intentions will not usually serve as an excuse. Shortcuts WP:ILLEGITWP:ILLEGIT WP:BADSOCKWP:BADSOCK Editors must not use alternative accounts to mislead...

block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log)) User:Kp3te (talk WP:ILLEGIT use of WP:IPSOCK account 64.85.181.34 (talk) WP:SIGNS: WP:IDENTICAL Puppeteer's...

provide some evidence of WP:ILLEGIT behavior. Vanjagenije (talk) 00:07, 15 February 2017 (UTC) No evidence of WP:ILLEGIT behavior provided. Case closed...

against claims. On hold - Obviously the same person, but I'm not sure if illegit socking. I have posted a warning in their user talk pages. MarioGom (talk)...

history, so no violation of WP:ILLEGIT. Beyond that, it's so obvious these are the same person, even if there were ILLEGIT activity, there's no reason for...

given this lack of time overlap between the accounts, I'm not sure a WP:ILLEGIT violation has occurred. Mz7 (talk) 20:29, 22 September 2020 (UTC) Clerk...

think the accounts are WP:ILLEGIT rather than WP:VALIDALT? Cabayi (talk) 12:32, 8 May 2019 (UTC) No evidence provided. No WP:ILLEGIT behaviour. Closing. Cabayi...

aware that ILLEGIT had to be met. Onel5969 TT me 16:18, 1 March 2023 (UTC)  Additional information needed - @Onel5969: Is there anything WP:ILLEGIT here? Vanjagenije...

against claims.  Additional information needed - @Swarm: What exactly is WP:ILLEGIT here? Vanjagenije (talk) 00:58, 23 July 2019 (UTC) @Vanjagenije: I feel...

CheckUser requested and endorsed by clerk - On their own merits there's no WP:ILLEGIT behaviour BUT the article in question has previously been targeted by Soulspinr...

yourself against claims. Clerk note: @Loriendrew: Is there anything WP:ILLEGIT in their edits? Explain, please. Vanjagenije (talk) 08:03, 4 June 2015...

the same range of articles with similar agenda definitely violate the WP:ILLEGIT. -Yoonadue (talk) 11:06, 19 January 2014 (UTC) @ IP 176.67.169.207 Investigation...

Fortuna! Imperatrix mundi. 20:09, 14 March 2017 (UTC) @Vanjagenije: Well; WP:ILLEGIT covers 'circumventing' policy I believe, and both one of the sandboxes...

David O. Johnson (talk) 18:15, 14 February 2020 (UTC) Cabayi I believe the ILLEGIT behavior would fall under "Contributing to the same page or discussion...

 Additional information needed - @Samtar: Please, explain what is WP:ILLEGIT in their edits. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:06, 8 December 2015 (UTC) No response...

investigate · cuwiki · SI) User compare report Auto-generated every hour. WP:ILLEGIT - Creating an illusion of support, see [1], [2] JoeSperrazza (talk) 21:21...

this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. There is nothing WP:ILLEGIT here. Case closed. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:50, 6 April 2016 (UTC)...

this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. There's no WP:ILLEGIT behaviour. I'll caution both with {{uw-agf-sock}} as a caution about the...

against claims. Almost certainly UPE, but no temporal overlap, so no violation of WP:ILLEGIT. Closing. -- RoySmith (talk) 19:20, 25 December 2021 (UTC)...

this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. Nothing WP:ILLEGIT was done here, no sockpuppetry. Closing the case. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:08...

below. See Defending yourself against claims. I don't see anything WP:ILLEGIT here, so I'm closing this without action. Vanjagenije (talk) 15:01, 30...

yourself against claims. No edits from either of those accounts. Nothing WP:ILLEGIT. @333-blue: Please, do not make such reports in the future. Vanjagenije...

section below. See Defending yourself against claims. I see nothing WP:ILLEGIT here, and they have been inactive for more than a month. Closing this case...

Wikipedia:Wiki Ed/Dartmouth College/Masterpieces of Russian Fiction (Winter 2016). Nothing WP:ILLEGIT. Closing. Vanjagenije (talk) 10:30, 10 February 2016 (UTC)...

contribs) 21:33, 10 June 2020 (UTC) Clerk note: The4lines, what is the WP:ILLEGIT behaviour? The edit history of Bergen Community College shows 100.8.174...

this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. No sign of WP:ILLEGIT behaviour. {{uw-agf-sock}} & WP:U5 all round. Closing. Cabayi (talk) 13:40...

since the last ones edited, so this doesn't appear to be a case of WP:ILLEGIT sockpuppetry. Closing without action. GeneralNotability (talk) 14:57, 26...

yourself against claims. While this is obviously one person it also doesn't cross the line into WP:ILLEGIT. Sir Sputnik (talk) 17:08, 22 May 2018 (UTC)...

using different accounts to back up themself, which is unacceptable (WP:ILLEGIT). A CheckUser can look into their technical connections. IRISZOOM (talk)...

See Defending yourself against claims. GPL93, they've done nothing WP:ILLEGIT before or since the report. {{uw-agf-sock}} and WP:U5 is the better course...

suspect an illegit link between the two accounts to warrant a CU. Do you have any further information that would constitute enough evidence of illegit socking...

abbandoned 4 years before another one was registered. I don't see anything WP:ILLEGIT here, so I'm closing this. Vanjagenije (talk) 22:37, 2 December 2015 (UTC)...

like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts.. I've left a {{uw-agf-sock}} notice. Closing...

Clerk note: Using multiple accounts to add copyrighted material is very WP:ILLEGIT. Sock should be indeffed and master warned to stop sockpuppeting. Vanjagenije...

section below. See Defending yourself against claims. I see nothing WP:ILLEGIT here. I tagged their user pages with alternate account tags. Closing. Vanjagenije...

this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. Nothing WP:ILLEGIT here. Alternative accounts are properly declared on user pages. Case closed...

June, and AdoDob was registered three days ago. I don't see anything WP:ILLEGIT here, so I'm closing this. Vanjagenije (talk) 09:29, 15 November 2015 (UTC)...

like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts. Closing without action. --Jack Frost (talk) 08:42...

The Supermind, it's suspicious but not conclusive, nor necessarily WP:ILLEGIT. I've tagged both with {{uw-agf-sock}}. Closing. Cabayi (talk) 14:40, 15...

are lying) or use the account inappropriately (so are in violation of WP:ILLEGIT). Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 13:41, 30 September 2020 (UTC)...

As a policy matter, there's no temporal overlap, so no violation of WP:ILLEGIT. If there's promotion going on, that can be dealt with outside of SPI....

dead to promote Ray Bradley (artist) just as the sock account. It appears illegit based on the fact that they are trying to promote the same person and are...

claims. Two Comcast IPs, same article, two days apart. Just DHCP at work. No WP:ILLEGIT behaviour. Closing. Cabayi (talk) 09:47, 14 October 2019 (UTC)...

like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts. I'll drop them both {{uw-agf-sock}} and that's...

information needed - @Wira rhea: Please, provide some evidence of abuse (see WP:ILLEGIT). Vanjagenije (talk) 12:17, 17 November 2023 (UTC) No evidence provided...

happen again. DarkLight1 (talk) 17:00, 28 April 2017 (UTC) There is nothing WP:ILLEGIT here. Case closed. Vanjagenije (talk) 08:09, 10 May 2017 (UTC)...

like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts. -- RoySmith (talk) 12:05, 21 October 2022 (UTC)...

section below. See Defending yourself against claims. No edits, nothing WP:ILLEGIT. Case closed. Vanjagenije (talk) 22:15, 6 March 2017 (UTC) Vanjagenije...

comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. Nothing WP:ILLEGIT here. Case closed. Vanjagenije (talk) 16:03, 28 July 2016 (UTC)...

against claims. Clerk note: @CptViraj: Please, explain what exactly is WP:ILLEGIT in their editing? Vanjagenije (talk) 22:03, 10 July 2019 (UTC) Vanjagenije...

this case there's no temporal overlap between the accounts and no apparent WP:ILLEGIT usage of multiple accounts. MCE89 (talk) 05:07, 7 March 2026 (UTC)...

to switch usernames. Absent intent to disrupt, I don't see this as a WP:ILLEGIT. Closing without action for now. Mz7 (talk) 04:42, 2 September 2020 (UTC)...

like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:54, 7 March 2022 (UTC)...

below. See Defending yourself against claims. I'd say this falls under WP:ILLEGIT enough for a block. Blocked and tagged. Closing. DatGuyTalkContribs 14:17...

against claims. Technically, no editing overlap so no problem with WP:ILLEGIT. But, the fact that Trueloveforknowledge was created 3 minutes before Kittykityee...

Breadcrumbs 09:05, 11 May 2021 (UTC) Question: - QuantumRealm, what's the WP:ILLEGIT behaviour? If there's none, then this bunch of WP:SPAs might best be dealt...

and 2) Even if the same person was using both accounts, would it be WP:ILLEGIT? Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 14:47, 17 June 2018 (UTC) @DarkFlares: Are you...

didn't like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts. Spicy (talk) 05:05, 19 August 2023 (UTC)...

simply lost their password and created a new account, which isn't a violation of WP:ILLEGIT. Closing. Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:28, 13 March 2019 (UTC)...

is no temporal overlap between the two accounts, so no violation of WP:ILLEGIT. Closing with no action taken. -- RoySmith (talk) 03:14, 15 December 2021...

claims. They are certainly working together, but I'm not ready to call this ILLEGIT. Blocked the sock as a UPOL violation and gave the master a uw-agf-sock...

of multiple accounts here. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 09:59, 13 March 2012 (UTC) I agree, not WP:ILLEGIT. Marking for close. Amalthea 11:55, 14 March 2012 (UTC)...

