Knowledge (XXG)

:Suspected sock puppets/Archive/August 2008 - Knowledge (XXG)

Source 📝

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Weissmann (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets


Report submission by
Evidence

Weissmann is a single purpose account who works only on articles related to Balve (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), and Festspiele Balver Höhle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). He tends to upload images without proper copyright info, and creates numerous articles (deleted contribs - admin only) on non-notable subjects. When confronted he shows little understanding of the issues. See User_talk:Weissmann for the evidence of this.

He has been indefinitely blocked on de.wiki ], on Commons , and apparently a checkuser there confirmed the links between these accounts.

Here he has begun using these accounts to edit the same articles - , , , , , , which shows that there is an intent to avoid scrutiny and show consensus where there is none.

There is a list on de.wiki of sockpuppets there, and on Commons a list of related blocks.

I'm just looking for a sanity check before I block the socks and decide what to do with the main account.

Comments
  • I support the Check-User request because Weissmann is one of the worse trolls and POV pushers we have got (here and on de/commons). I am also the sysop who banned him from commons. His main account should be banned as well. Regards, abf /talk to me/ 13:13, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
I have blocked all the accounts indefinitely, and the master account for 2 months. He's not been blocked here before, so I guess a last chance is in order. Kevin (talk) 02:15, 30 August 2008 (UTC)


Conclusions

All blocked, then. SQL 19:24, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Troyrodriguez361 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets


Report submission by
Evidence
Comments
Conclusions

Fairly obvious socks here. User:Mrclickettycane is now blocked indef also. Kevin (talk) 02:35, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
Greenflea3000 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
Newmediasinecure (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

-- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 18:56, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Newmediasinecure is a new account that immediately began redoing the same edits to Nick Leibham, including attempting to link to the same pictures that Greenflea3000 uploaded (that have since been deleted)

Comments

Newsmediasinecure is a account created by a co-worker of mine. We have worked together on wikipedia edits but neither he nor I are the proxy of the other. In this case, Newsmediasinecure cannot be considered a "meatpuppet" because the purpose of using two seperate accounts from two different people was solely for the creation and maintenance of wiki sites and not for illicit purposes involving "influencing a survey, performing reverts, or otherwise attempting to give the appearance of consensus" (from the wiki section on meatpuppetry). Neither my co-worker nor I are at all experienced with wikipedia and did not know that we needed to make clear in advance that we have a personal or professional connection. To insure that no third party observer thinks that we are pretending to build a larger independent consensus, we have taken the advice of wikipedia and placed a disclaimer to that effect on our user pages. Because of our lack of experience in wikipedia, any suggestions on how to prove that we are not in violation of sock puppet rules would be very much appreciated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Greenflea3000 (talk • contribs) 23:16, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

  • I have personally worked with one of these persons on a political campaign whose initials are SG. I received an email today from SG saying we are having trouble and it seems like they are just unfamiliar with editorial procedures. I have little doubt given the history of Greenflea3000 that a couple of rookies are trying to work together to produce something in WP:AGF. I doubt they are in violation of the spirit of any WP:SOCK rules. I believe they are enthusiastic about their current campaign and tried to create a WP entry in attempt to contribute from their expertise on the biographical information of this subject.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:38, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions

Per tony, I think we should assume good faith here. SQL 19:47, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Flyhead (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence
  • First edit is to the talk page of a user who has dealt with previous sockpuppets:
  • Several counts of vandalism performed in the same way as the previous sockpuppets (see contribs)
  • Asking this arbitrary question on my talk page from the IP, as I have previously dealt with the sockpuppets:
  • Then changing the auto-signature from the IP to the user , before asking it again
  • Added Mdmjanag - Used to make this edit , which was subsequently reposted under Autofan's signature and then removed entirely .
Comments
Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Greg Jungwirth (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence
  • Recently found a new bunch of IP addresses he can edit from and started attacking me through his last active account . On 27 August, left me a note on my talkpage under the account User:Greg Jungwirth the second which was shortly afterwards blocked which in itself is innocuous but the previous edit was clearly a malicious attack . On 29 August, he has created an account in my name and copied all the content from it in an attempt to throw my name into disrepute.
Comments
Conclusions

All already blocked, and, it seems pretty obvious. SQL 04:47, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

WikiTikiTaki (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence
  • User keeps removing international sales figures from Britney Spears articles, refering to the certification agencies as being "fake" without further explanation. Received a 31 hour block for edit warring, so is now editing anonymously to avoid the block: . Same edit summaries; less caps.
Comments


Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
Betaquest1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
Farstar1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

-- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 14:53, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Similar names, both only editing Teddy Harris in the same style, lack of signature, grammar, etc.

Comments

It does appear to me that these two accounts are operated by the same person. SQL 18:36, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

Obviously the same user, and because they both edited the same article on the same day, it is hard to see this as anything but an attempt to show broader support for the article. User:Farstar1 is blocked indef, and User:Betaquest1 has been warned of the perils of any future sockpuppetry. Kevin (talk) 02:49, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

ChuckCoke (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence
  • They both sign with the tildes then name (ChuckCoke (talk) 02:58, 19 August 2008 (UTC)ChuckCoke) and (Degenerate-Y (talk) 18:18, 26 August 2008 (UTC)Degenerate-Y). They both claim to have created Shamwow on their userpages. They both want to move the page Glen Jacobs to Kane, Chuck put a request in here and Degenerate-Y asked another user here. Chuck retired on 19th August, then on 26th August the first edit DY made was to remove the PROD from Shamwow, then when an AfD note was placed on Chuck's talk page then DY went and commented at the AfD . It is clear they are one person, or at least two close friends with similar editing patterns.
Comments
  • Please remember to notify all accounts listed as possibly linked to the sock puppetry in question (instructions).
  • Okay, to clear this up, ChuckCoke IS my friend, he introduced me to Knowledge (XXG). We both have all the same opinions on Kane, etc. When I said i made Shamwow!, I was at his house making it with him, so it wasn't really ALL me. ChuckCoke retired because he wasn't getting his way, but I then created an account to see what this is like, and he helped me do singutures and all. --Degenerate-Y (talk) 14:00, 27 August 2008 (UTC)Degenerate-Y
Conclusions

Ok Degenerate-Y is clearly lying. And we all know he is lying, and he knows that we know he is lying yet carries on, and after this he must know that we know that he knows that we know that he is lying. But so what?

It's silly to put a note on your userpage saying that you have retired. But lots of people have done it. And so he tried to save face by creating a new account and then got himself in deeper and deeper telling more and more porkies to cover his mistakes, but again so what? We have all done silly things at one time or another. The checkuser was refused for lack of evidence of abuse and quite rightly so. He hasn't done anything actually wrong now has he? So lets just leave him alone. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 20:15, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Violation of WP:SOCK. He has used two different accounts. He should only be permitted to use one account, so one or the other needs to get blocked. D.M.N. (talk) 21:20, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Disagree. See my talk page. He's admitted both accounts are his. Only a violation if he abuses the socks by double voting, ban evasion etc. Which he hasn't done. Blocking one will set the autoblocker on the other account. We do not block people who haven't done anything wrong. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:26, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Not wanting to jump to conclusions, but... D.M.N. (talk) 21:42, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Certainly looks suspicious but then again hasn't voted in the deletion debate, there is no block evasion, no revert warring, nothing that could be classed as abuse. I'm happy to watch for a bit. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:52, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Uhh.... Are you guys suspicous of me being Endwits? I don't what your talking about. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Degenerate-Y (talk • contribs) 22:03, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes that's exactly what we suspect. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 22:08, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Ok, I'm not lying on this one, that guy is not me, i would have no need for ANOTHER account. He uses the edit summary, I hardly ever use it. He use Youtube as a source, I know Knowledge (XXG) doesn't accept Youtube as a source 99% of the time.--Degenerate-Y (talk) 22:44, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I've left a comment on Endwits talk page.--Degenerate-Y (talk) 22:52, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

If you guys seriously think that he/she is me, start a new case. This one's getting a little lengthy for a resovled case. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Degenerate-Y (talk • contribs) 00:38, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

No it's not resolved, and it's not that lengthy either. I've added Endwits to the top of this page. D.M.N. (talk) 07:23, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
I also suspected Endwits, but didn't add it because I ran out of time yesterday. Darrenhusted (talk) 08:11, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Very well, but I'm not lying on this one, (s)he's not me.--Degenerate-Y (talk) 14:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
If it's not you, I don't think the other user wishes to be harrassed for a response. D.M.N. (talk) 14:43, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Sorry, didn't mean to harass. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Degenerate-Y (talk • contribs) 15:33, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Sigh. Why would you say sorry to us yet do nothing about you alarming message on Endwit's talk page? On the slim chance ( getting slimmer all the time IMO) that this is not your sock, I removed your message in order to prevent newbie biting. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:18, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
And this is why i quit in the first place, "On the slim chance this is not your sock"???? This is totally not my sock! If it was my sock I would have more than 3 edits. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Degenerate-Y (talk • contribs) 23:14, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Don't get in a tizz about it. It really does not matter if you only had two accounts or if you had three. Everything i said earlier is still true. You have not abused socks, and haven't done anything wrong. There really is nothing to see here, and you do not need to try and convince us that Endwit is not you. Quite frankly you stating "it's not me" over and over will not convince anyone since you already said that about ChuckCoke! So try just letting the matter be. Like I said you haven't done anything actually wrong so far but I am a little concerned that you will end up causing disruption if you don't cool down about this. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 00:28, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
Very well, I'll try keeping a cool head--Degenerate-Y (talk) 00:40, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Per Theresa, probably related, but, meh, who cares, they aren't being abused. I'm going to archive this now, as it seems to be doing more harm than good at this point. SQL 01:30, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Choyola8 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence
  • Further sockpuppetry, edit-warring and vandalism occuring on Lorenzo Lamas page, after previous sock puppet account was blocked yesterday by an administrator. Most likely that "Choyola8" account is a sockpuppet itself. Request Lorenzo Lamas page be fully protected from all editing for a period of time.
Comments
  • Semi-protected for a period of 1 week, after which the page will be automatically unprotected. None of the suspected socks have been autoconfirmed, so semi-protection should be adequate. caknuck ° is not used to being the voice of reason 20:38, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Not sure if semi-protection will work as the vandalism comes from registered users (Choyola8, Amdamblagh, etc) who can continue to edit. Would recommend full protection for a period of one week.Kookoo Star (talk) 20:57, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Autoconfirmation requires a minimum number of edits. Just registering an account does not automatically let you bypass semi-protection. In the event that semi-protection is insufficient, please list the article at WP:RFPP and request full protection (make sure to reference this case). caknuck ° is not used to being the voice of reason 22:58, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
  • These two do seem to be connected, even making basically the same edit. It's been almost a week now, however, and, both seem to have let it be. I'm inclined with the age of the incident, and, semi-protection working, to let this be for now. Thoughts from others? SQL 19:29, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions

Possibly the same account, however, I'm not really seeing abuse, or, a real reason to block them, especially considering that it's been a week, and semi-protection seems to have worked. SQL 19:43, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
philscirel (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
24.172.221.206 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
76.181.224.82 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

Adoniscik 05:22, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Aforementioned user is currently blocked and may be editing by logging out to evade the ban. (The edit pattern was a tip-off.) Please check identity.

