For archived investigations, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jinnifer/Archive.

This SPI case may involve cross-wiki abuse. Please consider reporting the results on Meta; checkusers can send an email to the interwiki checkuser mailing list if required.

A clerk or checkuser recommends that new socks in this case not receive tags per WP:DENY.

 Clerk note: All cases fitting the stereotypical Jinnifer modus operandi should be reported to AIV or any available admin, rather than here. Requests for global blocks/locks can be made at m:SRG in lieu of or in addition to such requests for local action.

– This SPI case is open.

• ~2025-34037-00 (talk ·  · 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

Similar edits at Home Alone 4 and Home Alone: The Holiday Heist.   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 23:24, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cf.:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Home_Alone:_The_Holiday_Heist&diff=prev&oldid=1315176365

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Home_Alone:_The_Holiday_Heist&diff=prev&oldid=1315176396

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Home_Alone:_The_Holiday_Heist&diff=prev&oldid=1325736109

    –Skywatcher68 (talk) 23:30, 4 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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

As someone who has dealt pretty extensively with Jinnifer's edits and numerous sock accounts, I'm not sure what it is about these edits that comes across as them. It's not really their editing style, nor are the articles subjects that they typically attempt to edit. I'm not saying it's impossible but this doesn't seem to me to be Jinnifer. NJZombie (talk) 02:35, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

See the talk page for 85.130.105.247 (talk · contribs · IP contribs · WHOIS) ("You are suspected of being User:Jinnifer. PhilKnight (talk) 14:20, 5 October 2025 (UTC)"), which provided the first two examples.   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 05:06, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just read it and while they may have been suspected as Jinnifer, it doesn’t seem like they were Jinnifer either. Probably the same disruptive user that you’re reporting here, sure, but doubtful that they’re Jinnifer. It just doesn’t follow any of the patterns indicative of Jinnifer. NJZombie (talk) 12:08, 5 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]