There's no editing overlap between the accounts, so technically not a WP:ILLEGIT violation. Closing with no action. If you want, drop them a uw-agf-sock...

like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts. Closing without action asilvering (talk) 02:51...

Bazj (talk) 09:53, 26 June 2015 (UTC) Vanjagenije - Two violations of WP:ILLEGIT: Posing as a neutral commentator: Using an alternative account in a discussion...

claims.  Additional information needed - @Ratnahastin: What is exactly WP:ILLEGIT in their editing? Vanjagenije (talk) 17:47, 7 July 2024 (UTC) Closing without...

attribution is legit? SWAdair | Talk 04:21, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC) looks very illegit and a candidate for an entry on Wikipedia:Copies_of_Wikipedia_content_...

section below. See Defending yourself against claims. I don't see anything WP:ILLEGIT here. Case closed. Vanjagenije (talk) 19:25, 9 January 2021 (UTC)...

section below. See Defending yourself against claims. There is nothing WP:ILLEGIT here, thus no sockpuppetry. Closing. Vanjagenije (talk) 10:37, 18 August...

explanation, leading me to believe this is indeed a vandal operation. (see:WP:ILLEGIT) Fairly OddParents Freak (Fairlyoddparents1234) C 21:38, 2 December 2012...

 Additional information needed - @Dodger67: Please, explain what exactly is WP:ILLEGIT in their edits. Vanjagenije (talk) 10:18, 8 July 2016 (UTC) Simply the...

but no temporal overlap between the two accounts, so no violation of WP:ILLEGIT. Closing with no action taken. -- RoySmith (talk) 03:49, 15 December 2021...

and Khendygirl started today. They do not use multiple accounts for WP:ILLEGIT as I can see. If Yanieborja resumes editing, then refill this case. Vanjagenije...

against claims. Even if he lies about the password, there is nothing WP:ILLEGIT there. Closing the case. Vanjagenije (talk) 14:29, 18 January 2016 (UTC)...

that matter). GABgab 15:29, 22 September 2016 (UTC) No evidence of WP:ILLEGIT behavior. Case closed. Vanjagenije (talk) 20:11, 25 September 2016 (UTC)...

Mahmoudfarag92 has not edited since Mesbahfarag was created, so no WP:ILLEGIT issues. Closing. There may well be promotional editing, UPE, etc, issues...

This shows every sign of being the use of multiple accounts against WP:ILLEGIT. AllyD (talk) 09:45, 30 March 2013 (UTC) Accused parties may also comment/discuss...

below. See Defending yourself against claims. Clerk note: What's the WP:ILLEGIT behaviour that merits an SPI case Rdp060707? Two people sharing the same...

 Possible,  No sleepers immediately visible. No sign of other accounts or ILLEGIT behavior (other than the suspicious sleeper behavior), and the other account...

Do you think he edited while logged out to mislead/deceive/disrupt (WP:ILLEGIT), or could it have been an accident? After all it is quite apparent that...

(contribs) 01:38, 22 June 2021 (UTC) Blocking sock indef for being WP:ILLEGIT due to time overlap (using Lordship888 then Adamakiko120 and then Lordship888...

 Additional information needed - @E Wing: Please, explain what is WP:ILLEGIT in their edits. Vanjagenije (talk) 19:23, 11 September 2015 (UTC) No explanation...

clueless promotional editing. Beeblebrox (talk) 18:40, 5 June 2017 (UTC) Nothing WP:ILLEGIT here. Case closed. Vanjagenije (talk) 19:12, 5 June 2017 (UTC)...

like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts. If they're editing promotionally, that can be...

like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts. Closing. Spicy (talk) 15:41, 27 May 2023 (UTC)...

and sub-optimal, but I'm not sure I would go so far as to call it WP:ILLEGIT. I left them {{uw-login}}, which seems sufficient for now. -- RoySmith...

like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts. Closing without action Jack Frost (talk) 07:23...

made a single edit. There's no temporal overlap, so no violation of WP:ILLEGIT. I left uw-agf-sock, and I'll leave it there. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:53...

like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts. -- RoySmith (talk) 03:00, 8 March 2022 (UTC)...

issue is that each of these accounts is in violation of WP:VALIDALT and WP:ILLEGIT. WP:VALIDALT allows for "Clean starts" but it also says there "Do not use...

maliciousness. In what way do you think is the behavior inappropriate per WP:ILLEGIT? If the edits made by the above accounts had all been made by one account...

See Defending yourself against claims. Shearonink, I don't see the WP:ILLEGIT behaviour. It's almost certainly the same person, but they could have forgotten...

they've used the accounts sequentially, so technically no violation of WP:ILLEGIT. I left the active account a uw-agf-sock warning and we'll leave it there...

same editor, it's not clear to me how the accounts' edits violate the WP:ILLEGIT, as there is no page overlap between the accounts. Perhaps they just wanted...

appropriate. Cabayi (talk) 04:43, 29 June 2019 (UTC) There's been no WP:ILLEGIT activity from the second account, more through luck than any forethought...

sockpuppetry. Maybe he just forgot the password. I do not see anything WP:ILLEGIT, so I'm closing this case. Vanjagenije (talk) 16:24, 24 May 2016 (UTC)...

likely is that they forgot their password or something like that. Please also see WP:ILLEGIT. Marking as close. Elockid (Talk) 20:16, 28 May 2010 (UTC)...

below. See Defending yourself against claims. On hold - Not totally WP:ILLEGIT, so I prefer discussing with the user first. I posted a message on her...

company promotion, an illegitimate use (although it's not specified on WP:ILLEGIT)? Joseph2302 (talk) 18:17, 11 April 2015 (UTC) Account Csi.ddpm was not...

July 2021 (UTC) No overlap in editing, so absent further evidence of WP:ILLEGIT socking there's nothing to be done here. Closing with a COI/PAID warning...

are annoying, but I think they are good-faith. I think this is not WP:ILLEGIT, so I'm closing the case. Vanjagenije (talk) 19:50, 2 February 2016 (UTC)...

multiple accounts. – bradv🍁 00:03, 25 April 2020 (UTC) No overlap = no WP:ILLEGIT. Tagged both with {{uw-agf-sock}}. Cabayi (talk) 06:26, 26 April 2020 (UTC)...

(UTC) VVAV Kitchen was soft-blocked and invited to create new account. Noting WP:ILLEGIT here. Closing. Vanjagenije (talk) 11:42, 18 January 2021 (UTC)...

similar grammar and the edits mentioned. I am not sure that we are at WP:ILLEGIT levels yet; perhaps only block the sock and tell 'em to stick to one account...

evidence of disruption this falls into the grey area between WP:LEGIT and WP:ILLEGIT. A warning about the misuse of multiple accounts should be sufficient here...

developed. Wildhartlivie (talk) 05:00, 1 June 2010 (UTC) Proc Keep WP:ILLEGIT Editing project space: Undisclosed alternative accounts should not edit...

the same person, but there's no temporal overlap, so no violation of WP:ILLEGIT. Closing with no action. I'll drop them a uw-afg-sock just to make sure...

information needed - @Narutolovehinata5: Please, give some examples of WP:ILLEGIT behavior. Vanjagenije (talk) 22:36, 28 February 2017 (UTC) @Vanjagenije:...

against claims.  Additional information needed - I fail to see anything WP:ILLEGIT in their edits. @Whpq: Please, explain me. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:35, 8...

below. See Defending yourself against claims. Not a single evidence of WP:ILLEGIT presented. Closing. Vanjagenije (talk) 08:17, 27 October 2021 (UTC)...

these do turn out to be the same person, it's hard to see what part of WP:ILLEGIT they would be violating. Playing silly games in your sandbox, while not...

GNG. 81.129.157.53 (talk) 14:56, 16 February 2014 (UTC) Invalid per WP:ILLEGIT. Leaky Caldron 15:02, 16 February 2014 (UTC) Are you claiming the IP user...

like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts. Obviously, there's a COI issue here. However...

like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts. Their edits so far have not exactly been productive...

it is not him, it may be another user from that discussion violating WP:ILLEGIT by contributing to the same discussion with a sock account. It may also...

doesn't make any edits (and it hasn't yet), there's no violation of WP:ILLEGIT. We don't block accounts proactively because they might do something in...

like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:27, 24 April 2022 (UTC)...

like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts. On the other hand, Doug Weller has raised the...

temporal overlap and neither account is blocked, so not a concern under WP:ILLEGIT. That these users have a COI is clear, but there doesn't seem to be abuse...