Comments

quack Toddst1 (talk) 21:18, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

My educated opinion, after having observed this user's behavior over the summer is that philscirel (talk · contribs) should simply stay away from all articles related to Fethullah Gülen‎, due to incorrigible partisanship. Others have said the same thing. (S)he jealously guards the article (the only one he contributes to) and lacks respect for core WP issues such as seeking consensus, RS, COI, and NPOV. He just might become fit to contribute to it once he racks up some edits on other articles to soak up the culture. --Adoniscik 23:27, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

i am a new user, trying to contribute wikipedia about a topic i feel like i know a lot. i am also trying to learn the system here and protect myself from the attacks of two senior editors. two well experienced users (User:Adoniscik, User:Nandesuka) performing newbies are trying to push me to the edge. they have buddies to polish their user pages, , while they template new users to create a negative image for whom they don't feel so friendly about., , .

my computer connects through two wireless ip available, automatically: one with regular ip, and the other is 24.172.221.206. after i am blocked by a moderator (i am still not sure why only me got the ticket while others just warned , ), i posted a note on my talk page. after i connected to the internet, i realized that i am able to edit. i thought my block is removed. once i have made a change,, i realized that a sockpuppetry case is immediately posted against me by User:Adoniscik. i would like to state clearly that 24.172.221.206 is also my ip address.

based on an earlier talk and suspicious edits of User:Adoniscik, i posted a request for ip check (suspected sockpuppets {Aalpay (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log), 194.237.142.6 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log), 91.65.228.223 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log), 91.66.168.194 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)), but my request is deleted from the queue., , . i will repeated the request for the same user. please have a look at the information there too. i briefly listed the evidence i have against him/her below:

  • user refer to another article stating that (please see Ergenekon's article, all suspects are listed despite there is no court ruling agaist them yet. If the court rules in favour of suspects, they would be still listed in the wiki page, we just can not pretent it never happened) (AA 11:31, 20 July 2008 (UTC)). the only common editor on Fethullah Gulen and Ergenekon articles was User:Adoniscik .
  • user post a peer review request and also mention about asking a bunch of people to take an outsider's look.
  • user claims consensus in disputes and involve in edit wars using more than one username and claim that the other users are independent from him.
  • User:Adoniscik using NPOV policy as a pretext to degrade gulen and his movement. s/he does not discuss his/her edits. he is posting inappropriate templates to give a negative impression on the whole article written by many. although i consistently ask them to locate and specify the problems -instead of posting templates on the whole article- for a fix, he does not do it.

i am also surprised that i am blocked from editing by a moderator although i made all my edits based on the discussion on the talk page of Fethullah Gulen. other two users (User:Adoniscik, User:Nandesuka) who use the edit summaries in the place of discussion page were not. isn't what they are doing an edit war? i like the admins please have a careful look at the case. all my and other editors' edits are in the history pages of Fethullah Gulen.

thanks...

Philscirel


When you are blocked you should sit out your punishment. If you edit from an anonymous account you are evading your block and you are sockpuppetting that anon account.
When you are blocked (whether you agree or not) there are only a few options
  • Accept and undergo your punishment and start anew afterwards
  • Appeal and accept the decision of the appeal
  • Evade block by creating a new account, or editing from an anonymous IP number. This latter is clear disrespect for Knowledge (XXG) guidelines and basically cheating. This latter behaviour may (and in my opinion should) result in very much extended blocks, or even total ban from the project.
It appears that you have chosen the last option, which maybe through your inexperience. I would strongly advise against that option though; and the risk of being blocked for long durations is all yours. Arnoutf (talk) 20:05, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
See history of User:Philscirel and history of User:24.172.221.206] as well as this edit to ANI. Toddst1 (talk) 21:45, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
96.247.37.61 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
347Editor (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Newcrewforu (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

Arbiteroftruth (talk) 07:02, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Edit-warring pattern similar to patterns established by this sock operator before. Both attacked the Dave Zirin page. Both of them also attacked the Neil Cavuto page as well

Comments
See the IPs listed under Knowledge (XXG):Suspected sock puppets/96.247.37.61 - this guy has followed me around for some time]Editor437 (talk) 18:16, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
See also :96.242.170.64 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log), which has edited the talk pages of both suspected sockpuppets and made no contributions--Editor437 (talk) 18:19, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions

The two accounts are blocked, and, I'm not sure it's even the same user on the IP anymore. Feel free to re-open this, or, let me know personally, if it starts back up. SQL 19:46, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

AccountabilityAssurer (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence
Comments
  • Please remember to notify all accounts listed as possibly linked to the sock puppetry in question (instructions).
The page for User:AccountabilityAssurer indicates it belongs in Category:Knowledge (XXG) sockpuppets of DavidYork71. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 00:59, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions

.

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
Onelifefreak2007 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
68.185.181.8 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

— TAnthony 17:08, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Blocked editor admitted to using IP here. I assumed ignorance of policy and explained that he should not be editing at all here. Subsequently he made edits here, here and here, which in context are reverts of edits by User:OLTL2002, with whom this user has ongoing edit wars in these and other articles over this same trivial information.

Comments


Conclusions

I'd agree, that the ip was probably used to avoid the user's block, but, has been quiet for a few days now, and, the user is now unblocked. Seems that once this report caught them out, they stopped. If it flares back up, feel free to open a new case, or, let me know personally. SQL 19:59, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Qualityleashdog (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence
Comments
Conclusions

Clearly the same user, both making the same nasty BLP edit. Both blocked indef. SQL 19:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
Achi9309 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
Ooa9309 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

Arbiteroftruth (talk) 04:33, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Ooa9309 claims to be an IT engineer from a particular government agency in Taiwan: which is also the description for Achi9309

Comments

Xp54321:Usernames aren't too different as well.--Xp54321 03:21, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Any evidence suggesting abuse or something? OhanaUnited 19:33, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm not seeing it either. Will close within a few days, if none is brought forward. SQL 19:41, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions

Probably the same user, but, I'm not seeing any evidence of doing anything wrong with these accounts. SQL 12:41, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Benkenobi is a retardate (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Auson (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Ausonia (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Italicus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Catholicus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
189.31.111.134 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by
Evidence
  • The usernames are extremely similar and the edit summaries are really redundant.
  • User:Auson was indefinitely blocked for harassment of users and manipulating sock accounts (see the Block log).
  • Benkenobi is a retardate is listed as a record of the first known user account operated by the same person ...who goes as far back as 200.215.40.3. "Benkenobi is a retardate" is also the first highly suspected account that is available to me now, as the IP addresses keep changing in the same old malicious manner (I wasn't even able to list absolutely every single IP in the other report; ie: 189.73.73.228).
  • 189.31.111.134 is evidently the same user as 189.31.111.24, both of which are in an immense IP range (for simplification; they can both be found in the close range of 189.31.111.0/24). Moreover, both have similar editing patterns, and if their identities match, the more recent IP has the potential to evade blocks.
  • The IPs have several global (cross-wiki) contributions: the most notorious one was originally 200.215.40.3; the most recent one is 189.31.111.134.
  • Most importantly, all of the IPs are registered by an ISP based in South America, all of the WHOIS reports state that the ISP is Latin American and Caribbean IP address Regional Registry (see the WHOIS reports for 200.215.40.3 and 189.31.111.134).
  • User:Auson tried to evade the block of User:Benkenobi is a retardate and still attempted to harrass User:Benkenobi18 with this edit. It should be noted that User:Ausonia (talk|contribs) and especially User:Auson, made several page moves that were undiscussed, which puts what Auson said in contradiction.
  • Every user I warned/notified became more active and responded negatively: when I filed the report for 200.215.40.3, 201.67.241.178 went too far and continued edit warring. That user was blocked for instigating an edit war. A few minutes later, Italicus did the exact same thing until he/she was also blocked (for 24h). For a third time, User:Ausonia continued that edit war within less than 24 hours. All of these users are either evaded blocks or worked under the same articles in the same manner. Even while this is being reported today, Ausonia's edits are continuing.
  • All of these accounts have (creation) logs that were subsequent. In short, this means that all of the sock accounts are held under the possesion of the same person except for the indefinitely blocked ones (Benkenobi is a retardate and Auson). This poses the risk of the same debacle that I had with the accounts that happened the last time I filed a sock report.
  • Almost all of these users say "rv unexplained edit" or "rv unexplained change" or "rv vandalism in several edit summaries. This is really just over-using the term and, sometimes (particularly with Auson's edits), the previous edit was explained, which (again) contradicts the edits made by these socks and, quite frankly, indicates that these editors are not willing to discuss their controversial page moves, major edits, or name changes (which either redirect to another page or are against naming conventions). Also, see Knowledge (XXG):Vandalism#Types of vandalism for clarification on edit summaries (listed as "sneaky vandalism").
  • In diff pages (and a few edit summaries), these users make POV statements. While people are free to have personal bias (basic rights, of course), it should not be incorporated into the article just because of their personal POV per se. According to WP:NPOV, if there is a POV, it should be compared/contrasted properly with all other POVs which, in a subtle sense, should be inclusive and not favour one side over the other. There are so many POV summaries and changes, and thus, there is no need for me to explain them to the same extent as before (it has been examined somewhat before with that other report). However, I will note that even the recent edits (like to Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor) are POV-oriented (ie: edit summary by Catholicus:"The head of Christendom is the Pope"; it's a claim and can be said as an opinion, but to be fair, it is to be counted as a "fact" for an NPOV).
  • Since vandalism is described as "any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Knowledge (XXG)", then almost all (if not all) of these edits can be described as such. Also, if I notice any similar edits by these users before this case is carefully looked at, I will revert them immediately based on those grounds and will ask for assistance if needed. Further, I demand that these users withdraw from any such juvenile edits, tactics or desperation for making the same changes without being fair to other users.
  • Just a brief recap: asides from all of the above issues, the evidence is pretty much based on these simple facts ...similar editing behaviour, similar user names/tactics, edit summaries used over and over again, and IPs that are all registered under the same ISP and start with either "200. ...", "201. ..." or "189. ...".
Comments
  • -I would like to add that if any a checkuser matches any of these users as "confirmed" sock puppets, then please deal with the issue under the following conditions:
  1. That every account involved gets blocked indefinitely and that email is blocked as a precaution for preventing any form of harassement (that includes unblocking the already indefinitely blocked accounts and then reblocking with the addition of email de-activation).
  2. That all cross-wiki (IP) contributions be carefully looked at and reverted. As another precaution, I strongly suggest that those Wikimedia projects be monitered in the case of further socks (which may result in blocks over there). Keep in mind that I know what I am talking about with Knowledge (XXG)'s policies on blocking: it is not to be confused with (community) bans and is to prevent articles from being negatively affected (not to punish users).
  3. That any trusted administrator who looks at this case may be someone that I can quickly refer to about more of these sock puppets in any future event: it is not usually safe to confront the issue alone.

...please make sure that we don't miss anything here. Thanks, ~ Troy (talk) 19:01, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions
  • I've cleared out a pretty obvious sock drawer. There were six as-yet unused socks in the pile as well. There were several dozen different IPs used, so interwiki blocks and contributions won't be particularly enlightening. Is there actually a history of email abuse by this editor? (Pardon me if I missed it.) --jpgordon 21:08, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
    • First of all, please also pardon my long report. To answer your question: "no", there wasn't email abuse, but I don't want to risk it. It was just a suggestion as I was still remembering the events from last time. Other wiki projects have only been affected by the IPs, and so that is very hard to track. However, as I was careful to spot it, I thought that it was worth mentioning. Further, the rarely used socks, as you may have noticed, were likely spares in order to evade blocks. For that reason, blocking all of the user accounts would at least put a dagger in all of those undiscussed page moves. The IPs, on the other hand, are too risky. I think that we need careful monitering for those. If there should only be IP blocks in extreme cases, then I suggest that users just be aware of this guy and revert any edits that could be POV, controversial, or undiscussed when they really should be. I have been meaning to ask: do we need a checkuser for the less obvious ones (and may be Italicus)? Thanks, ~ Troy (talk) 22:06, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
      • Oh, sorry I didn't make it clear enough -- all these usernames have been checkusered and blocked. The IPs include what appear to be major providers in a large country, so not much can be done there. --jpgordon 22:55, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Well, at least it's alright now. You're a checkuser? No wonder I asked for your help. It was getting out of hand the last time I filed the case. It was all over me ...but now that that's over with, I still have a couple of concerns (:|). Firstly, what should I do if this happens again? I don't want to waste the time of admins or other folks, but I am quite powerless with handling with socks by myself. If there's a guy who will be familiar with this case so that I don't have to repeat myself, that would be great. I am still a little disturbed from the contribution-stalking from last time. ~ Troy (talk) 23:35, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Oh! I assumed that's why you asked for my help in the first place! Since this guy is a confirmed sockpuppeteer, you can just list it at WP:RFCU, and one of us will get to it. --jpgordon 00:48, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
      • Sorry, I was busy with the cross-wiki edits. Well, I will list it there if you don't mind. Also, check out the Portugese article on "His Holiness". The similar/same bunch of IPs just bombarded that page ...eventually, it subsided, but I didn't even notice! If the guy wasn't in such a huge range, I would've been able to hunt down his edits project by project, but unfortunately, I can't. I did come across cross-wiki edits/vandalism once before (that was when I was casually looking at different projects). ...Well, now I have two thoughts: A: somehow deal with the cross-wiki stuff and B: list it at RFCU. ~ Troy (talk) 00:57, 28 August 2008 (UTC)


The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Crashingthewaves (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence

These three accounts have been behaving in a highly disruptive manner at 2008 stabbings at Beijing Drum Tower, its previous AFD nomination (Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/2008 Olympics attack on American nationals (2nd nomination)), and the article's talk page. The accounts also try to convince other editors to either back down or support the editor and his views on their talk pages. Sometimes the language used is hostile and uncivil. See these user talk pages including: User talk:The Rambling Man, User talk:Cobaltbluetony, User talk:Elliskev, User talk:Ohconfucius, User talk:Twas Now, User talk:Davumaya, User talk:Mboverload, User talk:Michael Hardy, User talk:Fabrictramp, to name just a few. Also see comments made at Knowledge (XXG) talk:Mediation Cabal#Request. Much of this diruption has to do with the renaming of this page. For a concise account of moves made by all three accounts as well as other editors see Knowledge (XXG):Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-08-27 2008 attack during the Olympics. Also, for the clearest example of confirmed sockpuppetry see my own talk page nrswanson (talk · contribs). I was contacted by Overmoon (talk · contribs) after which he switched mid way in the conversation to Thunderstruck45 (talk · contribs). He also sent me a private e-mail in which he admited to being Crashingthewaves (talk · contribs). Since at that time he wasn't using the different accounts in what I percieved to be a harmful way I did not feel the need to file a sockpuppetry case at that time. See my response to him at the overmoon talk page in which I cautioned him about being civil and about using only one account. Sense then however, he has used multiple accounts on the article in question in a disruptive manner, forcing me to report him. I really didn't want to have to do that sense he initially came to me for advice and help. Advice that he didn't heed.Nrswanson (talk) 00:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I too was contacted for advice by the users, through AIM. I like to AGF as much as possible, and so left the issue alone for a while. I have the AIM conversation saved in which he himself admits to using multiple accounts:
  • fireworks1777 (8:54:18 PM): I am crashingthewaves
and later:
  • greenyjordan msn.com (9:17:26 PM): so are you User:Thundersturck45 too?
  • fireworks1777 (9:17:40 PM): and others
  • greenyjordan msn.com (9:18:00 PM): be careful with that... that actually is against policy...
If that isn't sufficient, I can send the actual file by e-mail. -JWGreen (talk) 00:48, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Also, reading further I found the following:
  • fireworks1777 (10:50:33 PM): well, overmoon, not sure how old that one is
-JWGreen (talk) 00:51, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Comments
  • Please remember to notify all accounts listed as possibly linked to the sock puppetry in question (instructions).
Conclusions

Pretty obviously the same user, dodging their block at this point, and, being all-around pretty uncivil, making threats, etc. I've blocked the remaining accounts indef. SQL 01:42, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Daffydoo1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets


Report submission by
Evidence
  • Both users added the same nonsense page De-welio the god. In his recent edit summary for the creation of this page, Bcj999 even admitted being Daffydoo1:
15:58, 27 August 2008 Bcj999 (Talk | contribs) (351 bytes) (stop deleting it and i wont have to make accounts, yes i am daffydoo1)
Comments
QUACK! Block them both if they haven't been already. Watch the page and go get the IP at WP:RFCU if he keeps going. Paragon 16:48, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions

I've blocked the remaining user, and, salted the nonsense page they like to create. SQL 19:17, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
Pibo Manitoba 13 - ILTTOD (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
PiboManitoba (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Diarratomik (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

ThreeDee912 (talk) 01:38, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

created nonsense articles, such as ILTTOD Society. see contribs. marked his user page with fake "blocked" template, but is not actually blocked.

Comments


Conclusions

All three accounts are indef blocked. SQL 03:45, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Vincebethel (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence
  1. User:Vincebethel is actually Vince Palamara - the contributions page Special:Contributions/Vincebethel for this article states as such.
  2. Vince Palamara is currently undergoing an AfD: Knowledge (XXG):Articles_for_deletion/Vince_Palamara.
  3. Mr. Palamara posted several times to the AfD, pleading for the article to be kept, but the majority was still in favor of deletion. This included suggestions on how to make the article acceptable - admitting his ego, offering to reduce the article to one much smaller, and justifying notability by offering a laundry list of other works that referenced him.
  4. Mr. Palamara's MySpace page indicates he lives in Bethel Park, Pennsylvania and South Park, Pennsylvania, both suburbs to the south of Pittsburgh.
  5. Two new users became involved in the conversation. User:Davejz and User:Jessica120.
  6. Davejz has only contributed to three articles: Vince Palamara, the AfD, and a single change to an article on Jerry Reuss ref
  7. The change to the Jerry Reuss in question concerns Reuss's time as a player in the Pittsburgh Pirates organization. As mentioned, Mr. Palamara lives near Pittsburgh.
  8. Jessica120 has only contributed to either the Vince Palamara article or the AfD.
  9. Jessica120's changes to Vince Palamara have echoed the ones that Mr. Palamara suggested.
  10. Jessica120's case to keep Vince Palamara have echoed Palamara's suggestions - including admitting ego.
  11. Jessica120 made two edits when logged out, resulting in an IP address being shown: 1 and 2. Both were made shortly after Jessica120's previous edit; the one made to the AfD was made 11 minutes after her last edit, and the one made to Vince Palamara was made 5 minutes after her last edit - with the description of "me again :-)"
  12. The IP address in question, 216.183.185.133, is associated with the Mount Lebanon, Pennsylvania library.
  13. All of these cities are suburbs to the south of Pittsburgh. Bethel Park is 5 miles away from Mount Lebanon 1 and Bethel Park a bit over 8 miles 2.

Seeing as both users came on only when the article was nominated for deletion, have only commented on Vince Palamara or his AfD (with one exception), both live in or near the same geographical location as vincebethel, and have made similar comments as Mr. Palamara on his AfD, these are almost certainly sock puppets.

Comments

I closed the AfD as Delete, given the broad consensus that the subject did not meet our notability guidelines. Even prior to a review of the above facts, it was clear from the RfA that the three accounts in favor of keeping the article (listed above) were the same individual. UltraExactZZ ~ Evidence 18:08, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

The contributions all look the same and all around the AFD, Users sound the same also. I Think CU would make this 100%. ·Add§hore· /Cont 15:59, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions
Blocked socks indef, master two weeks. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:29, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

The Twenty Thousand Tonne Bomb (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence

Both accounts were created on 14 August, 30 minutes apart, and both have "Signature" pages: User:Mr Kringle/Signature (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) and User:Ehh Mon Ehh/Signature (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). Most edits by both users have been minor, and in different areas, but there is an unusual pattern in the times of both users' edits; The Twenty Thousand Tonne Bomb (now indef blocked for sockpuppetry) also had similar patterns (although less obvious) some, but not all, of the time. Users have all edited Knowledge (XXG):Possibly unfree images/2008 August 11, edits by Mr Kringle and Ehh Mon Ehh to recommend that File:NSYNC.jpg (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), uploaded by The Twenty Thousand Tonne Bomb, should be kept. The Twenty Thousand Tonne Bomb has already used sockpuppets for the same purpose in the discussion of that image and others listed on the same PUI page. --Snigbrook 15:06, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments


Conclusions

Pretty clear to me. In addition to the above, both accounts fake using AWB (or, have plain hacked it, either way...) Blocked both for block evasion / sockpuppetry. SQL 19:55, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Jvolkblum (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence

It is clear from their contributions that none of these users are newbies.

Like past Jvolkblum sockpuppets, EXP11-09 has a focus on embellishing articles about New Rochelle, New York and related topics, as indicated by the list at User:EXP11-09/sandbox and the edits listed at Special:Contributions/EXP11-09. Like Jvolkblum puppets, this user has paid particular attention to creating and editing a user page -- User:EXP11-09. The user's edits are individually unremarkable, but collectively they strongly resemble the work of Jvolkblum, including minor format changes and addition of templates that are of questionable value or inappropriate and embellishing the New Rochelle article with minor details.

NashuaNH has a user name that suggests "Nashua, New Hampshire," but this user's focus is clearly New Rochelle (see contributions and user pages). This group of diffs is a classic pattern of Jvolkblum's: adding names of notables to the New Rochelle article, accompanied by reference citations that are naked URLs (although at least they are now surrounded by ref templates) and that include some totally erroneous/inappropriate sources (I deleted the link that pointed to sedoparking.com).

In the last few hours, EXP11-09 and NashuaNH edited as a tag team in the New Rochelle article. In the last few hours, both have been busy adding articles to Category:People from New Rochelle, New York, as in this diff by NashuaNH and numerous edits by EXP11-09, such as this diff.

User:TerrenceGuion has done little other than create a user page that is remarkably similar to many others created by Jvolkblum puppets. The user's two article edits were to articles of interest to Jvolkblum puppets, including adding a source to the Davids' Island article shortly after citation-needed templates had been added to material added a few hours earlier by EXP11-09. The earlier article edit was to remove information about a famous golf course from an article about another New York City suburb -- Jvolkblum and puppets have a strong interest in publicizing New Rochelle's golf courses and similar assets while making sure that other NYC suburbs don't have similar content in their articles.

Comments

Note: When Rudget closed the last sockpuppetry case for Jvolkblum, he suggested simply contacting him instead of opening new cases, but unfortunately he is gone. Also note that there probably are other active sockpuppets that I have not yet noticed. Orlady (talk) 00:25, 25 August 2008 (UTC)


Conclusions

These have all been indef. blocked already. SQL 19:49, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Soccermeko (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence

Compare IP addresses to address from Knowledge (XXG):Suspected sock puppets/Soccermeko(11th)

Or from Knowledge (XXG):Suspected sock puppets/Soccermeko(10th)

Editing Kierra_"Kiki"_Sheard just as Knowledge (XXG):Suspected sock puppets/Soccermeko(9th)

Combined with this edit from the edit history, where it removes Soccermeko sockpuppet tags from other anonymous IP addresses.

new addition, rather than starting the 14th case 4.154.3.7 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) just popped up and restored all the edits I rolled back last night, and complained on my talk page about me having reverted "his" edits. That completes the link between 4.129.*.*, 4.128.*.*, and 4.154.*.* that you can see if you review the 13 sockpuppet cases and the checkuser reports on Soccermeko. This guy will not stop evading his ban, and I think a few range blocks are needed now.

Comments
  • Please remember to notify all accounts listed as possibly linked to the sock puppetry in question (instructions).
    • Please stop trying to prove an untrue statement. I am not doing anything that is hurting you. I have edited pages that need to be updated and you erasing that is getting in the way. 4.154.3.7 (talk) 13:22, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions

They all seem to have been handled around the 22nd. SQL 19:32, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Be Black Hole Sun (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Report submission by
Evidence
  • Be Black Hole Sun started an edit war on the Bryan Adams article on August 2, 2008. After starting, what he called, an article re-build, he began reverting any edit from other editors that conflicted with his own pov on the article content/format... picking on User:Michelle1 in particular.(she is a veteran editor of the page) Diffs: .
  • Edit war escalated on August 16, 2008 with repeated reverts of all edits that contradicted his specifically he began re-adding musical genres and controversial citations that went against the consensus of the other editors trying to work on the page. Diffs: .
  • After these repeated reverts Be Black Hole Sun was issued a 3RR warning for edit warring on the article.
  • On August 17, 2008, despite the 3RR warning Be Black Hole Sun continued to re-add the controversial citations and content that contradicted the consensus of the other editors. Diffs: .
  • At 10:25, 17 August 2008 Wiki-admin East718 issues a 79 hour block on Be Black Hole Sun(his fifth block) for continued edit warring on the Bryan Adams article. Block to expire early on the morning of August 21, 2008.
  • On August 20, 2008 (almost a full 24 hours before Be Back Hole Sun's block is to end) IP 80.212.228.51 re-adds the exact same content and controversial citations that Be Black Hole Sun was blocked on August 17th for trying to add. Diffs: .
  • IP's fourth edit to re-add the Be Back Hole Sun's content here uses and edit summary writing/wording style that is exactly the same writing/wording style of edit summaries used by Be Black Hole Sun (as seen in previous links in this report and throughout the recent edit history of the Bryan Adams article.
Comments
  • Be Black Hole Sun is blocked until Thursday morning. IP 80.212.228.51 shows up a full day ahead of Be Black Hole Sun's block end and re-adds the exact same content and controversial references that Be Black Hole Sun was blocked for edit warring trying to re-add against the consensus of the other editors. IP also uses edit summaries similar to those used by blocked editor Be Black Hole Sun. Clearly the IP is being used to side-step the 3RR block still in effect to continue the edit war started earlier. Original blocking administrator User:East718 has been notified of the possible block aversion.
Conclusions

East handled this some time ago. SQL 19:25, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

QuirkyAndSuch (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence
  • OGM:
  • QAS:
- Wikidemo (talk) 18:50, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
Comments
  • These two accounts do seem very closely related. It seems, that ObamaGirlMachine, goes in, and, asks on the talkpage that the article be deleted , then, QuirkyAndSuch, pastes in a support in short order . This happens again and again and again and yet again. They support each other in other places as well, again, pretty close together time-wise (altho in this instance they are seperated by a couple hours). UserCompare Summary SQL 19:06, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Suggest consider topic ban of all Barack Obama-related articles given that most of the disruption was related to this topic, user was disrupting the articles in bad faith, and even after being warned and clearly receiving the warning that the articles were on probation the user continued to sock/edit war, make accusations wikigame, and canvass (X 22), and file bad-faith administrative actions after receiving the notice. Wikidemo (talk) 11:37, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
I wonder if this group might be connected more widely to any of the other sock families or instigators on the Obama articles. Wikidemo (talk) 17:34, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions

All blocked as sockpuppets of QuirkyAndSuch. SQL 19:22, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Swamilive (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets


Report submission by
Evidence

Swamilive (talk · contribs) created articles Mirror Song (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and Shit Towne (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) about unremarkable Live (band) songs. I redirected the articles (plus related articles not created by Swamilive) to their respective albums, citing WP:MUSIC in the edit summary. These changes were reverted by 216.211.57.63 (talk · contribs) with no edit summary or attempt to discuss on the talk page. The IP was eventually blocked for 3RR. When I reverted the articles back to redirects, 24.109.207.40 (talk · contribs) reverted them, again with no edit summary or attempt to discuss on the talk page. Although I hadn't violated 3RR, Swamilive (talk · contribs) immediately left me a 3RR warning on my talk page and filed a 3RR report here, which was a cut-and-paste of my report from the previous day in which I'd suggested that 216.211.57.63 was likely a sockpuppet of Swamilive. The WHOIS for both IPs suggests that they are from Thunder Bay, a small Canadian community.

