Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mkstokes

Mkstokes

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

02 June 2024[edit]

– A checkuser has completed a check on relevant users in this case, and it is now awaiting administration and close.

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Sentaso (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 • SPI Tools

Both accounts have interests in Peter Schiff and Nick McKenzie and have engaged in disruptive editing in order to WP:RGW particularly in regards to a lawsuit that occurred between Schiff and McKenzie. As a consequence of Mkstokes disruptive behaviour they were topic banned form Schiff and McKenzie and later received a block for 31 days for violating their topic ban. Sentaso appears to be editing in a similar manner to Mkstokes. Both accounts have a habit of aggressively telling others that are wrong about WP policy. Refer to Special:Diff/1226866525 for an example of Sentaso doing so. Refer to Special:Diff/1194975996 for an example Mkstokes doing so. TarnishedPath^talk 10:52, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

Inconclusive. Sentaso is editing from proxies. Behavioural evidence needs evaluation. Spicy (talk) 18:03, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Administrator note: It's not clear to me that these are the same person, though they do share interest. And it's a bit reasonable that two different individuals might have similar objections or be brought to Wikipedia, as Schiff himself does make public statements about how he believes Wikipedia's coverage is unfair towards him. The contribution history of each account also doesn't make me think that this is an activated sleeper, so I'm inclined to close with no action unless some stronger connection than shared interest in the McKenzie-Schiff saga can be demonstrated. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 04:48, 17 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]