2019 (UTC) Three new user accounts, none of which have done anything WP:ILLEGIT, only two of which have edited to argue that Armenia benefits (none of...

temporal overlap in their editing histories, there's no violation of WP:ILLEGIT. I left them uw-agf-sock, but that's as far as I can go. -- RoySmith (talk)...

like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:33, 5 April 2023 (UTC)...

like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:26, 23 March 2022 (UTC)...

their password and created a new account, which is not a violation of WP:ILLEGIT. I'll leave a {{uw-agf-sock}} on their talk pages, but that's as far as...

throwaway account, Rightwingerpride indef and am advising Bluemarine on legit and illegit uses of socks. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:11, 8 November 2007 (UTC)...

looks to me like they just wanted to fix their username, which is not WP:ILLEGIT. If they continue spamming their YouTube channel, let me or WP:AIV know...

logged out is not against policy and I can't see abuse which meets WP:ILLEGIT, though you can place {{IPsock|username}} on the IP's talk page if you...

against claims. The BushraShariar/Abir Sadaf Chowdhury pairing is not WP:ILLEGIT since there is no overlap in edits, but I have no doubt they are working...

like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts. The username's a well-known lawyer gag so doesn't...

this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. Nothing WP:ILLEGIT here. Case closed. @333-blue: Please, do not make such reports in the future...

result. Izno (talk) 20:04, 21 December 2023 (UTC) Since no evidence of WP:ILLEGIT use was provided, I'm closing this with no action. Vanjagenije (talk) 11:50...

Talk! 23:10, 5 January 2024 (UTC) Clerk note: @Liz: There is nothing WP:ILLEGIT here. The master account was blocked as compromised. The user clearly stated...

Nadwi Kooriyad started the next day. They may be the same person, but there's no WP:ILLEGIT behaviour. Closing. Cabayi (talk) 12:56, 22 March 2019 (UTC)...

(contribs) 22:29, 22 November 2020 (UTC) Clerk note: I don't see nothing WP:ILLEGIT here. They could be newbies trying to create the same article or someone...

still see no reason to think it was abuse of multiple accounts per WP:SOCK#ILLEGIT. There was no attempt at deception or disruption that I can see. Amalthea...

queue. Mike V • Talk 04:19, 8 December 2015 (UTC) I don't see anything WP:ILLEGIT here, as the editor fully disclosed using those IPs. Closing the case....

Defending yourself against claims. Doesn't seem to have actually violated WP:ILLEGIT, but from the behavior, I wouldn't be surprised if there were previous...

single person has used the 3 accounts), but even if it was true, it's illegit meatpuppetry. MarioGom (talk) 15:03, 5 November 2022 (UTC) Accused parties...

User:Rawkatherine [3]; User:HuldaClark1 [4]; 66.18.54.6 [5]. Violation: Per WP:ILLEGIT (1) Creating an illusion of support; (2) Contributing to the same page...

investigate · cuwiki · SI) User compare report Auto-generated every hour. Per WP:ILLEGIT - used for circumventing policies or sanctions, specifically WP:EVASION...

(UTC) I'm closing the case. Even if Marco castellani 1965 is Zwgeem, I don't see anything WP:ILLEGIT. Vanjagenije (talk) 19:27, 27 August 2016 (UTC)...

(talk) 22:26, 24 January 2022 (UTC) I don't see any issues here with WP:ILLEGIT. @The Page Maker 2.1: as long as you continue to use just the one account...

user was trying to mislead other editors using multiple accounts (see WP:ILLEGIT). The fact that Heeheemalu uploaded the image can be adequately explained...

articles here. We may have an article about you, but it is not yours. WP:ILLEGIT - Do not try to pretend to be someone else. We can and will block you as...

(UTC).  Additional information needed - @Sjö: Please, explain what is WP:ILLEGIT in their edits. Vanjagenije (talk) 10:05, 19 September 2015 (UTC) If there...

(PPIO) personnel. FagundezBadajoz2026 & PPIOJOSE2025! are overlapping & WP:ILLEGIT. Cabayi (talk) 13:14, 9 July 2026 (UTC) Accused parties may also comment/discuss...

explanation and COI disclosure. I'm not seeing anything that violates WP:ILLEGIT, so closing with no action. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:41, 28 September 2021...

Uekusa and Fright Night Film Fest, has been already blocked because of WP:ILLEGIT on the Japanese Wikipedia. Maybe there are some more sleepers. 122.16.131...

there's a pretty clear connection between them and there's a violation of ILLEGIT. I also agree that it wasn't intentionally deceptive. The two accounts...

this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. Nothing WP:ILLEGIT here. Case closed. Vanjagenije (talk) 10:03, 3 December 2016 (UTC) Confirmed...

see this as an attempt at avoiding scrutiny or anything else that's WP:ILLEGIT. I'll just leave some uw-agf-sock love on their talk pages. If they continue...

accounts were the same person (I'm nowhere near convinced), there's no WP:ILLEGIT behaviour. With a 5 month gap between accounts, and the first account having...

The naming is so obvious that CU is pointless. They've done nothing WP:ILLEGIT so far, though it's hard to conceive of a WP:VALIDALT reason for four accounts...

December 2021 (UTC) There's no temporal overlap, so no violation of WP:ILLEGIT. Not to mention that Karan is stale. Closing with no action. My suggestion...

with Elizabethwarren2011). ​—DoRD (talk)​ 11:57, 4 July 2017 (UTC) No WP:ILLEGIT behavior reported. Case closed with no action. Vanjagenije (talk) 16:25...

see that there is the overlap of edits required which would make it WP:ILLEGIT. @Yaush: Have I missed something? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:56...

which is simply not acceptable. The IP cited seems to have breached WP:ILLEGIT too, as Pedro kept using it while removing the single release of "First...

Mouzam Abbasi marked it as patrolled ([2]), which is forbidden per WP:ILLEGIT. Vanjagenije (talk) 10:27, 22 June 2014 (UTC) Accused parties may also...

easy to conclude that Timgriffin27 = CLServicesinc1234, but that's not WP:ILLEGIT – the block on CLServicesinc1234 was explicitly a soft block, meaning further...

See Defending yourself against claims. I don't know that this counts as ILLEGIT, but I don't think anyone really expects this user is here to contribute...

the same person based on their user pages, but their edits don't fail WP:ILLEGIT. The Merosoft account doesn't have enough information to determine if it's...

Defending yourself against claims. Clerk note: Closed. Please read WP:ILLEGIT. It is completely acceptable to create a new account with an acceptable...

they're closely coordinating to publish spam, which would push them into ILLEGIT territory. --Blablubbs|talk 11:37, 27 May 2021 (UTC) Blablubbs, Yeah, I...

like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts. But also, sock already username-blocked. asilvering...

needed - @Loriendrew: Michael Dane has no edits at all. What exactly is WP:ILLEGIT in the edits of other two accounts? Vanjagenije (talk) 11:19, 3 February...

sure, both accounts are the same person. Check user could help, perhaps. Illegit use of multiple accounts, umm.. I find myself sometimes in dilemma whether...

that they forgot password, but in any case I am inclined that it's not WP:ILLEGIT behavior. Closing without any action. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 16:48, 7 June 2019...

timecards, apparent trolling trolling [1]... I'm not sure this is WP:ILLEGIT, since it looks like per-device accounts (desktop, mobile) without any...

Seems like the user is using a sock to back up his own argument per WP:ILLEGIT. Diff 1 - Shows Unreal7's move proposal as well as the supporting vote...

(talk) 04:06, 2 May 2013 (UTC) Clerk note: Closed. No violation of WP:ILLEGIT has occurred. The alleged combative behavior and personal attacks are not...

first three accounts & NJA softblocked the next two. I don't see any WP:ILLEGIT behaviour from any of them. It's undoubtedly the same guy who is pretty...

more than two months after the first one was abandoned. I see nothing WP:ILLEGIT here. Closing. Vanjagenije (talk) 16:22, 10 July 2015 (UTC) @Vanjagenije:...

I'm not seeing a crystal-clear intent to evade scrutiny or act in an ILLEGIT way, so please hold off on a block if CU is positive. Randhirbharat's edits...

edit by the later account, and no temporal overlap, so no violation of WP:ILLEGIT. Closing with no action. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:44, 3 October 2021 (UTC)...

--Bbb23 (talk) 21:54, 10 October 2019 (UTC) No overlap in time. No WP:ILLEGIT behaviour. SP321 cautioned about COI. Nothing to do. Closing. Cabayi (talk)...

may all be the same person, but nothing they've done runs afoul of WP:ILLEGIT. If problems emerge, we can revisit this. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:54, 26...

when one gets reverted, it's usually the other that reverts back (WP:ILLEGIT)? Both accounts also became more active around 2019–2020 based on their...

get coverage. [1] [2] Dream Focus 04:42, 1 June 2010 (UTC) Proc Keep WP:ILLEGIT Editing project space: Undisclosed alternative accounts should not edit...

doubt that these are the same person, but this doesn't appear to be a WP:ILLEGIT case (an account getting used once then a new account being used a few...

free to report again if you have evidence of a previous account and WP:ILLEGIT use (e.g. evasion of active sanctions). Closing without action. MarioGom...

Smak021 and Safeersmak are connected, no policy has been broken yet as WP:ILLEGIT hasn't been violated with those two; in any event, based on the username...

enough evidence to take any action on. If they continue to perform edits WP:ILLEGIT edits, please open a new case here. Closing with no action taken. -- RoySmith...

yourself against claims. Awaiting administrative action - This is not illegit sockpuppetry. The account was created after the edit with the IP, which...

Ashbeck was actively contributing, which likely violates a principle at WP:ILLEGIT. These were promptly removed by Ashbeck. BenYes? 01:55, 4 July 2014 (UTC)...