User:Swamilive reverted my removal of spam links from an article here and didn't respond when asked about it on their talk page. User:24.109.207.40 twice removed an AfD notice from Frank Gross, an article I'd nominated for deletion and recently edited. Both accounts are clearly targetting my edits following the redirection of Live (band) song articles.

Addition by Dominus (talk)
216.211.51.245

I think Swamilive has a habit of using anonymous IP accounts to do his dirty work for him. One day he listed the article about me, Mark Jason Dominus, for PROD . Another editor quickly reverted the listing, since the article had survived two AFD discussions. A few days later, User:216.211.51.245 restored the PROD notice. .

216.211.51.245's only other edits both seem to be Swamilive acting antisocially. One edit was to insert mentions of "Vov Abraxas" into the DVD article. Vov Abraxas is the stage name of a musician who is connected with Swamilive, or who is Swamilive himself . In the past, many of Swamilive's edits were devoted to inserting mentions of Vov Abraxas to various articles..

The other edit by 216.211.51.245 restored the (probably non-notable) mention of a certain segment on a comedy podcast that had been previously added by Swamilive and removed later.

216.211.54.163

User:216.211.54.163 made a series of Swamilive-like edits on July 2. One was to add "Vov Abraxas" to the Abraxas article . One vandalized Wager: . The next was to add a spam section about Swamilive's record company to the James Bay article: . This section was removed soon afterward by another editor, and Swamilive restored it: .

The anonymous user finished his session by editing my user page without my permission. Swamlive has a long history of doing this even though other editors have told him not to .

216.211.59.3

User:216.211.59.3 appears to be another Swamilive account, making a series of antisocial, Swamilive-like edits between 28 and 31 July.

This user repeatedly edited my user page without my permission.

The anonymous user inappropriately linked to James Bay from the Darien article , inappropriately linked to Mark Jason Dominus from the Unix article . As discussed above, James Bay and Mark Jason Dominus have both been targets of Swamilive's vandalism in the past.

The anonymous user also vandalized 5-Methoxy-diisopropyltryptamine and Drug Enforcement Administration . The DEA article has also been a past target of Swamilive's vandalism:

Addition by GRBerry

I added James Bay and Bruce Jeremy, each of whom has in the last week recreated at new titles a deleted article originally created by Swamilive. See their deleted contributions for the evidence. GRBerry 13:00, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Addition by Swamilive(!)

User:Underworld MK1 was added by User:Swamilive themselves. Seems likely given the single contribution. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 14:01, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

A nice clean, simple vandalism example

Since User:Swamilive has admitted to the sockpuppetry, here's an example of how it was used for for simple vandalism. The static IP 24.109.207.40 adds nonsense to A-Frame. Then different 216.XXX.XXX.XXX IPs undo the removal by multiple editors . Clear enough? Delicious carbuncle (talk) 14:26, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

Excellent detective work, Delicious carbuncle. A couple quick points though. The Frank Gross article most certainly has enough external links and respectable references to validate the article's inclusion on Knowledge (XXG). Most certainly moreso than Mark Jason Dominus. Secondly, to accuse me of targeting your edits is a bit of a switch-around/swap-around, don't you think? Our whole relationship began when you nominated Stan Jacobsen for deletion, and I disagreed with the nomination. Not understanding the process for AfD, I asked you some very well-intentioned questions to try to allow the article to stay up. These questions were met with a snarky response. Since then, you've done nothing but revert notable songs to their album's article. I reckon you're the one targeting me, sir. Which is flattering to a degree, but ultimately distasteful.

Hi Dom. I did nominate you for deletion, but quite honestly, this was not in bad faith. Basically, you can read and write Perl. You ran a medium-traffic website with some other people. You had a book published, you like octopuses, and you had yourself filmed in an undershirt spitting profanity at the cameraman 6 years ago. Mark, I've done all these things, except Perl isn't my language of choice. No offense, my friend, but you're technically no more notable than I am. How many units of Higher-Order Perl have you shipped? My record company sold over 2,000 Vov Abraxas records. Not trying to put you down. Just providing a comparison. Yet, I'll bet that if I created an article about myself, you or Mr. Carbuncle would be quick to nominate it for deletion. Am I wrong?

So yes, I did in fact make all those edits from those different computers. I guess there's a matter of blocking to be discussed. All I would like to suggest is that the IPs (or IP range) are not subjected to a block. For the most part, those are public computers at libraries and Internet cafés here in town. Looking at the histories of these IPs, I can tell you that I certainly didn't make all the edits listed in their contribs. Other people have been, and will be using these IPs for good-faith edits.

Here's my recommendation. I will stop creating and reverting articles about promotional-only Live singles (this should satisfy Delicious carbuncle). I may create articles about Live singles if I can find references that prove the song is notable, but I'll leave out the non-charting, radio-only promo singles. As for Dominus, I will leave your user page alone, and I will resist the temptation to nominate your Mark Jason Dominus page for deletion. I will protect it from vandalism by other users, but I'll otherwise leave it alone. Also, I guess the Stan Jacobsen article has to stay off. Trying to reach an honest consensus here....would this be satisfactory to you two? Swamilive (talk) 12:39, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Just to add a little perspective to this discussion, all of my edits to articles involving User:Swamilive have been to apply WP policies and guidelines. I'll let an admin sort this out, since this user has long since lost any good faith I may have had in them. If nothing else, the 24.109.207.40 appears to be a static IP and should probably be blocked as vandalism only. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 14:01, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
I took a look at the edits I made from that IP to see where the computer is located. Those edits were made at a computer at Starbuck's. I'm not sure blocking a public access computer is in the interests of the community. Swamilive (talk) 15:34, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Those edits sure look like they are all yours, so I doubt anyone else would be effected, if what you say is true. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 15:52, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
And I've added some evidence of just plain vandalism and sockpuppetry. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 14:26, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Although it's not appropriate to use PROD on an article that has survived two AFD debates, listing the article for deletion could plausibly have been done in good faith. But using a sockpuppet to relist it again is intrinsically bad faith, and that's what this page is about. -- Dominus (talk) 14:05, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions

Yep, these are all related. I've blocked the IP 24.109.207.40, for following around and harassing Delicious carbuncle, for one week to prevent further abuse. The rest of the IP's, were in my opinion, already sufficiently blocked, or, far too old. As to the accounts, I've blocked all of them indefinitely, to prevent further disruption. SQL 18:49, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Liam1992 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets


Report submission by

De728631 (talk) 13:29, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence
  • This an excerpt from the new pages record where both accounts create a nonsense page about one Liam Mconnell. The pages have subsequently been deleted per CSD:
  1. 13:14, 26 August 2008 ‎LIAM MCONNELL (hist) ‎ ‎Ralson46 (Talk | contribs) (← Created page with 'liam mconnell from glasgow is the creator of ther gooch of windwaker whicxh features in the game zelda if you know anythnig else about this entrepenuor or his goo...')
  2. 13:12, 26 August 2008 ‎LIAM MCCONNELL THE CREATOR OF GOOCH (hist) ‎ ‎Liam1992 (Talk | contribs) (← Created page with 'no, russell')
Comments


Conclusions

Both accounts are already blocked indef. as vandal-only accounts. SQL 18:28, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Blake The Third (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence
Comments
Conclusions

No overlap in editing, different styles, I severely doubt that these users are the same person. SQL 19:18, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

GENIUS(4th power) (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence
  • NYAE and Master of Pies usually edit at the same time, and several edits by NYAE have been reverted by Master of Pies.
  • NYAE: Master of Pies:
  • NYAE: Master of Pies:
  • NYAE: Master of Pies: .
Comments

What? This is really mean. Many people start creating user and user talk pages. Accounts are created every minute, it doesn't suddenly mean that I'm him. I have found Master of Pies the first time in recent changes and than a second time there. I decided to watch over him to see whenever he vandalizes. I am a great user, I have not vandalized, and in fact, I have made almost 600 great contributions and actively use Twinkle. I am here to attribute greatly to the project. This report innacurate and deeply saddens me. So someone please just tell Snigbrook he is wrong and block Nyae. Thaks, and remember, I'm not guilty.--Master of Pies (talk) 21:46, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm a little confused, you "watched over" yourself to see if you were vandalizing? Are you sure that's what you meant to say? Beeblbrox (talk) 20:54, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

No. first of all, I'm not him or her. Please don't accuse me of that. I'm not guilty. Second, i kept a steady eye on their contributions to see their edits. Again, I'm not guilty. You tense was unnescecarry. Shame.--Master of Pies (talk) 23:52, 24 August 2008 (UTC) By the way, I checked. There was never a checkuser filed on Eithen except for mine I filed. Looks like Snigbrook is being prejidicial and just wants me gone so he fakes evidence.--Master of Pies (talk) 23:56, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm not faking any evidence; it's just the editing patterns, and similar user pages, make it look like you could be the same user. Your recent edits have been constructive, however your response to this does not assume good faith, and that's what is likely to be a problem. I assume the "faked" evidence is referring to the block of Recoverer; the checkuser tool was used (as it often is) without any RFCU case being filed. The evidence connecting you with NYAE is from the Special:Contributions pages, and the similarity with Recoverer can also be seen in the contributions (although I'm not sure if you are the same user). I don't "want you gone", and as blocks are for prevention, not punishment, then as there is no continuing problem that I am aware of, currently there is not a reason for you to be blocked. However, if NYAE is your account, it is a violation of the policy on sock puppetry and that account should be blocked. --Snigbrook 00:55, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I still don't understand what you meant by " I have found Master of Pies the first time in recent changes and than a second time there. I decided to watch over him to see whenever he vandalizes. " You, Master of Pies, wrote that, what does it mean exactly? Beeblbrox (talk) 04:52, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Checkuser evidence
Oo-kay. Checkuser says Master of Pies (talk · contribs) is actually a sock of GENIUS(4th power) (talk · contribs) / The Great Editor In Chief (talk · contribs). Also, the following are  Confirmed:
  1. Eithen (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
  2. I'm Smarter (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
  3. I have a cute nose (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
  4. Recoverer (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
  5. Genius's Revenge (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
  6. NYAE (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
- Alison 05:33, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions

Seems settled, per Alison. All of these socks are now blocked. SQL 19:15, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

65.216.70.60 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence
  • User: 65.216.70.60 has been cutting a wide swath in the last few month, being involved in a 3RR violation on the Gemstone IV article, edit warring on the Superman (film series) article, edit warring with severe WP:BLP violations on the Ray Carver (darts player) article, vandalization of user pages and numerous hostile and uncivil edit summaries and user talk page posts to myself and several other editors , , , , , , , , , both from that IP address and two other IP addresses to which he has access - Special:Contributions/68.239.20.96 and Special:Contributions/72.72.118.129, discernable by editing one IP's talk page from another, from two of the accounts editing the Gemstone article and all three reverting on the Carver and Superman articles, and indiscriminately posting to user talk pages in response to a thread from another address. The 65.216.70.60 address has been blocked three times within the last fortnight for vandalism, only to open up again directly after the expiration of each block, and is now under a two week block; nonetheless, he's using the 72.72.118.129 address for more harassment , and continuing to edit war on the Carver article, which so far seven editors have been involved in reverting.  RGTraynor  15:18, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
Comments

Obviously the same user here. User:65.216.70.60 is blocked for 2 weeks for continued incivility, User:72.72.118.129 is blocked for 2 weeks for the same + block evasion. The other IP seems to have stopped for now. Kevin (talk) 23:09, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

The non-blocked IP does not need blocked at this point, as, it has been quiet for the last 10 days. That aside, everything else appears to be handled, and, I agree, those look to be the same user. SQL 19:10, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
ICarly0246 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
iCarly10 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

Templarion1 (talk) 22:25, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Username almost the same, also iCarly10 posted an unblock accepted template on iCarly0246 when not an admin.

