Can Sea lioning be a fallacy?

I had looked up to a bad-faith debate tactic called, "Sealioning" which is in quite basic terms asking a person to prove everything that they claim regardless of its level of relevance to the conversation.

So this is a tactic, but gish gallop is also a tactic that tries to do something extremely similar but instead of asking questions to prove something, it gives arguments.

Not all fallacies are tactics, but if gish galloping can be fallacious, can sea lioning be too? It sounds like its linked with nitpicking which is also already in the book, any ideas?

Yes. It is part of the class of "fallacies" that are more tactics in argumentation. One should be aware of these and remind those guilty of their lack of relevance in the conversation.

I wrote an article about "sea lioning," among a few others, because people who don't like their dogma questioned cry "sea lioning" when sincere, Socratic questioning is used. "Sea lioning" is also simply "asking insincere questions." The problem is, sincerity cannot easily be determined by another person.