(🐿️—🏳️‍🌈) 22:56, 27 November 2022 (UTC) Based on Vermont input, there's no illegit socking here. Closing without action. MarioGom (talk) 17:28, 2 December...

they have an explanation. Cabayi (talk) 19:06, 2 April 2020 (UTC) No WP:ILLEGIT behaviour and both users are now aware of the implications of WP:MEAT....

policy. In fact, it's hard to find anything they've done that fails WP:ILLEGIT. Only the oldest account has edited the AfD, etc. If they start spamming...

templates. The Wiktionary stuff isn't actionable and may not even be WP:ILLEGIT; if it is, you'd have to go to Wiktionary. Sorry about the hassle. Otherwise...

claims.  Additional information needed - @Doc James: Is there anything WP:ILLEGIT here? Vanjagenije (talk) 08:03, 6 October 2017 (UTC) @Doc James: Please...

over top of the existing page. Question, Dl2000: how does this breach WP:ILLEGIT? One started editing a week after the other, so we don't have time overlap...

started. No block evasion. Is there anything which rises to the level of WP:ILLEGIT, WayKurat? Cabayi (talk) 11:26, 4 March 2021 (UTC) PvZGamer7382 has responded...

Abandoning an account and registering anew one after 8 years does not look WP:ILLEGIT to me. Did you try to discuss this with JCN217? Vanjagenije (talk) 00:58...

 — Berean Hunter (talk) 14:45, 12 November 2018 (UTC) I don't see anything WP:ILLEGIT here. Closing. Vanjagenije (talk) 12:56, 14 November 2018 (UTC)...

like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:11, 5 June 2022 (UTC) Hey...

No other recent similar account creations. Not otherwise a breach of WP:ILLEGIT. Closing without action. --Jack Frost (talk) 19:51, 18 November 2021 (UTC)...

information needed - They certainly seem to be the same person but there's no WP:ILLEGIT behaviour, no overlap in time between the accounts, no dodging the consequences...

yоu should request those pages to be deleted. I don't see anything WP:ILLEGIT here, so I'm closing the case. Vanjagenije (talk) 12:11, 8 September 2015...

there any reason to believe that there is abusive sockpuppetry (see WP:ILLEGIT for a list of prohibited uses of multiple accounts) going on? The account...

Hoomanbahreini resumed activity to remove the tag. Clear violation of WP:ILLEGIT. Additional indications: Shirinkhalvati has edited Hooman (1 2 3) Both...

See Defending yourself against claims. There is nothing particularly WP:ILLEGIT here. One edit from one IP adress (49.195.159.44) and then several edits...

like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts. Closing without action. Jack Frost (talk) 03:31...

like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts. asilvering (talk) 07:23, 27 January 2026 (UTC)...

password, or something like that. In other words, nothing that falls under WP:ILLEGIT. I'm going to close this with no action taken. If you wanted, you could...

If they deny that the previous account was theirs or there's a clear WP:ILLEGIT usage of the two accounts, then we can handle it as a sockpuppetry case...

there's no temporal overlap, so by our rules, not socking. It's not WP:ILLEGIT to change your username, as long as there's no intent to deceive. I'm going...

account name seems on the mark. I don't see anything that triggers WP:ILLEGIT, so closing with no action. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:51, 18 May 2021 (UTC)...

interested in. They were used to make disruptive edits, vandalize, etc. WP:ILLEGIT. The first example is from the Battle of Lens article, where User:~2026-23979-43...

suspicions on the two accounts' behavior ([7], [8]). On the grounds of WP:ILLEGIT, I believe the accounts Cinemaandpolitics and Symphidius worth a CheckUser...

administrative action - This looks closer to competency issues than to illegit socking. Given the timeline, it does not look like a lost password. I would...

142.12, one account stopped editing, the other started. What's the WP:ILLEGIT behaviour? Cabayi (talk) 11:18, 25 October 2019 (UTC) Cabayi beat me to...

these two accounts are the same person, I'm just not seeing how this is WP:ILLEGIT. The previous account hadn't edited in 7 years. {{nto}} applies here. There's...

watch one account instead of two. A second account is not allowed for illegit reasons per WP:SOCK. AGF is block and watch. -- DQ (t) (e) 06:39, 9 March...

disrupt/deceive/mislead and thus no illegitimate use of multiple accounts per WP:ILLEGIT. It's correct though that they should make the connection between the two...

Massacre and have both edited project-space, they technically violate WP:ILLEGIT. I am required to request an indef block of Clawman9994. Because I see...

person, but no temporal overlap between the accounts, so no violation of WP:ILLEGIT. Closing. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:38, 13 February 2022 (UTC) Ooops, I missed...

and block it as an IP sock, but for now I do not see a violation of WP:ILLEGIT. Reaper Eternal (talk) 13:47, 10 September 2012 (UTC) Clerk note: As you...

GNG. 81.129.157.53 (talk) 14:53, 16 February 2014 (UTC) Invalid per WP:ILLEGIT. Leaky Caldron 15:03, 16 February 2014 (UTC) Delete The best we have is...

Viibird does not edit again, I would suggest leaving this here. If WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts continues, feel free to report again. Thank you...

like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts. applies, so closing with no action taken. RoySmith...

February 2015 (UTC) Note that the nominator has been blocked for violating WP:ILLEGIT. It is not permissible to create an alternate account to participate in...

2019 (UTC) There's a three month gap between the two named accounts and no WP:ILLEGIT behaviour. Closing. Cabayi (talk) 07:11, 19 October 2019 (UTC)...

2020 (UTC) I note that jumping from Taricksalmaci to Kronkgym13 isn't WP:ILLEGIT since the former was only softblocked. However, it's pretty clear that...

(UTC) Explicit, the original block was a soft-block. I don't see any WP:ILLEGIT behaviour justifying the SPI or the hard-block. Cabayi (talk) 11:21, 22...

multiple accounts", and "Editing logged out to mislead" as described at WP:ILLEGIT. This is on top of a refusal to abide by verifiability policies and willful...

 Additional information needed - @Pennsy22: Can you show some evidence of WP:ILLEGIT behavior? Logged-put editing is nor prohibited per se. Vanjagenije (talk)...

sockpuppetry vs. meatpuppetry, as well as whether these accounts were WP:ILLEGIT or if, for example, the user simply forgot their password. Because most...

themselves from the {{paid}} notice at User:Depeterz, which would be WP:ILLEGIT. I've left uw-agf-sock on Ikenna0001's talk page and I'll leave it there...

by someone with a very detectable conflicting interest (not that that's illegit in image uploading itself) months to over a year ago. --Nat Gertler (talk)...

a single article which I have a hard time considering as disruptive or ILLEGIT. Closing with no action, but please re-report if the accounts start attempting...

they're trying to evade detection. So, I don't see how there's any WP:ILLEGIT activity going on here, so I don't see that it's socking. I'm inclined...

sockmaster was warned [15] at one point), possible signs of WP:IDART and WP:ILLEGIT. While the account EsmeKraz was created last year in mid 2023, the accounts...

sockpuppet and recreating the deleted text, I am not sure if we meet WP:ILLEGIT. Procedure question - if an SPI depends on a policy question that is not...

multiple account usage, no block evasion. It's not clear if this is WP:ILLEGIT, but I sent a warning to the user. Closing. MarioGom (talk) 19:28, 29 September...

minor style or grammar errors, so I don't see how this can be called WP:ILLEGIT. Maybe somebody's just running some "We're all stuck at home in covid quarantine...

below. See Defending yourself against claims. I don't see that this is WP:ILLEGIT. The original account has not, as far as I can tell, ever been blocked...

so it is very hard to make any behavioral analysis. There is nothing WP:ILLEGIT in their edits neither, so I think we should not block any more accounts...

note: Pt. Shiva's first edit, "Khanacademy", and the lack of outright WP:ILLEGIT behaviour leads me to believe it's just a classroom clumsily learning to...

to do so is not covered by WP:SOCK#LEGIT and is probably covered by WP:ILLEGIT per WP:SCRUTINY  Ryan Vesey 00:04, 14 February 2013 (UTC) Expanding on...

investigate · cuwiki · SI) being the most recent, which would make this definitely illegit socking if confirmed. However, I'm not entirely sure if I'm looking just...

years of inactivity, this person created new account. What exactly is WP:ILLEGIT here? Vanjagenije (talk) 18:38, 7 February 2016 (UTC) @The Four Deuces:...

illusion of greater support for a controversial opinion as described in WP:ILLEGIT. All accounts have attempted to change the description of the ideology...

Adetona and drisupt Celestina's talk page, clearly in violation of WP:ILLEGIT. [1] and [2] don't look like edits by a person who's here to build an encyclopaedia...

same person, but doesn't look like they did anything in violation of WP:ILLEGIT. Looks like the three accounts were used sequentially. Maybe they kept...

second account to edit in violation of an active block, as stated at WP:ILLEGIT), which is why I opened this SPI. Based on the evidence of their edits...

AbolfazlEbrahimi14, I don't think that pair being confirmed would be WP:ILLEGIT. Closing without action. MarioGom (talk) 15:07, 1 October 2023 (UTC)...

Doug3584030 has edited, and to be honest, it doesn't seem like there's any WP:ILLEGIT socking among these accounts, so not sure if any action is needed.  Clerk...

defend the article on the talk page. All this is likely a violation of WP:ILLEGIT by both creating an illusion of support, contributing to the same page...

like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts.. Bearcat I suggest you just drop them some warnings...

tarnishing another editor's name for legitimate sockpuppetry? Or was it illegit because the user is now blocked?). Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:49, 28 December...