Comments

I'm pretty sure this is the same sockpuppeteer as User:Tajtheman and User:Steelcity95. Same interest in airlines, airports, iCarly, and overlapping TV shows. --Matt (talk) 23:22, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

At a minimum, it's a sock of the 0246 account, which is currently indef blocked. I've applied the same restriction on the 10 account, and prompted them to request an unblock on whatever master account they choose. Kuru 23:36, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
Hubris22: TheGuru (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
Hubris23: PotGobbler (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

Brougham96 (talk) 04:04, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

see talk:Hubris22: TheGuru they have also been vandalizing pages.

Comments


Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
41.232.60.70 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
Hoshy 90 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

Brougham96 (talk) 23:08, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Stephen_Schwartz_(journalist)&action=history

vandalized several times within a minute then created an account and continued vandalizing

Comments


Conclusions

IP given a 48 hour block, user account blocked indefinitely. PhilKnight (talk) 23:26, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Holla213 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence

Holla213 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) blocked today for edit warring on University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, including the use of 128.103.142.23 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) as an anonymous sock, also blocked. Now, Recardoz (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) gets created, just to champion Holla213's changes.Kww (talk) 19:08, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

One additional piece: note that he just can't find the ~ key on his keyboard.Kww (talk) 19:11, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

I edit-conflicted with Kww as I was here making the exact same report... I share his or her suspicions completely. --ElKevbo (talk) 19:14, 24 August 2008 (UTC) (I also added the IP address; the admin who originally blocked Holla213 considered the IP address the same editor as Holla213, an assessment with which I concur.)


Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Boxx Faxx (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets

68.30.14.29 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Report submission by

-- JediLofty Talk 12:25, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence
Comments

I've just added 70.8.94.37 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) per this edit. It's either the same as 68.130 or just another "helpful" spellchecker. TravellingCari 13:08, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

and 68.30.163.239 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) probably is 68.30.163.239 but in case it's just related. I don't understand how IP addresses change with use, but yeah, lots of SPAs in someone who may not exist. TravellingCari 01:37, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
and 68.30.14.29 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), also spell checking others' comments. AfD is a mess. I've already suggested that Boxx Faxx get a block from this independent of socking after re-creating this following a final warning. TravellingCari 03:20, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions
All the IP addresses resolve to the same ISP, leading me to believe that this is in either one house, or one company. Either way, this is obvious sockage/meatage, and as such, blocking them. Soxπed93 20:20, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Troyrodriguez361 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
IPs used by user
Report submission by
Evidence
  • This user has engaged in a broad pattern of vandalism intended to add himself, "Troy Rodriguez". to wikipedia. This includes the alias "Lil' King", ostensibly a rapper, and a made-up movies, "The Sin" and "Route 666". All of the users and IP above have been variously used to create the following articles:
  • The user has also tried to insert himself into multiple other articles, below, to make Lil' King look legit. Examples:
  • That last entry suggests the editor was born in 1994, making him 14. Any way this can be reported to his parents?
  • This user has shown a persistent pattern of prolific vandalism. Not just the articles, but the subtle other edits (which are often not reverted immediately) to make his own web of articles look legitimate. He's consistently tried to avoid blocks by creating sockpuppets and has boasted about his ability to do so (example). Attempts to CSD these articles are thwarted, so we've had to go through three AFD discussions (two linked above, the latest is here.
  • Some of these sockpuppets have already been banned indefinitely. justinfr (talk) 13:40, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Comments
Conclusions

 Likely That the suspected sockpuppets are operated by the sock master. I have blocked Girlsalltheway2009 and Livinglifetoothefullest indefinitely as socks of Troyrodriguez361. This was considering one of the blocked socks(Scriptwriter2009) said they'd be back in four days and were back four days later with the two latest socks which created the latest batch of articles which have now been deleted per the latest Afd. Also because Troyrodriguez361 reasoning to creating the articles was because it was "for my client" which was also a term Girlsalltheway2009 used in protesting the deletion of the more recent articles. Currently all of the known accounts have been indef blocked for sockpuppetry. However, I have taken no action on the IP addresses considering both no longer actively editing. However I will keep an eye on the addresses' contribs over the next days and if activity increases then the appropriate action will be taken. AngelOfSadness talk 18:18, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
Jwjkp (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
Aramis87 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

Templarion1 (talk) 06:26, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Keeps blanking Jwjkp's page, claiming he is innocent, and removing warnings and the sock puppeteer template. Blanked the warning on his own page too.

Comments Also, Aramis86 was blocked by FisherQueen for having the same IP as Jwjkp, and about an hour later Aramis87 comes along and blanks his talk page, hiding it.Templarion1 (talk) 06
37, 22 August 2008 (UTC)


Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Miamiboyzinhere (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence
  • New user Comayagua's first-day edits are markedly similar to past edits of user Miamiboyzinhere, who remains indefinitely blocked for abuse, personal attacks and tendentious edits over categorizing articles about tourist attractions based on their proximity to Orlando, Florida — in defiance of consensus and civil discussion.
  • Comayagua removed a suspected sock puppet tag from his or her Talk page and replaced it with a comment regarding the categorization of Orlando attraction articles.
  • Comayagua edits show overlap with Miami-related edits of Comayagua99.
  • A list of previous sock puppets of Miamiboyzinhere is archived here.
Comments
Conclusions
Very strong likelihood. They have near-identical editing pattern. The 3 sockpuppets have very similar names. Blocked them indef. IP is blocked for 24 hours. OhanaUnited 03:03, 22 August 2008 (UTC)
Postscript

As a result of this discussion, it was determined that User:Comayagua99 was not a sockpuppet, and was unblocked. Kevin (talk) 22:32, 24 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Choyola8 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence
  • User has been edit-warring on Lorenzo Lamas page and reverting information that is not relevant to the page, as well as reverting corrections to grammatical mistakes (therefore commiting vandalism). User has also recieved a prior warning on their talk page, which has been blanked. The account appears to have been created with the sole intention of edit warring and vandalism. A further account (user:79:74:76:78RIPE) has also just been activated to continue this activity. The appears to be an account trying to mock another user's IP address with the word RIPE at the end of it.
Comments
Conclusions
  •  Likely that the sock puppet belongs to the master. The puppet has been blocked indefinitely by another administrator for an inappropriate username, but I'm tagging for tracking purposes. Additionally, blocking the master for 19 hours. Anthøny 01:21, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Jessyjamestoloose (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence
  • Note: the above URLs used to date have been blacklisted.
Comments
Conclusions

Both accounts blocked, IP blacklisted. Nothing to see here...Gb 19:40, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Mharvey23 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence
Comments
Conclusions
  •  Likely that the suspected 'puppet is operated by the sock master. I have blocked Yellowdude indefinitely, and Mharvey23 for 12 hours; both are tagged as appropriate. Anthøny 02:01, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

MarkRae (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence

I am having an issue with a user on some Genesis pages (mainly revolving around Wind & Wuthering) who I suspect is a sockpuppet. User:MarkRae persists in reintroducing information that is unsupported, and I find very familiar behavior showing up under the guise of User:77.99.142.41.

Conclusions
  • The behavioural evidence is very clear here. Exceptionally  Likely that the suspected sock puppet is operated by the sock master. I have blocked each for 24 hours, and tagged the userpages. Anthøny 01:50, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Zerida (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence
  • Looks like the indef blocked sock-puppeteer Zerida might be back to push a Pharaonist POV on the Egyptians talk page. Diffs can be seen in the few contribs the IPs have made. Three IPs show up out of nowhere at the same time to tag-team. First IP is canvassing on talk pages of users who might be supportive of the cause, and wants them to revert to Zerida's preferred version of the article, which goes against consensus on the talk page. Second and third IP proceeds to do so themselves.
Comments
Conclusions
Asking Thatcher, the CU that did the Zerida block, to look at this. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:21, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
The IPs are consistent with Zerida's IPs. Thatcher 02:04, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Soccermeko (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence

Same IP range as last three Soccermeko socks, only edit was to post the material he has been prevented from posting to Nicole Wray to Talk:Nicole Wray.

This report is more for completeness of bookkeeping than anything else, in the event that a range block or semi-protection of a talk page becomes necessary.

Comments

Stop creating useless articles and lies. 4.154.3.202 (talk) 20:53, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

  • Since the report has been filed, the extreme step of semi-protecting even the talk pages of the target articles has been taken. That is probably a sufficient response at this time.
    Kww (talk) 12:30, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sock puppeteer

Undercovergals (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets
Report submission by
Evidence
  • Various sock users hit by rangeblocks abusing the helpme and unblock template. All request unblock using various "wikipedia scares me" and assertions that they are all unique people, but have followed up talk page protection of one account with a helpme or unblock request minutes later on another sock. Previously blocked for obvious socking based on contribs.
Comments
  • Haven't been keeping track of the sock names so I may have omitted some of the newer ones which aren't tagged. Not sure if this is correct or if this is an issue for checkuser to clear out any remaining socks. -Optigan13 (talk) 07:30, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
REALidMan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
SecureLicense (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

TravellingCari 20:45, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

repeated promotion and spam on Real ID Act as well as the organization's own page: Coalition for a Secure Driver's License. There have been IP activity as well, not sure why the switchin accounts as REALidMan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) doesn't appear to ever have been blocked whereas I just blicked the latter as a spamusername.

Comments

I concur that the contrib records look pretty similar: both SPAs editing the same two articles and both pushing the promotion of the same organization. There seems to be high likelihood that both users are the same person. I am not sure, though, if this qualifies as actual abuse of multiple accounts since User:SecureLicense started editing in August while the last edit by User:REALidMan was in June. Nsk92 (talk) 00:46, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

See also:
--A. B. 21:22, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


Conclusions

Blocked all accounts indef, IP 1 week. Tagged all. Does appear to be switching names, edits and behavior very similar. Tagged LicenseAuthority as the master. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:12, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Intothelogos (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Sarah Edmontons (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Battle8 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
71.94.151.241 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

Delicious carbuncle (talk) 16:16, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Contributions of all listed editors are almost exclusively to add references to "Shawn Westerberg" to Knowledge (XXG). Intothelogos (talk · contribs) created the pages West (Shawn Richard Westerberg) and Shawn Westerberg. Battle8 (talk · contribs) has just recreated the page Shawn Westerberg. 71.94.151.241 (talk · contribs) edited and repeatedly removed speedy tags from the previous incarnation of that article.

Comments


Conclusions
  •  Likely that the sock puppets listed are accounts operated by the master sock puppet. I've blocked the sock's indefinitely, and the master for one month. All tagged, too. Anthøny 15:37, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
Santeni (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
Geniusman33 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

Altairisfartalk 00:13, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Both are being used for the same questionable edits (in addition to IP edits) to LeFlore Preparatory Academy.

Comments

I see that both users have strong contributions to LeFlore Preparatory Academy. However I don't believe that Geniusman33 (talk · contribs) is a sockpuppet of Santeni because of a simple argument:

  • Santeni registered an account in 11 October 2007, and Geniusman33 registered in 12 August 2006. If Geniusman33 registered first than Santeni, how can Geniusman33 be sockpuppet of Santeni???

Also, could you please provide more information about the IP edits? They would be useful if you want to prove that Santeni is a sock puppeteer. macy (talk) 14:15, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Vivin (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Uzhuthiran (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Rashtrakooda (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

--Avinesh Jose  T  04:46, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


Evidence

I strongly believe that User:Vivin is a sock puppet or meatpuppet of User:Uzhuthiran. First Uzhuthiran is been used for the same interest in adding the copy edit and grammer tags on Santhosh George Kulangara and later supported by Vivin who just simply added the tags without any discussion on the talk page. Kindly check the status of both. If it is not socks, Uzhuthiran must have informed Vivin through Email as a meatpuppet.

