, with no action taken. Sorry it took so long.
Amalthea 10:35, 30 January 2014 (UTC)