Do you think those IP edits were made to mislead/deceive/disrupt per WP:ILLEGIT? Fizikanauk hasn't edited page and talk page in quite some time. Amalthea...

those two in isolation, there's no temporal overlap, so no violation of WP:ILLEGIT. It gets more complicated when you mix in the rest of the accounts. The...

escalated into trying to manipulate an AfD, which clearly falls under WP:ILLEGIT. Michitaro (talk) 17:59, 24 October 2012 (UTC) Accused parties may also...

to be more support for her POV than there really is (falling under WP:ILLEGIT). Creativity-II (talk) 07:28, 6 February 2010 (UTC) See Defending yourself...

e. 86.44.etc.etc. Sockmaster and (3) sockpuppets appear to seek to WP:ILLEGIT and circumvent policy on account creation and use. These accounts clearly...

fixed this myself. (2) BDKSH is not currently blocked, so what part of WP:ILLEGIT does this fall under? –Chase (talk / contribs) 22:22, 15 May 2015 (UTC)...

like their username, or wanted a clean start, and thus this is not a WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:57, 16 April 2023 (UTC)...

disagree on whether Colton's editing constitutes a form of sockpuppetry (WP:ILLEGIT). Timotheus Canens indefinitely blocked Colton on 15 May, 2012, stating;...

deceive/disrupt/mislead, and casual users in particular often don't log in (see WP:ILLEGIT for what is considered inappropriate use). Blocking any of those accounts...

claims. Clerk note: @Drmies: In this particular case, they are socking (WP:ILLEGIT), and I agree they should be blocked. Editing sane article with multiple...

out with Leaheaton. MarioGom (talk) 20:17, 27 November 2022 (UTC) Ok. No illegit socking here. Closing without action. ProClasher97: In a case like this...

(UTC) @SanAnMan: Please provide diffs demonstrating a violation of WP:ILLEGIT, because I don't see any. ST47 (talk) 20:40, 27 August 2019 (UTC) I see...

note Thanks Ponyo. I can't see any interactions which fall a foul of WP:ILLEGIT so I think we cab close this without action. Callanecc (talk • contribs...

non-local sources. Two previous AFDs were closed as procedural keeps per WP:ILLEGIT due to the nominator being a sockpuppet of a banned user. Claritas § 20:27...

requested and endorsed by clerk - Re-voting on merger proposal crosses into WP:ILLEGIT. Please confirm & check for sleepers. Cabayi (talk) 13:52, 24 September...

topic areas both logged in and logged out, which is a violation of WP:ILLEGIT, specifically WP:SCRUTINY. However, it isn't clear to me if the user is...

per WP:ANI#PAYTALK Widefox; talk 08:01, 20 November 2015 (UTC) Restate: ILLEGIT is deception / imminent block evasion / WP:SCRUTINY (per my comment at...

scrutiny", and "Editing logged out in order to mislead", as described at WP:ILLEGIT. Eleassar my talk 19:26, 13 March 2012 (UTC) Accused parties may also comment/discuss...

However, if these accounts are the second accounts of anyone else, they're ILLEGIT, because the socking policy says Undisclosed alternative accounts are not...

(User:Tysongodest), and assuming my suspicions are correct, then this is obviously an illegit use of multiple accounts; i doubt they forgot their password(s), didn't...

those accounts would be affected by any change in the policy. However WP:ILLEGIT point 1 (and point 4 for that matter as well) is quite clear and has been...

of which JimSmith123 created) looks to me like a clear violation of WP:ILLEGIT and WP:SCRUTINY, if not of other rules. Fyddlestix (talk) 00:31, 29 January...

evasion has occurred (yet) but I am blocking the extraneous account per WP:ILLEGIT. The IPs are dynamic and rotate frequently, and this user hasn't edited...

no overlap in editing. Should they be blocked? Did they do anything WP:ILLEGIT? Vanjagenije (talk) 22:12, 30 January 2018 (UTC) I always leave the discretion...

start with a new one, as long as you don't edit in a way that violates WP:ILLEGIT. But, the item that concerns me more is your mention of "life threatening"...

despite being given an agf-sock template, they have engaged in subsequent WP:ILLEGIT illusion-of-support edits like removing a speedy template from an article...

I agree that switching to another account is fine in general. But, WP:ILLEGIT says, "switching accounts or concealing a clean start in a way that avoids...

never edited that article previously and are pushing the same POV. WP:ILLEGIT Jeraxmoira (talk) 05:03, 26 October 2023 (UTC) Accused parties may also...

misleading and inappropriate use of alternative accounts is a violation of WP:ILLEGIT. Most concerning is that the editor just doesn't seem to understand what...

value if a second account is used without disclosure, which would make it illegit socking and UPE. However, if you give any credibility to the explanations...

be disclosed in the user pages, but other than that, there does not seem to be illegit sockpuppetry here. MarioGom (talk) 14:34, 5 December 2023 (UTC)...

they're the same person, would it be a valid CLEANSTART, and/or is it ILLEGIT? Cdo2017 isn't blocked and Cdo bd para has edited only after Cdo2017 stopped...

‐‐1997kB (talk) 13:45, 7 December 2020 (UTC) Clerk note: I don't see anything WP:ILLEGIT here. They could be newbies trying to create the same article or someone...

purpose of making these speculations/accusations against me? I have read WP:ILLEGIT and feel that there is enough reason to initiate an investigation to see...

log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki · SI), but that isn't WP:ILLEGIT unless Sunita.william is actually Mahim6785 so I'm not yet blocking. (Abish...

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mitt Romney/archive2. This is a violation of WP:ILLEGIT's "Creating an illusion of support". Please perform a checkuser to check...

some CU results. Not detailing these as they are not a violation of WP:ILLEGIT unless Danny White is a sock of Young English Actor. Dreamy Jazz talk to...

User:Arthur Kemp belonged to the same person, it still wouldn't really be WP:ILLEGIT; not quite as we would have liked it, but not problematic enough to do...

14:48, 16 February 2014 (UTC) Almost certainly an invalid !vote per WP:ILLEGIT. Leaky Caldron 14:55, 16 February 2014 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more...

new accounts to avoid the scrutiny of having the sandboxs deleted is WP:Illegit and so is an abuse of multiple accounts. Would a CU please confirm the...

of starting some edit summaries with "Just...". I don't see anything WP:ILLEGIT there. Clerk declined. Cabayi (talk) 22:15, 27 February 2019 (UTC) Cabayi...

to why he maintains two different accounts, but instead has violated WP:ILLEGIT by reviving the position and POV from his other sleeper account, that failed...

(talk) 23:22, 22 November 2023 (UTC) There's no clear violation of WP:ILLEGIT and the relationship is now, belatedly, declared on both userpages. Closing...

evident and admitted, based on the links provided to WP:CLEANSTART and WP:ILLEGIT I think that the sockmaster is actually older than Lac47 and would like...

He has claimed to have "forgotten" his other account(s). When I read WP:ILLEGIT, the use of multiple accounts is prohibited, especially when it prevents...

just forgotten about them. At any rate, none of this quite crosses the WP:ILLEGIT line, so I am not going to block you, Vitsuha. (I will block the other...

their comment this user is clearly a disruptive sockpuppet of someone. WP:ILLEGIT - Creating an illusion of support, Avoiding scrutiny and possibly Contributing...

Creating multiple accounts to impersonate well-known persons looks WP:ILLEGIT to me. Please, indef all the confirmed accounts. Thank you. MarioGom (talk)...

that has only edited their sandbox in the last year, so not really an WP:ILLEGIT), but  Unlikely to the other accounts. To be honest, after looking at the...

different account to edit same pages is sockpuppetry per definition of WP:ILLEGIT. Vanjagenije (talk) 09:36, 17 February 2016 (UTC) Clerk endorsed - yes...

temporal overlap between the two accounts, they're clearly violating WP:ILLEGIT by evading their topic ban. Spicy (talk) 19:59, 22 March 2021 (UTC) Accused...

8 September 2016 (UTC) @L235: Could you comment on which point of WP:ILLEGIT this hits and how a block would be preventative rather than punitive? With...

I started on the sock puppet talk page, IP users like this violate WP:ILLEGIT and WP:LOGOUT. I didn't notify the user so they couldn't move to another...

 Additional information needed - @331dot: Please, explain what is WP:ILLEGIT in their edits? Vanjagenije (talk) 21:58, 18 August 2015 (UTC) "Circumventing...

particularly distinctive). Additionally, I don't think we've actually breached WP:ILLEGIT, since as far as I can tell they have not interacted in a way to hide edit-warring...

Lrcee has socked before. JmacBrown has violated some of the rules at WP:ILLEGIT. He created The Moody Brothers and recreated a deleted article originally...

under Wikipedia:Sock puppetry#Legitimate uses, either. Closest match is WP:ILLEGIT:"Contributing to the same page or discussion with multiple accounts. Account...

requests: These accounts are all illegitimate sockpuppets according to WP:ILLEGIT. Undisclosed alternative accounts are not supposed to "be used in discussions...

Contributing to the same page or discussion with multiple accounts of WP:ILLEGIT. CptViraj (📧) 08:51, 8 August 2019 (UTC) Accused parties may also comment/discuss...

done. Sincerely, Round4figure Round4figure (talk) 07:42, 9 July 2016 (UTC) Nothing WP:ILLEGIT. Case closed. Vanjagenije (talk) 13:11, 28 July 2016 (UTC)...

created a user account I don't see any indication of a violation of WP:ILLEGIT. VQuakr (talk) 01:08, 1 October 2017 (UTC) Unrelated. Please close this...

when I'm verifying them. For some types of proxies (both the legit, and illegit kinds), whatismyip can still trace my original IP (but I think that is...

username similarity and this log entry but I'm not seeing any obvious WP:ILLEGIT behavior and none of them have edited in several months. I've left uw-agf-sock...

engaging in editing the same content for which they are paid, so it's illegit. CUPIDICAE💕 18:26, 11 March 2021 (UTC) Accused parties may also comment/discuss...