This is a bogus case with little or no merit. This editor has a history of sockpuppeteering and I think he's doing this because I filed one against him a while ago. I came across this article because apparently I had the sockpuppet page (that I originally created for the sockpuppet case that I filed) listed on my watchlist which showed a change on it. So I went to take a look and eventually ended up at the aforementioned article. You'll notice that after adding the tags I went through and cleaned up the article. Further notice that the tags weren't added there by the original editor frivolously. The article had serious grammar, spelling, and tone issues. This not the first time this editor has run afoul of WP:OWN. He seems to regard an attempts at improving his articles as 'vandalism' and calls it so. --vi5in 06:14, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
My previous sock case was closed without my comment and explanation as I was away from WP during that time. My later explanation was added in my talk page. About User:Vivin an edit warrior especially in Nair related article’s came to my article, i.e. Santhosh George Kulangara as a surprise and commented that the article has serious grammatical errors. Please note that it was edited by many editors and corrected/chopped numerous stuff from it. Therefore, I filed this case. Anyway, still, I request admins to check the status of User:Uzhuthiran and User:Vivin and I am not interested to further comment on this issue. Thanks. --Avinesh Jose  T  06:31, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Your previous two sock cases were closed after they proved beyond a doubt that you are the puppetmaster. Your explanations were weak and your unblock request was denied. You know, I just realized something. Let us assume for the sake of argument that you are saying the truth and that the editors mentioned in your previous sock cases are not your socks. You and I have interacted previously (meaning, before all of this) on a very limited basis. In fact, I remember writing on your talk page actually thanking you for trying to help with a dispute. In fact, I had no idea that you were the puppetmaster until the admin in the RFCU stated it. I thought that Harjk was a sock of Tomb (or the other way round). Users Harjk and Tomb have consistently accused me of targeting them and also of 'vandalism'. Now I notice that you accused me of doing the same in this sock case and on my talk page. How can you say that I have been targeting you if you and I have rarely interacted? If they weren't your socks, I'd think that you'd assume good faith on the basis that you and I never interacted (for sake of argument of course). The logical conclusion is that you are lying and the sockpuppets mentioned in your previous cases are your socks. In addition, it is also immediately obvious that you have WP:OWN issues. I request the admin to close this case. It's a waste of time. --vi5in 15:31, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
To the admin, also note that Avinesh has never really involved himself in the Nair article. However Harjk and Tomb extensively involved themselves in the article. I find it odd that Avinesh would know so much about the article, assuming (only for argument's sake of course) that Harjk and Tomb are not his socks. --vi5in 15:38, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Listen, I only noticed it from the moment I was accused as a sock with harjk. Moreover, Nair is added in my watchlist along with thousands of Kerala related articles since I am a Kerala wikipedian. --Avinesh Jose  T  04:19, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Good one. --vi5in 02:11, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Diffs from RFCU:


Comments
  • User:Vivin is by and large a very sensible, judicious editor excepting for his obession with casteist junk. User:Avineshjose on the other hand is an ignorant SPA whose chief purpose is to create advertorial stuff on business men and business houses. It looks very much like that he is a paid editor. His reverts on Santhosh George Kulangara, which brought back much nonsense I removed, suggests that he is impervious to reasoning. This frivolous and extremely bad faith accusation of socking should be severely dealt with. I have already stated that I am a banned user. Still, he had the cheek to hurl this accusation against a user who has been editing for many years. Uzhuthiran (talk) 13:12, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Uzhuthiran, someone has to clean up the 'casteist junk' ;) --vi5in 15:31, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Uzhuthiran is lying, as per his userlog, he is not a banned user. (I’m not much sure about his banned sock id’s). As Vivin’s support on Uzhuthiran as ‘casteist junk cleaner’ does not applicable anywhere as Uzhuthiran’s contribs proves that he has opened this account on 1 September 2007 and hardly edited 50 times in which he was mainly interested in accusing me as a paid editor and attacking only Labour India and Santhosh George Kulangara. It is against our policy i.e WP:NPA accusing an editor as a paid which is not at all justifiable. Those who are looking at my contribs could see it well that whether I am a paid/not. I clearly stated my intention creating article is well available in my user page. I AM VERY HAPPY THAT UZHITHARAN’S LATEST VANDALISMS IN MY USER PAGE AND HERE, WERE REVERTED BY OTHER EDITORS. --Avinesh Jose  T  05:18, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
I was referring to myself as the "junk cleaner". --vi5in 02:11, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions
  • I find the evidence  Inconclusive with regards to any of these accounts being linked. Although there are cross-overs between the areas of interest and the precise points of views, I feel them to be a rough over-lap rather than exact match. The behavioural evidence is not strong enough here, I feel. No blocks placed; closing report. Anthøny 14:59, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Greenlanop (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Rick well (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Yorkking (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Lsonfey (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Pdonbuff (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Crystal AB (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Selininaemily (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Welawat (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Cooner&0908 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Wishess2m (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

--tcsetattr (talk / contribs) 09:21, 14 August 2008 (UTC)


Evidence

These accounts have been used to post fake questions and answers on the Computing reference desk to create publicity for some products that the user apparently wants to sell. I chose the "puppeteer" somewhat arbitrarily from the group. They are all apparently single-purpose spamming accounts but clearly working together and pretending to be talking to each other.

The major events in chronological order:

  • 23:09, August 12, 2008 Yorkking created (log)
  • 00:59, August 13, 2008 Pdonbuff created (log)
  • 01:33, August 13, 2008 Pdonbuff asks a fake question (diff)
  • 01:35, August 13, 2008 Lsonfey created (log)
  • 01:45, August 13, 2008 Lsonfey answers Pdonbuff's fake question (diff)
  • 02:16, August 13, 2008 Rick well created (log)
  • 02:39, August 13, 2008 Rick well asks a fake question (diff)
  • 21:35, August 13, 2008 Greenlanop created (log)
  • 21:40, August 13, 2008 Greenlanop asks a fake question (diff)
  • 21:43, August 13, 2008 Greenlanop adds a blatant advertisement to the Entertainment refdesk (diff)
  • 21:45, August 13, 2008 Greenlanop asks another fake question (diff)
  • 21:49, August 13, 2008 Crystal AB created (log)
  • 21:52, August 13, 2008 a benevolent user deletes the blatant advertisement from the Entertainment refdesk (diff)
  • 21:54, August 13, 2008 Crystal AB adds a blatant advertisement (diff)
  • 21:59, August 13, 2008 I delete the 2 fake questions from Greenlanop (diff)
  • 22:43, August 13, 2008 Crystal AB asks a fake question (diff)
  • 22:52, August 13, 2008 Crystal AB branches out onto the Entertainment refdesk with what looks like another fake question in the same style as the others (diff)
  • 02:19, August 14, 2008 Yorkking answers Rick well's fake question (diff)

The suspicious timing: Pdonbuff creates an account and asks a question: plausible. Lsonfey happens by, notices the question, has the answer, creates an account (2 minutes after the question was asked) and then answers after 10 minutes, and disappears? Not likely. Yorkking did an even more amazing thing when he saw Rick well's question: he traveled back in time 3 hours to create an account so he could answer the next day.

The products:

  • "Decompiler Flash"/"Decompile Flash"/"Flash Decompiler Gold": The subject of the Pdonbuff/Lsonfey exchange, Greenlanop's second fake question, and Crystal AB's blatant advertisement.
  • Memory Improve Professional: The subject of Crystal AB's fake question.
  • Digital Audio Editor: The subject the Rick well/Yorkking exchange.
  • Power Audio Editor: The subject of Greenlanop's first fake question.
  • Digital Music Record Edit Burn Studio: The subject of Crystal AB's blatant advertisement.

The connections between the products: 

 decompileflash.com has address 209.200.229.222
 nctsoft.net (where you can buy Power Audio Editor) has address 209.200.229.222
 memoryimproveprofessional.com has address 209.200.229.115

 decompileflash.com is registered to "Jun, Tang"
 audioeditor.us (where you can get "Digital Music Record Edit Burn Studio" and "Digital Audio Editor") registration has Billing Contact "Tang Jun"

Not only are they stupid spammers, these products have awful names. "Digital Music Record Edit Burn Studio"? Call him "Stu" for short.

Comments

Added a couple more from WT:RD#WP:RD/C#Magic Memory Optimizer and an earlier encounter. Note that Cooner&0908 and Wishess2m have been confirmed as socks of each other by checkuser, but no other accounts were found back then (so they may have been the first). It might be time to submit another IP check. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 23:02, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

...as I just did. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 23:13, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Fixed the spelling of Selininaemily... --tcsetattr (talk / contribs) 23:19, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions

User:Sam Korn responded to the request for checkuser by blocking all these accounts and then some. Case closed, I think --tcsetattr (talk / contribs) 06:36, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

XxJoshuaxX (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Xxlaura88xx (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

Bidgee (talk) 12:47, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Not strong evidence however both names have XxNAMExx. XxJoshuaxX use to edit signers articles which Xxlaura88xx has done which I've found suspected. Bidgee (talk) 12:47, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

I don't see any evidence of abusive sockpuppetry here. Kevin (talk) 01:01, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions
Unrelated. A lot of people have the "Xx ... xX" as their username. OhanaUnited
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Soccermeko (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

4.129.70.115 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

Kww (talk) 00:56, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Look at his edits to Knowledge (XXG):Suspected sock puppets/Soccermeko(10th). Who besides a sock comes in screaming that he isn't one? And again, compulsively editing Nicole Wray related articles. I think we need a nice long block against 4.128.0.0/16 and 4.129.0.0/16.

Conclusions

This clearly supports 4.129.70.115  Likely being a sock puppet of Soccermeko. However, I'm unwilling to apply a range block at this time: the history of Knowledge (XXG):Suspected sock puppets/Soccermeko(10th) does not seem to show any highly disruptive edits from this range, bar from 4.129.70.115.

Unless I'm missing evidence of Soccermeko using IP addresses other than 4.129.70.115, a range block would be pre-emptive and preventative (see, WP:BLOCK#Purpose and goal). If he begins to use such a large number of IP addresses that we're struggling to keep up with them, I'm willing to look into employing range blocks to enforce the original block on Soccermeko.

Anthøny 20:05, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Electricsoupie (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Theanimalstyle86 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Hebozhong (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Nsk92 (talk) 02:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

All three are new SPA accounts active only in the last two days and whose only contributions were to harass the article David Eppstein. Apparently, this is motivated by some personal grudge agains David Eppstein based on some action of him as a Knowledge (XXG) admin. This motivation is indicated by this edit:. Now User:Hebozhong has nominated the article David Eppstein for an AfD with the following "rationale":"This article is irrelevant and does not deserve an encyclopedia entry", see Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/David Eppstein. The contributions of the 3 SPAs are limited exclusively to this topic and all occurred withing the last two days. Now this harassment has extended to a frivolous and disruptive AfD listing. Clear sockpuppetry is at play here and it'd be good to find out if there is anyone else behind this. Nsk92 (talk) 02:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

The evidence here is rather clear; if any editors require clarification and/or further explanation, please request on my talk page.

It is  Likely that Theanimalstyle86 and Hebozhong are sock puppets of Electricsoupie. I have blocked all three indefinitely, and tagged the first two as puppets of Electricsoupie (who in turn is tagged as the master).

Anthøny 19:55, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

TheSeraph'sAdvocate (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Ani4ani (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
BeltKingIn (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
A variety of IPs from NYC 66.108.xx.xx

Report submission by

Shell 18:14, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

All three accounts appear to be SPA's who showed up to edit Terren Peizer after it finally came out of protection due to severe BLP issues. There has been a complaint to OTRS over the continued problematic edits (20080808100267322008080810026732) - these three accounts continue to revert to similar versions or add the exact same material (with even the referencing done exactly the same) repeatedly. One account will make two or three of these problematic edits and then stop; a little bit later another one will appear and make the same edits as if this was an attempt to avoid scrutiny or sanction. Sometimes they will revert a section to an earlier version and sometimes they will simply revert or re-add a paragraph - since this all looks rather hokey to me, but I wasn't certain there's enough to definitively call them socks, I was hoping for some other opinions (or suggestions). Thanks. Shell 18:14, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments
Conclusions

It seems  Likely that TheSeraph'sAdvocate = Ani4ani. Both of those accounts have been blocked indefinitely, and tagged (Ani4ani as the sock master, as that account was registered first, and TheSeraph'sAdvocate as a sock puppet).