Mbhiii is using multiple IPs that could be viewed as a violation of WP:ILLEGIT at Talk:Tea bag (disambiguation) by making "the impression of more support...

Closed. I'm not really seeing the sockpuppetry, and it wouldn't violate WP:ILLEGIT even if they were the same. Plumoyr is unblocked and stopped editing years...

photo as a copyright violation concerns me. I believe this touches on WP:ILLEGIT, specifically the condition "Contributing to the same page or discussion...

been used sequentially, with no overlap, so there's no violation of WP:ILLEGIT. I am pinging @Jdbolivar, JdbolivarChavez, and JdbolivarChavezmarcos: to...

WP:BLP (see for example Frank Costa). It would seem that it would fail WP:ILLEGIT if proven; i.e. a number of editors editing in such a manner as to both...

AnulBanul are (probably) run by the same person, but I don't see what is WP:ILLEGIT in that situation. User is allowed to abandon one account and create other...

user registers account and starts using it. Is there any evidence of WP:ILLEGIT behavior? Vanjagenije (talk) 09:03, 28 December 2018 (UTC) @Vanjagenije:...

obvious that they're the same person. I don't think it falls under WP:ILLEGIT, but they should of course stick to one account, to make things easier...

suck, and even his soundtracks arent that good, but that doesnt make them illegit. Look, what if I cited proof of his movie work, Tempe video, Amazon? I'll...

accounts (or are affiliated with them) but haven't violated policy as per WP:ILLEGIT? Please list all accounts you've used in the past and explain the similar...

here, that has always been a disclosed alternate account, in no way WP:ILLEGIT. Amalthea 21:55, 28 April 2013 (UTC) ... but I have reminded Dr. Blofeld...

I'm hard pressed to say this is an attempt at deception or any other WP:ILLEGIT use of multiple accounts. On the other hand, @Wukai and AlsoWukai:, you...

scrutiny" and the "Circumventing policies or sanctions" sections of WP:ILLEGIT would be fine, I should think. SpitfireTally-ho! 13:44, 6 May 2010 (UTC)...

in an obscure topic, I would expect overlap between their edits. Per WP:ILLEGIT, "Contributing to the same page or discussion with multiple accounts" is...

page ([6]) --Wüstenfuchs 16:04, 25 September 2012 (UTC) According to WP:ILLEGIT, you're not supposed to be editing the same article with more than one...

illusion of support", albeit in this case on different pages, violating WP:ILLEGIT. Update: Here is another admission that the same person controls both accounts...

three accounts registered just today – looks like an obvious case of WP:ILLEGIT #6 ("contributing to the same page or discussion with multiple accounts")...

account and that they are inappropriately editing anonymously (per WP:ILLEGIT) then please list your evidence above. Otherwise I don't see there's anything...

Clerk note: I'm not seeing any abuse here. It's not a violation of WP:ILLEGIT to edit while logged out, provided there is no intent to deceive. Given...

consequences of ignoring a final warning that provides the element of WP:ILLEGIT which elevates the case into sockpuppetry rather than a simple case of...

fine to have multiple accounts, as long as you're not using them for WP:ILLEGIT purposes. You need to declare on each user page what the purpose of the...

likely that Noloop = Mindbunny, but so what? I don't see violations of WP:ILLEGIT. (S)he would not be the 1st editor to return after ditching an account...

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael J Coudrey. This seems to be a case of WP:ILLEGIT or WP:MEAT. This is the first AFD participation for all three accounts...

Non-overlapping sequential WP:SPAs, obviously the same person but nothing WP:ILLEGIT until Shivadee123 was blocked. Awaiting administrative action Please indef...

the perception of independent support, or in any other way contravene ILLEGIT, file another report here and I will ask for an indefinite block of the...

second, please comment on how their use of the second account/IPs fails WP:ILLEGIT. It's not immediately obvious that they used the two accounts at the same...

expired on the account. Accordingly, I don't believe any violation of WP:ILLEGIT has occurred this time. If information is being falsified, then WP:ANI...

forbidden, so we'd need to see evidence that the IP edits fall under WP:ILLEGIT (or are inherently disruptive) before taking action. Mark Arsten (talk)...

22:38, 24 April 2022 (UTC) @RoySmith: Has something changed to make this ILLEGIT since you warned the two accounts in 2019? -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they)...

with the IP and Santos33 (which still technically isn't a violation of WP:ILLEGIT per WP:EWLO, perhaps the user forgot to log in?), and were not evading...

speak volumes) the puppet does not appear to meet the definitions of WP:ILLEGIT, though the addressable COI is definitely of a concern. Without evidence...

established user. If such is the case, and additionally the sockpuppet is illegit (i.e. the master sockpuppeteer is in fact also involved in the debates)...

both named accounts and let it go at that. We can always revisit if WP:ILLEGIT behavior continues. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:45, 25 June 2020 (UTC) Realyaru...

CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki · SI), which is either an WP:ILLEGIT sock, or an unrelated LTA. I'm not confident it's the former, but a block...

right conditions are true (that they are indeed sock puppet & master), are illegit. WP policy states that you wait for the very recent violation even if you...

multiple accounts to re-create an article deleted via AfD is certainly WP:ILLEGIT. I'm calling an admin to compare newly re-created article with deleted...

"we generally tolerate everything that is not explicitly listed as WP:ILLEGIT." and "as long as you are forthright with the account there shouldn't any...

with the ability to provide diffs, just the elimination of yet another WP:ILLEGIT violation.—Kww(talk) 03:25, 9 December 2013 (UTC) If it makes anyone feel...

July 2021 (UTC) Clerk note: I'm not convinced there's any violation of WP:ILLEGIT, or WP:LOGOUT. The later says, Editors who are not logged in must not actively...

the talk page that their editing while logged out was a violation of WP:ILLEGIT. Hrodvarsson (talk) 01:34, 3 May 2018 (UTC) @Berean Hunter: They are now...

these IPs have made edits on the English Wikipedia that would violate WP:ILLEGIT even if they were an editor editing while logged out. Do not make reports...

you serious? That's just wiki-lawyering. In resp. 1) The idea behind WP:ILLEGIT is that the user cannot give the appearance of being multiple people. In...

creating an illusion of support in discussions, avoiding scrutiny and all WP:ILLEGIT actions were not your intention? I don't quite take the bait when you say...

stop me from filing an SPI or reporting a block / ban evasion (as that is illegit itself), however, many of these disruptive socks first appear to be genuine...

evasion, whereas it is unclear whether the "sanctions" referred to in ILLEGIT apply in the case of global actions. The user would have to appeal the...

the same person, there's no time overlap, and nothing that would suggest illegit sockpuppetry. Given how much time has passed since the last report, and...

problem with editing logged out unless there's something that applies in WP:ILLEGIT? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:19, 13 April 2020 (UTC) That applies...

even if this if Fdinshaw, it's not clear to me that this would violate WP:ILLEGIT. They had a previous block for sockpuppetry, but six months passed between...

illegitimate. I see how they link "rights" and "legitimacy" but even with illegit occupation a country can "administer" a territory &, even if LactoseTI's...

Pax 05:06, 20 February 2015 (UTC) Biruitorul blocked one week for the WP:ILLEGIT violations, Раціональне анархіст blocked 24 hours for edit-warring in an...

administrative action - These 3 spare "alts" created in a row look WP:ILLEGIT to me and Akatziri has not given any reasonable explanation. Instead of...

information needed - @LouisAragon: Please, explain what exactly is WP:ILLEGIT in their edits. Vanjagenije (talk) 19:59, 16 December 2015 (UTC) Clerk...

registered on 17 April. Even if they are run by the same user, it's not WP:ILLEGIT. Closing this case, Vanjagenije (talk) 23:15, 29 April 2015 (UTC)...

mislead/deceive/disrupt it is not inappropriate use of multiple accounts, see WP:ILLEGIT. Amalthea 13:52, 28 September 2012 (UTC) @Amalthea. He doesn't claim to...

I advised them on ANI and their talk page that they were violating WP:ILLEGIT using a sock account to edit project space, avoid scrutiny, and in a good...

but actually you have violated the policy. The sixth bullet in the WP:ILLEGIT section of the policy reads that users may not contribute to the same page...

IPs, blatantly WP:MEAT. To my eyes Simiprof has crossed the line of WP:ILLEGIT on 2 points: Creating an illusion of support; and Contributing to the same...

accounts have overlapping edit histories, but there are breaches of WP:ILLEGIT in each. Blocked, and tagged under Zxcv9 as what I suspect is the oldest...

were already determined to be the same person but not in violation of WP:ILLEGIT in Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/EditorManagerPH. So there's really...

indefinitely as a confirmed sock (Actually, probably doesn't fail WP:ILLEGIT, so not blocking) and leaving a message for UnitedStatesOfWireless explaining...

based on the following sentence in WP:ILLEGIT: Based on the comment above by TonyBallioni referring to WP:ILLEGIT, I would surmise the proposal for blocking...

violation of WP:ILLEGIT wasn't enough for blocking him indefinitely? It took him hardly 7 days and he returned to violate WP:ILLEGIT. Now he was more...

every hour. Editor interaction utility Creates an illusion of support. (WP:ILLEGIT) Sussie17 started editing on 5 April following Javier93h's getting banned...

are what I could find). Their editing under different IPs may not be WP:ILLEGIT, but it's hard not to be suspicious of their reasons for doing so, especially...

WP:ILLEGIT to attempt to justify the edits as being within policy is what I'm arguing against.—Kww(talk) 21:38, 17 March 2013 (UTC) I've refuted ILLEGIT...

Renamer note: PasVraimentSoroka, NotReallySoroka, this reads as an WP:ILLEGIT purpose, "Editors must not use alternative accounts to mislead, deceive...

main evidence is that Zhanzhao was recently told to stop violating the WP:ILLEGIT. It was 14 March, and right after a few hours, this IP edit warred on this...

ones posting on the issue. the is a big idfference between a legit and illegit sockpuppet - you should know as you have now admitted to have over 5 of...

voting Keep (again?) [2]. This seems like double voting/ballot stuffing/WP:ILLEGIT. Logical Cowboy (talk) 23:36, 26 January 2014 (UTC) Response. Hi Logical...

a WP:SPI would be a better route, however you should be aware that WP:ILLEGIT does allow a second account for privacy reasons in controversial topic...

subject area. NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 22:23, 20 August 2012 (UTC) Per WP:ILLEGIT, "in the case of sanctions, bans, or blocks, evasion causes the timer to...

Cheers. Collect (talk) 11:29, 6 July 2011 (UTC) Feel free to review WP:ILLEGIT at your convenience, Collect. Viriditas (talk) 11:36, 6 July 2011 (UTC)...

May 2020 (UTC) I'm unclear who you're going to avoid falling afoul of WP:ILLEGIT again. If you are to remain unblocked, how will you ensure that your future...

--174.48.32.232 (talk) 23:35, 21 December 2012 (UTC) See WP:EVASION and WP:ILLEGIT. Your account has been blocked because of edit warring and, as you've continued...

report submitted by an IP with no other edits. This risks violating WP:ILLEGIT, which is part of the socking policy. EdJohnston (talk) 22:13, 30 July...

account, unless they are already banned from the project (please see WP:ILLEGIT). Endorse block. — Nearly Headless Nick {c} 15:46, 19 July 2012 (UTC) What...

of RMs in a highly contentious topic area is a textbook violation of WP:ILLEGIT. Their denial here is also disheartening given the CU results. Awaiting...

AFDs at all with a sock account is a serious violation of WP:SOCK. Per WP:ILLEGIT, alternate accounts cannot edit project space. Compound that with the fact...

fuck yourselves morons! at [259] and Go fuck yourself moron. at [260]. WP:ILLEGIT says Strawman socks: Creating a separate account to argue one side of an...

exhaustive list of legitimate uses of anonymity. (Of course, neither is WP:SOCK#ILLEGIT, though I'm not in violation of any of those cases either, and have offered...

dance in the air and follow his steps 03:32, 24 October 2012 (UTC) WP:ILLEGIT is quite specific on this point. I don't really care why he is using an...

July 2012 (UTC) Purely by editing here, Cracker92 has twice violated WP:ILLEGIT: "Undisclosed alternative accounts should not edit policies, guidelines...

this account in discussions internal to the project, in violation of WP:ILLEGIT, including especially the AN/I case of LiamNotNeeson/DistractedOften, and...

resources, or are they actually causing disruption to the encyclopedia per WP:ILLEGIT? -- RoySmith (talk) 21:15, 31 December 2020 (UTC) Sandbox tomfoolery is...

(talk) 22:41, 28 June 2010 (UTC) Are they doing anything listed at WP:ILLEGIT? --Chris (talk) 23:15, 28 June 2010 (UTC) Yes they are Contributing to...

also been used in a way that could be given an allusion of support (WP:ILLEGIT) at Talk:Tea bag (disambiguation) and the article in question. It has been...

two seperate accounts joining in a discussion. This clearly violates WP:ILLEGIT. Singularity42 (talk) 16:12, 18 June 2011 (UTC) Another instance of using...

You have a clear misunderstanding of the sockpuppetry policy. See WP:ILLEGIT especially the circumventing policies or sanctions part. You are blocked...

evade restrictions/scrutiny of a newer account is still covered by WP:ILLEGIT... Anyway; if nobody finds any other accounts or problematic articles,...

the side of removing some legit links to get rid of a larger number of illegit links. That would still be fine, if they were deleting under C--but deleting...

editing in previous topic areas - this is exactly as spelled out in WP:ILLEGIT as a sockpuppet account for evading scrutiny. - The Bushranger One ping...

further edits should be made to this discussion. See WP:VANDAL and WP:ILLEGIT. Confirms my view. 86.153.133.193 (talk) 18:22, 29 January 2016 (UTC) Just...

(talk) 22:26, 3 June 2012 (UTC) These are not socks. Please review WP:ILLEGIT. Socks are secondary accounts created for deception; In the single post...

if the policy actually stated that, but it doesn't. Which heading of WP:ILLEGIT should I be looking at? Leaky Caldron 11:54, 12 February 2014 (UTC) Huh...

such as this using a self-admitted undisclosed alternative account. WP:ILLEGIT, point 3. T. Canens (talk) 17:14, 11 April 2013 (UTC) That's a horse of...

yet that the account is WP:ILLEGIT. Zad68 12:14, 30 April 2015 (UTC) I think the talk page input speaks strongly to WP:ILLEGIT, but I agree that a behavioural...

that you reference. Oh, and 3) Misuse of IP addresses is covered under WP:ILLEGIT and there is no separate category for abuse of IP addresses rather than...

blocked, so even if they are the same person they have not violated WP:ILLEGIT, so a a sock puppetry block wouldn't be appropriate. One thing to note...

2015 (UTC) @GoldenRing: Yes. I know now that I was in violation of WP:ILLEGIT, if not the ban. It will not happen again. Galestar (talk) 01:02, 25 March...

discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. No WP:ILLEGIT use of either of these accounts, should such behaviour arise, WP:SPI is...

ways multiple accounts can be used inappropriately, as described at WP:ILLEGIT. Mostly, it's about whether the person is using multiple accounts to try...

it does not seem to be an appropriate use of multiple accounts per WP:ILLEGIT. Marchjuly (talk) 06:20, 26 January 2017 (UTC) Accused parties may also...

February 2010 (UTC) At the very least this is (likely) a violation of WP:ILLEGIT; "Undisclosed alternative accounts should not be used to edit in project...

no smoking gun that I can see. Plus, I'm not sure that this would be WP:ILLEGIT at this point – even if it was the same person, they might have just forgotten...

since no email is associated with any account I spot-checked. And yes, WP:ILLEGIT seems to come into play here. Nobody needs dozens to hundreds of accounts...

September 2010 (UTC) Sven's use of IPs doesn't actually fall foul of WP:ILLEGIT either, with the exception of block evasion. He made clear that it was...

(talk) 01:04, 8 December 2009 (UTC) It doesn't seem like a problem, per WP:ILLEGIT it's only an issue if they're editing the same article with multiple accounts...

order to avoid scrutiny and to deceive the community is disallowed per WP:ILLEGIT. This is standard procedure. Are you now claiming you weren't hacked? --...

very careful about that, as you've already stepped over the line per WP:ILLEGIT. Given your history of disruptive advocacy on the talkpage, I'm tempted...

the same article with two different accounts is abuse according to WP:ILLEGIT. You should bring your evidence to WP:SPI to see if your suspicions are...

create chaos, and has run afoul of at least a couple bulletpoints of WP:ILLEGIT. And if, perchance, they happen to be someone whose main account is under...

different, undisclosed, and active accounts is to avoid scrutiny per WP:ILLEGIT. Forgive me for having to speculate about your motives, but you force us...

hand/bad hand tactic which is very common for sockpuppet masters (see WP:ILLEGIT). This, combined with unwarranted attacks on people at the talk page just...

Both parties blocked for edit-warring, Biruitrol blocked a week for WP:ILLEGIT violations.—Kww(talk) 05:31, 20 February 2015 (UTC) The discussion above...

At some point the serial account thing becomes an issue in itself (WP:ILLEGIT is not an exclusive list per the policy, and imo, creating a ton of accounts...

against a user, is clearly a sockpuppet of one form or another. From WP:ILLEGIT (illegitimate uses of sockpuppet accounts, under WP:SOCK) - Editing project...

blocked somewhere else, even another IP, falls under the spirit of the WP:ILLEGIT policy: Evasion of sanctions: Sanctions apply to individual editors as...

find a better one. --Eleassar my talk 15:26, 14 March 2012 (UTC) The WP:ILLEGIT states: "Editing under multiple IP addresses may be treated the same as...

(UTC) Can you confirm that you would adhere to the prohibitions at WP:ILLEGIT in your use of an undisclosed alternative account, specifically the prohibitions...

timing and coming straight in with first edit supporting 1st IP) WP:SPA WP:ILLEGIT "Creating an illusion of support" [126] Preboot Execution Environment (edit...

and he then comes to WP:AN to talk about it, shouldn't he have kept WP:ILLEGIT in mind? Specifically those parts about "editing project space" and "avoiding...

Would someone do me the favor of blocking Krakatoa89 for a violation of WP:ILLEGIT? I'd rather not have to take the "any reasonable admin would have done...

noticed...) that the "Editing logged out in order to mislead" part of WP:ILLEGIT was violated here. - The Bushranger One ping only 04:30, 16 October 2011...

so while it may not fall under WP:VALIDALT, it doesn't fall afoul of WP:ILLEGIT either, especially because they're disclosed. HOWEVER, since they claim...