Due to insufficient evidence, I find it  Inconclusive that BeltKingIn is linked to these sock puppets. However, further to the other two being blocked, this account may become the "main account" if it is indeed a 'puppet. Should this be the case, I'd recommend re-opening a fresh SSP case, or contacting me directly.

Regards, Anthøny 19:39, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
Einzelkämpfer (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
Fontanalis (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

Morbidthoughts (talk) 02:39, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

I suspect that Fontanalis is a sockpuppet of Einzelkämpfer or a meatpuppet acting in concert with Einzelkämpfer. Einzelkämpfer created the article, Tímea Vágvölgyi, which is going through an AFD. Fontanalis's only contributions consist of participating in the AFD and a creation of an article on nude wrestling (that was speedied) which Einzelkämpfer wikilinked from the Timea article. Both accounts have similar writing styles in the AFD and have the unique interest in nude wrestling. Today, a Fontanalis account uploaded a Timea image to the Commons which Einzelkämpfer posted nine minutes later on wikipedia. I do not believe this is a a coincidence.

Comments

From the contribs of Einzelkämpfer and the single contribution of Fontanalis It looks like there is a good chance that they are socks but I think CheckUser would be a wise decision here. ·Add§hore· /Cont 07:26, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

It is possible that Einzelkämpfer was hanging around at RC patrol and added the image after it's uploaded. OhanaUnited 17:34, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions
The upload alone may be coincidence, but the rest of this makes it way above the coincidence level. Blocking sock indef, warning the master. — Rlevse • Talk • 12:52, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Fredfickle (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Hthrkrns (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
24.164.172.13 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

Schuym1 (talk) 02:09, 16 August 2008 (UTC)


Evidence

Fredfickle, Hthrkrns, and 24.164.172.13 keep on vandalizing Bill Evans and Brad Mehldau and they are obviously sockpuppets because they do the same exact thing each time.

Comments
 Confirmed by checkuser, all of the above - Alison 06:21, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
ElboMisery1993 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

Caldorwards4 (talk) 21:04, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence
  • Obsession with country music discography pages, most notably Billy Ray Cyrus
  • Spins off discography pages without discussion
  • Will make several minor changes in a row without marking edits as minor
  • Constantly changes widths in album and single tables


Comments


Conclusions
  • It's pretty circumstantial. Some similiar diffs would be great. Unfortunately I can't take any action because of the lack of evidence. Scarian 21:02, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Baseball Card Guy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Bbcardguy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Opccollector (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Die Profis - Die nächste Generation (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Your Radio Enemy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Libro0 (talk) 04:28, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

The puppetmasters MOs include: Themed names- all of the names Baseball Card Guy, Bbcardguy, Opccollector, Die Profis - Die nächste Generation, Your Radio Enemy, are all theme names attempting to give the impression of knowledge or interest in the subject matter. I believe this is done to throw people off. For example Your Radio Enemy edits radio related articles but only in a manner not related to content. His edits are cosmetic and can be achieved by anyone with or without radio knowledge. For that matter he could make the same cosmetic edits to any kind of article. Die Profis gives the impression he is a German user. I was not surprised to see that his edits at the baseball card pages were to include metric units. Die Profis claims to have stumbled onto the pages however those were his first three edits. 1, 2, 3.

Red links- at the opening of the previous case all the suspected socks had the traditional red link with little to no use of the talk pages.

ANI and deletions- These links show that he is quick to make complaints and does so frequently. He also places numerous pages and images up for deletion.

Having a great deal of socks has certainly made it difficult for him to keep track of them all. Baseball Card Guy cites 3 diffs claiming to be harassment against him, however the first diff is about Die Profis not Baseball Card Guy.

This edit shows Baseball Card Guy changing inches from fractions to decimals. An edit shared by Die Profis above. All of them keep the decimals despite the statement made here.

Your Radio Enemy got into a little edit spat over at New York IRT and related pages with another user. Among the reverts in the conflict was Baseball Card Guy Furthermore, this discussion shows the true nature of Your Radio Enemy. It did not taken him very long to irritate that user.

I had also mentioned the writing style and logic. They are prone to empty and unfounded statements concerning my demeanor and intentions. They do not confront valid arguments in the discussion forums. Their writing resembles speech which itself resembles childish drivel. He does not appear to have achieved the writing skills necessary to pass 8th or 9th grade. It is surprising to me that this is not clearly evident upon investigation of his vast literary forays into the wikipedic continuum. Then again, as I mentioned above, his edits are primarily uploads and deletions of images, unwarranted reverts, complaints to ANI, monitoring me, foot apparel manufacturing... Some examples-

This edit plants Die Profis right in the same basket as Plate King and Bolly Nickers. Plate King has also ventured on to the Baseball card pages and the Vehicle registration plate pages. The plate pages are also littered with the same redlink/themed socks such as Plate King, Mr. License Plate, Ricksplates, etc. Furthermore the plate pages are designed as a data table/image gallery. This is the same design that Baseball Card Guy has employed at the Baseball Card Pages. Compare 1950s Topps with Vehicle registration plates of Washington, D.C..

Comments

Please refer to the following cases Knowledge (XXG):Suspected sock puppets/Baseball Card Guy, Knowledge (XXG):Suspected sock puppets/I Hate CAPTCHAS, Knowledge (XXG):Suspected sock puppets/Bolly Nickers. Baseball Card Guy pretty much convicted himself in the I Hate CAPTCHAS case. He accused me of being banned user Tecmobowl. However I found it hard to believe that as he had began editing in May of 2008 that he would have knowledge of Tecmobowl who was banned in July 2007.

  • More lies and insane paranoia from Libro0. The New York IRT edit ] was done for your benefit. It was a trap to see if you would use it in your crazy sockpuppet attacks. It worked. Do you want me to act like an insane person and find users that made similar edits to you and call them sockpuppets? Are some of the suspects actually you trying to force me off because you don't like what I am doing to your baseball card articles? You attack attack attack and try not to be civil. If someone makes edits you don't like and someone else backs them up they must be a sockpuppet. I am sure we can find the same for you if we were crazy enough to obsess about it. You like to be the center of attention don't you. As for Tecmobowl, I looked up the history of the articles and found another problem user like you. There are several similarities, especially in the pigheaddeness. Should we look at every article that has a data table/image gallery and add the user who did that to Libro0's delusional sockpuppet list? He is abusing the system with these crazy lies and conspiracy theories. Baseball Card Guy (talk) 13:41, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Christ on a bike I am tired of this nonsense from Libro0! You tar anyone you have issues with as a sockpuppet and wikistalker. You abuse the system. You outright lie. You make connections which aren't there. I was having fun here until I crossed paths with you and your allegations and lies.
I tried to intervene between you and Baseball Card Guy you call me a sockpuppet. Just because I made a few edits to some baseball card articles and disagree with you makes me a sockpuppet? Just because I asked for some article to get deleted I am a sockpuppet? I take it that RogueNinja should be added to Libro0's sockuppetry false allegations list because he voted delete as I did. How many of the notional sockpuppets here voted for deletion of that article? None. Wow that is strong evidence of a sockpuppet ring. All hail Libro0 for bringing it to light.
The small row over New York IRT was resolved. You are grasping at straws. The whole naming convention argument just shows how delusional you are in your further grasping of straws. I would hardly call properly categorizing articles "cosmetic" edits. I could argue that he is making mainly "cosmetic" edits, too.
In this farce, Libro0 continues with his tiresome passive aggressive attacks. This one is really childish - He does not appear to have achieved the writing skills necessary to pass 8th or 9th grade.
Libro0 fails to listen to the advice of others and continues with these time wasting exercises. To me, Libro0 is the problem and has engaged in troll like behavior. He needs to be properly sanctioned for it. Your Radio Enemy (talk) 14:48, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

You did declare that you set a trap. I did not buy it however. You clearly got your socks switched and had no way out of that than to say it was a trap. Seriously, who goes around saying they set traps for people. You already have admitted to monitoring me as well. You cannot seem to keep yourself out of trouble. All you have done is implicate yourself further. It isn't just that you guys support each other. You guys behave the same. All the socks dodge the discussion issues. Compared to everyone I have dealt with here, you stand alone in this negative behavior. Everyone else, wether I agree or disagree with them, is able to entertain a rational discussion. User:Fram and quite a few others have come by and edited at the baseball card pages and made good faith edits as well as engaging in straight forward discussion. Aside from the futile discussion at Talk:1960s Topps, none of you appear at any talk pages. However Baseball Card Guy is mercilessly resistant to allowing me to make corrections and additions. As you can see here: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47,48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55,56, 57. There is no edit war. A war requires two combatants. I have yielded to this onslaught. You(Radio) are not neutral otherwise you would call for his(BCGuy) block. Libro0 (talk) 17:33, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

  • You fell for the trap. Heed the words of Admiral Ackbar! I have set more for you to use as your evidence. You are a bad person who is wanting their way all the time. You keep making insane lies about things and you need to stop. You are probably doing some of the sockpuppetry because it does something for your God dammed crazed mind. Stop dragging people into your crazy fantasy world of loonies. You fall for traps because they are easy. You lack the sense of Admiral Ackbar. Baseball Card Guy (talk) 17:54, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Please just ban Libro0 and Baseball Card Guy and put an end to this madness. I spend most of my time here looking after Libro0 to see if he is engaging in more slander, like you see on this page. Baseball Card Guy seems to egg him on. There is not going to be any peace until these two stop and the only way for that to happen seems to be for the two of them to get banned. I did not sign up for this. All I did was make a few edits to some baseball card articles that Libro0 didn't approve of and disagreed with him. There needs to be action and that action needs to be swift and against both Libro0 and Baseball Card Guy. Your Radio Enemy (talk) 18:14, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions
  • Not sure about Opccollector or You Radio Enemy, so I've left those alone. Baseball Guy uploaded pics of cars or something, as did the German username'd guy. And the Bcardguy was an obvious one. Socks I've mentioned I've done indef. BCG blocked 24 hours. Scarian 20:56, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Soccermeko (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

4.154.5.119 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
4.129.70.150 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

Kww (talk) 02:50, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Identical edit pattern. Leaps up, and begins frantically editing Nicole Wray articles. IP ranges in this range have been blocked before, such as 4.154.6.163. The fact that this is the 10th sockpuppeting case says it all.

Added 4.129.70.150 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) today. Restored all of 4.154.6.163's edits, same IP range.

Comments


Conclusions
Same range, same articles, same edits. 4.129.70.150 blocked for 31 hours (dynamic IP); 4.154.5.119 not used by that person anymore, therefore not blocked. --Oxymoron 21:08, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Izmir lee (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

81.214.119.236 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

Pureditor 08:38, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


Evidence

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Turkey&curid=79992&diff=231637584&oldid=231636661 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk%3ATurkey&diff=222717332&oldid=222704380

As well as arguing the same points, I tested the location of the ip address. It is located in Izmir, Tureky and is clearly a sock puppet of the previously banned user User:Izmir lee.

Comments


Conclusions
Looks like the IP is very familiar with the term "consensus" on his first edit. And both are using near-identical rationale to push POV. IP blocked by Hiberniantears for 2 weeks. OhanaUnited 19:42, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
Ananny (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
CanadianArtworks (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

freshacconcispeaktome 17:17, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

In an attempt to get around essentially being banned, User:Ananny created a page which was a duplicate of List of Canadian painters with her own name and an image added. The article was speedy deleted as pure vandalism.

Comments


Conclusions
Sockmaster exhausted the community's patience. Both are blocked indef. OhanaUnited 19:33, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

NoseNuggets (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

NozeNuggets (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

– PeeJay 06:00, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

These two users have very similar names and similar edit patterns. It is possible that the suspected sockpuppet is merely a copycat editor, but I think it's worth investigating.

Comments

I signed into Wikiquote with "NozeNuggets" while the Knowledge (XXG) entry has me as "NoseNuggets." Must be a problem with the unified sign-in. NoseNuggets (talk) 3:24 AM US EDT Aug 13 2008.

Conclusions

Not a violation. Gb 07:25, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

ravenfan4ever (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Raheemistheone (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

H2H (talk) 07:41, 12 August 2008 (UTC)


Evidence

The only edits of the Raheemistheone were the Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/This Is My Time Tour. The account was created at 17:44 and it edited at 17:57, barely 13 minutes. It also doesn't sign its posts, similar to ravenfan4ever.