2014 (UTC) I'm also concerned that Lfrankbalm does not understand the WP:ILLEGIT use of alternative accounts. For example, User:Renaissancego was created...

apparent refusal to disclose his own earlier Wikipedia account per WP:ILLEGIT. (Yes, I'm aware that Colton Cosmic says that he disclosed the account...

standards, only indef block is appropriate for 6 years+ violation of WP:ILLEGIT. We cannot support sock puppetry. Again, abuse is also evident with socking...

blocked) with an expiry time of indefinite (Abusing multiple accounts: WP:ILLEGIT; undisclosed alternate accounts may not edit project space) and it's that...

of an AFD nomination in so few edits. That combined with the policy WP:ILLEGIT #2 which says "Editing project space: Undisclosed alternative accounts...

"your edits, not you, are what is looked at by others" is violating WP:ILLEGIT. We are supposed to be able to evaluate the edits in context of the editor's...

without understanding what the problem was - not at all legit. ok - one illegit action, this happens. your behavior after this point leads me to believe...

make it obvious they are related, but they are they falling foul of WP:ILLEGIT such as Creating an illusion of support, avoiding WP:3RR or Contributing...

used multiple accounts, is there clear evidence that he has violated WP:ILLEGIT? Kingoflettuce (talk) 18:06, 28 January 2022 (UTC) Two of the accounts...

WP:NOTHERE to help us achieve our goal. That person tried to violate WP:ILLEGIT (or WP:CLEANSTART, if we believe him) and that is simply not allowed. I...

another editor for editing while logged out. That's a valid report; see WP:ILLEGIT. It can be handled at the SPI. Both editors are advised to cease attacking...

Their usage of two accounts to edit the same article appears to be WP:ILLEGIT. Many of their uploads to Commons are tagged as 'own work' even with photos...

evidence of sock/meatpuppetry, but not the most important basis for WP:ILLEGIT. That being said, I will not add any further comments about socking here...

I'm simultaneously editing with an account and an IP in violation of WP:ILLEGIT? Well I'm not, but I accept that I have no way to prove that (well aside...

volation of Circumventing Policies/GoodHand-BadHand/and Role accounts per WP:ILLEGIT. The scope of disruption has been widened, I do not consider this fit for...

different from using two accounts to edit the same topic area: it violates WP:ILLEGIT in both spirit and letter. Your statement "I only use a registered account...

to disclose your original account's name, or it may be blocked as an WP:ILLEGIT account. Girth Summit (blether) 11:15, 7 July 2021 (UTC) This is a time...

2018 (UTC) Yeah I don't really see an issue here. I mean while yes, WP:ILLEGIT forbids the use of undisclosed alternative accounts for discussions internal...

using multiple accounts while also editing as Kashmorwiki, violating WP:ILLEGIT outside of the block evasion (full EIA here). Shahoodu edited until December...

against claims. Clerk endorsed - Yes, although there are no obvious WP:ILLEGIT edits, something is suspicious here. Maybe a case of paid editing. Vanjagenije...

weeks for the master. There's no question that this is a violation of WP:ILLEGIT as being done to avoid scrutiny and being an edit to project space.—Kww(talk)...

outright scams. I haven't read anything that said that Bitcoin Cash is illegit or a scam per se. The issue here is the behavior of this advocate, as it...

TonyBallioni (talk) 14:40, 24 July 2020 (UTC) I've blocked Lcmr2 as an illegit cleanstart (though I'm still unclear why I was pinged to the talk page)...

different people. While irritating, I understood it did not violate WP:ILLEGIT. Now I'm seeing that Nyxaros (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs ·...

do you know if they are the editor or different sock? LightandDark2000 Illegit explains that. The gravedancing was by Attic Salt not Lithopsian As for...

2014 block by Kww for block evasion by using IP edits which violated WP:ILLEGIT. The following are the Standard Offer terms: Wait six months, without sockpuppetry...

discuss it 19:54, 27 June 2021 (UTC) While not block evasion, it was WP:ILLEGIT. The second account was WP:SCRUTINY and the IP was WP:LOUTSOCK. Meters...

interest a controversial policy debate certainly gives rise to WP:SCRUTINY/WP:ILLEGIT editing of project space concerns. And you have been arguing that the proxy...

to prove that the user used multiple accounts illegitimately (see: WP:ILLEGIT)? Using multiple accounts is not prohibited per se, it is only prohibited...

I am of the opinion that if something is violating polciy, albeit with illegit. "consensus", it be removed pending mitigation. None of my points made...

should be the other way around: those seeking to enact TheDreamBoat's illegit content removal should seek consensus for it. MarioGom (talk) 17:48, 18...

9 December 2018 (UTC) It seems to me the OP should be blocked for WP:ILLEGIT socking [22]. At the very least they're violating "Editing project space"...

accept your argument about "procject space". "Editing project space" in WP:ILLEGIT applies to "misleading, deceiving, disrupting, or undermining consensus...

Keep. The claims that this type of bridge does not pass the WP:GNG or is illegit cannot be taken seriously. Nominator has a question about these bridges...

attention of contributors to this discussion the following Wikipedia policy WP:ILLEGIT regarding the use of multiple accounts. - Galloglass 11:15, 16 March 2010...

Just to be clear: I don't doubt, and have never doubted, that there is illegit behaviour here. My comment above was made because I believe the behaviour...

with respect to the merits of this case, but I'll point out that WP:SOCK#ILLEGIT says, "Editing project space: Undisclosed alternative accounts are not...

here are two things this user/users is/are doing that would violate WP:ILLEGIT if they were a single person: 1) Editing under multiple accounts at Talk:Galileo...

alternative accounts are not necessarily sockpuppetry. I do not believe that WP:ILLEGIT was violated. And no, I have not requested a clean start. I created the...

multiple accounts in a deceptive manner, which is unacceptable per WP:ILLEGIT. Gabbe (talk) 09:38, 14 March 2010 (UTC) See Defending yourself against...

251.167 (talk) 16:33, 17 February 2014 (UTC) Closer please note, per WP:ILLEGIT, undisclosed alternative accounts should not vote in deletion debates....

Breaching experiments are frowned upon, no matter how noble the goal. WP:ILLEGIT would appear to apply to your use of the Bymatth2 account, as well. Any...

operating both accounts. Normally I would not care as it doesn't seem illegit on the surface however, it appears the SNA account is engaging in some...

disallow which isn't already covered by one of the other bullet points in WP:ILLEGIT. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:39, 16 April 2021 (UTC) Scrap PROJSOCK per the others...

used in ways outlined in the inappropriate uses section of this page. WP:ILLEGIT is clear about the fact that editing projectspace with an undisclosed alternative...

cuwiki · SI) Reason for submission: likely multiple infractions of WP:ILLEGIT. The (User:Keepcalmandcarryon, User:RetroS1mone) accounts were created...

201, 202, 203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214 WP:ILLEGIT has the following to say: Editing project space: Alternate accounts should...

October 2016 (UTC) I believe social class had huge importance here. Being illegit would be a massive burden in the upper classes, but in the lower classes...

really needs doing. Reaper Eternal (talk) 13:13, 25 November 2013 (UTC) WP:ILLEGIT allows multiple accounts to edit the same page if they are "clearly linked...

image who seems to have mysteriously disappeared, have you also read WP:ILLEGIT and/or WP:PANICVOTE? Because as logged here and here, you "both" started...

probably both his accounts, but, Ian.thomson, you have to explain what WP:ILLEGIT was made by those two. I don't see any common article edited by both (except...

participate[10] in the Arbitration case about his actions, a violation of WP:ILLEGIT. Support: As proposer. LFaraone 22:03, 23 January 2014 (UTC) Although I...

edit the same article (on almost the same day) in clear violation of WP:ILLEGIT, and in my next comment declared that I just didn't believe him anymore...

would be indicative of bias" and the definitions of sockpuppetry at WP:ILLEGIT Creating an illusion of support: Alternative accounts must not be used...

This is clearly the same user [1], and I'm not really convinced it's WP:ILLEGIT. Awaiting administrative action - requesting attention from an admin to...

I am obligated to attempt in whatever ways possible to highlight their illegit edits & fix them - it's almost like trying to do something to correct wrong...

non-local sources. Two previous AFDs were closed as procedural keeps per WP:ILLEGIT due to the nominator being a sockpuppet of a banned user. Claritas § 20:27...

instance, for a number of reasons: (a) It borders on violations of WP:ILLEGIT; WP:SOCKS; WP:MEAT because other bona fide WP users cannot know if they...

pretty bulletproof, stable and has images. The things that concern me are illegit date linkings; standalone years are usually frowned upon e.g. "Falk has...

inappropriate usage of an account to evade WP:SCRUTINY as a usage of WP:ILLEGIT. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 03:07, 29 November 2014 (UTC) The IP is editing...

listed in WP:VALIDALT. Any use of multiple accounts like those listed in WP:ILLEGIT will likely be noticed and flagged for adminstrator review. I hope you...

account and an IP. He is not being disruptive or violating anything at WP:ILLEGIT (besides possibly WP:LOUTSOCK), but is simply making edits in conjunction...

squeaky clean yourself, and particularly you had broken the letter of WP:ILLEGIT, I filed an appropriate SPI for others to decide how to deal with you....