Comments


Conclusions

Blocked those 2, plus Rscp123. Obvious socks, or at least meatpuppets. Soxπed93 04:35, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Pdfreeman (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Bpaftw (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Pbstrypsin (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Added by Kevin (talk)

Cmfoundation (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Ambcfoundation (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Pstremors (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

Nrswanson (talk) 23:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC)


Evidence

There has been suspicous behavior by the three above users at Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Brandon Law. It has been noted that all three accounts tag team each other in the discussion and are new accounts with user pages suspicously identical to other long established wikipedia users. Bpaftw appears to have only made three edits in the Knowledge (XXG) namespace, and five total. The current version of his very impressive user page appears to be a clone of that of another, well-established user. The same is also true of two other advocates of keeping the article who have made few other edits outside of it. Pbstrypsin's user page looks identical to Art LaPella's page. And Pdfreeman, who apparently spends a lot of time editing the Royal Military College of Canada article according to her user page (but not her edit history), has a user page similar to a recent version of a user called Victoriaedwards who does put a lot of work into that. Also, Pbstrypsin created a talk page with several messages from other users on it, but apparently there's only one single edit to this talk page: his own. The same thing happens with Bpaftw, who created a talk page containing already a message purportedly from 2005. I suspect that one person has created all three accounts and copy pasted other user pages to try and make them seem like legitimate different editors with the intent of trying to influence the AFD discussion in an unethical way.Nrswanson (talk) 23:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Additional evidence The article American Brain Cancer Foundation was created by User:Cmfoundation and subsequently speedily deleted on August 7. It was re-created and again speedily deleted on August 8 (I cannot see who re-created the article that time). It was again re-created on August 9 by User:Bpaftw. --Crusio (talk) 10:35, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Addition I see that Toddst1 has blocked almost all puppets in this case, but a few minutes ago another possible one popped up: User:Moraltimer, with two edits, one to Brandon Law and one to American Brain Cancer Foundation‎, where he removed a prod tag, but not the prod2 tag. I am not sure whether it is appropriate to undo this edit. --Crusio (talk) 16:54, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

I suspect all these are socks of the original author - User:Cmfoundation. User:User:Pstremors was created by User:Ambcfoundation. Taking this to WP:RFCU Kevin (talk) 10:05, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

Obvious sockpuppets. Given the coordinated attempts at manipulation of 2 AfD listings, blocked indefinitely. Toddst1 (talk) 16:43, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Elspeth Monro (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Mike A Mitchel jr (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
86.25.54.80 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
86.29.241.185 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
86.25.50.100 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
86.29.249.26 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Micky the bold snr (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
86.25.54.9 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
86.29.251.59 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Nobody of Consequence (talk) 00:21, 5 August 2008 (UTC)


Evidence

Monro always uses the same kinds of edit summaries with cryptic abbreviations/acronyms, and always tags his own socks as such using IP addresses. , , , , , ,

Comments
  • The Elspeth Monro vandal has a long history of creating socks and using IPs, engaging in various kinds of shenanigans, then tagging his own sock puppets talk pages with sock templates. He even tags the pages of other blocked puppetmasters as Elspeth Monro socks, probably as a way to build up a vanity page of socks to show off online. Mostly he's just annoying however he's also been creating maps and uploading them with his sock accounts. I suspect these uploaded maps and images are in many cases copyvios and even if not they are most likely totally bogus and deliberately incorrect. Who knows how long this vandal has been introducing bogus information by means of uploading images. I've got one map image speedied, but when I tagged this one the other day, he began vandalizing its page with multiple db templates with meaningless nonsense for the reason. THIS IS HIS M.O. I have reported this person multiple times to ANI, but all anyone ever says is "what do you want us to do?" We need to put a stop to this person somehow, before they totally corrupt Knowledge (XXG) with images containing bogus information. This whole thing is immensely frustrating because nobody will listen to me and I don't have the tools to checkuser and block his socks myself. NOTE: The socks listed above are a miniscule fraction of the actual socks and IPs (almost all in the same range) this person has used and no doubt is using as we speak.Nobody of Consequence (talk) 00:21, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
    • I ran some check and determined the following:
      • Elspeth Monro's normal edit time: 5:11:26
      • Mike A Mitchel jr's normal edit time: 11:8:41
      • Remaining accounts (IPs) normal edit time: 17:13 to 19:18
    •  Likely The IPs can be concluded to be socks.  Unlikely on the 2 registered accounts (or so it seems). OhanaUnited 00:38, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Maybe the named accounts are actually meatpuppets then? That may make a bit more sense... a couple of clowns playing games with each other instead of just one derango. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 02:44, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
To be honest with you, your evidences are on the weak side. A lot of people use shorthands (me included) and people who don't know will think they're cryptic. Not in this project though, in Wikispecies, I use a lot of shorthand like IW, VN, ref, img, syn, etc. Good luck guessing them, especially the first two ;) OhanaUnited 07:32, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
After reviewing the two registered accounts, I see little evidence to support their socketpuppets. There's also very little information about the two accounts to even look at, and apparently the checkuser cleared them. Now, I didn't see any, but did Mike A Mitchel sign his edits w/ Elspeth Monro like the IPs. If so, then we have more and better evidence to look at. --DJS24 19:53, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Some comments: not sure if there was any checkuser. The check appears to be based on editing times, and other sockpuppets show no consistent editing time, for example The golden easter party man (talk · contribs). Of the 16 pages edited by Mike A Mitchel jr, 14 have previously been edited by IPs in the 86.25.48.0/21 and 86.29.240.0/20 ranges; I don't think this can be a coincidence as there is no other connection between the pages. Also the use of "vandalisum removed": used by Mike A Mitchel jr in the edit summary on User talk:86.29.247.207. A search for this phrase on Knowledge (XXG) finds two results: one is an edit by 86.25.54.9 on User talk:86.25.54.205 the other is by 86.29.251.59 on User talk:86.29.240.36. It has also been used in edit summaries; unfortunately they cannot be searched, although I have found this edit by Micky the bold snr (talk · contribs) on User:Homer slips.‎, the user page of a blocked sockpuppet of Elspeth Monro. --Snigbrook 02:56, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
No, no checkuser was performed related to this case, as far as I know. Apologies for the confusing symbols above. Ohana was trying to adapt the checkuser templates here. See WT:SSP. His  Likely didn't mean that anyone performed a check. Enigma 03:29, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions
  • Per Ohana. Can't see anything. Although, both the Mickey's have related usernames and their deleted contribs match up but I can't match them up with Elspeth. Scarian 21:28, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Nangparbat (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

81.151.100.11 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
81.151.100.167 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
86.158.236.217 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
86.156.210.105 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
86.158.233.103 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
86.158.232.147 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
86.158.178.203 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
86.162.69.108 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
86.158.239.106 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
86.158.177.226 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
86.162.69.230 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
86.154.149.153 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
86.158.178.254 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
86.158.233.163 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
86.158.179.143 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
86.158.236.136 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
86.162.70.179 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
86.158.235.17 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
86.156.209.150 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
86.153.129.192 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

] (talk) 17:04, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Nangparbat is currently vandalising many Pakistani based articles, especially those in connection to Kashmir, or Indo-Pakistani wars. He always uses the same kinds of edit summaries such as "Indian bias" to delete sourced information and continues to attack the same pages despite getting his IPs blocked and then his own account blocked, he is now using another IP to circumvent his block.

123456789

It is easily more apparent, if you actually look at the contributions of each of his/her socks to see that they are the same person.

Comments

Before creating his account, Nangparbat was using anon IPs to disrupt articles regarding Pakistani and Indian history, after many pages were protected due to his vandalism, he created an account to make himself appear more legitimate, though no-one was duped by this. Not only is he disruptive and uncompromising, he is also very rude and uncivil, he posts ad hominem attacks on other user pages (including mine), as well as in his edit summaries, and accuses other editors to be part of an Indian conspiracy to favour India in Pakistani related articles.

The main reason I posted this complaint, was that I was recommended by Tanthalas39, as he handled the protection of articles and he felt that protecting the articles in question was no longer enough to stop these disruptive edits. ] (talk) 17:04, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Without having as much research as Giani g has done, I endorse this case. Tan ǀ 39 17:23, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Also, I have warned the user by using a "{{MultipleIP}}" tag. I did not use ARV because there is already a case here. --frogger3140 (talk) 15:01, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure that the same user was also behind the edits made through IP 81.151.100.11.  S3000  ☎ 18:22, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

As of now, I've adding new IPs of his on a daily basis (including one just now), this is a joke, why hasn't any action been taken to stop him yet? ] (talk) 18:51, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

After reviewing all the IPs and the registered account, it seems very convincing that they are all socks of Nangparbat. The edit summaries and the articles they edit on are all the same. Also from the fact, that the IPs share similar numbers. --DJS24 20:09, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm wondering if this guy is intentionally using different IPs to deceive as we may think, because certain Internet Service Providers use Dynamic IPs, which means the IP address changes everytime the connection is reset. Hence there's no way the user can keep his IP address from changing. The user in question does not hide the fact that he's behind all those edits through different IPs because his ISP uses Dymanic IP (see user talk 86.154.149.153). Moreover, I can't find any rule in Knowledge (XXG) that prevents registered users from editing without logging in. Hence, is classifying this as a sockpuppet case justified?  S3000  ☎ 08:42, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure there is a rule regarding using anon IPs when a user in question actually has an account, as it can give an air of support to someone who would otherwise be appear to be editing by himself. In any case, this still doesn't resolve the issue regarding his disruptive edits. ] (talk) 13:15, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

I had origionaly requested several pages be protected that were, but as soon as they were protected he moved onto other articles with the same disruptive edits. Like Tanthalas39 stated protecting every single page isnt going to solve it, but it is becoming very tiring to constantly revert these edits every single day. I would think something for having ip banned for 24-48 hours and then returning before that deadline and making the same edits under a different ip would count for some sort of action. Knowledgeum :  Talk  17:55, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

In an attempt to move things along I have requested a check user Knowledge (XXG):Requests for checkuser/Case/Nangparbat. It should also be noted that on July 25 I filed a Knowledge (XXG):Wikiquette alerts but as the pages he edited were protected and he was an anon user still so it just expired with no action taken. I am hoping something can be done about this now, either protect the pages he edits or block the range. Knowledgeum :  Talk  17:57, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

I have requested a range block on WP:ANI as suggested by another admin after he chaged ip's and continued his edits after being blocked again. Knowledgeum :  Talk  18:33, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

The range block has been approved, however it appears the range was not large enough as the user has continued under 86.156.209.150 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log), and 86.153.129.192 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) the range may need to be expanded. Knowledgeum :  Talk  19:44, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Blocking a large range of IPs only denies innocent users from freely using Knowledge (XXG). Day by day the range involved seems to be getting bigger. Protecting the articles is also useless as the user in question seems to be moving on to new articles within the same scope (India-Pakistan overlapping subjects e.g. Kashmir related). It would be impossible protecting all articles within that scope. What other options are there?  S3000  ☎ 07:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions
  • IP addresses/IP ranges blocked for two weeks:
  • 86.158.128.0/17
  • 81.151.100.0/24
  • 86.162.68.0/22
  • 86.156.210.105
  • 86.154.149.153 (Blocked one week by User:Toddst1)
  • Please contact me with questions or concerns. Users of these IP ranges may contact unblock-en-l AT lists DOT wikimedia DOT org to request an account. Hersfold 18:58, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
Iantresman (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
Raevaen (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

ScienceApologist (talk) 17:23, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Few contributions, but they establish a disturbing trend:

  1. Questioning Raul654 about perceived slights. These are directly related to accusations that Ian Tresman leveled against Raul.
  2. Two areas he was interested in included checkuser and the community sanction noticeboard. Ian Tresman was banned by the latter and found to be sockpuppeteering by Raul654 by the former.
  3. This diff looks a lot like Ian Tresman's typical gaming. Referring to an unvetted Astrophysics Data System search was a COMMON practice for Ian. Interestingly, Ian is also the web-designer of Corliss's website, and so probably has a concerted interest in the subject of me removing links to this website.

Anyway, I've interacted with Ian a LOT and this looks very suspicious. I'd appreciate a rebuttal if Raevaen can offer one.

Comments

There is nothing to rebut. Your point (1) has nothing to do with slights, (2) seems a common subject of discussion (3) is a joke right, since when is a question "gaming"? I think you are over-reacting, and failing to assume good faith. --Raevaen (talk) 00:30, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

  • It looks likely that this account is a previous user who has a beef with Raul654 and ScienceApologist. It's unusual, to say the least, for a new account to find its way to ArbCom election statements as its first edit, and then to pop up 7 months later on a user talk page. I'm inclined to block, but maybe some other administrator has some input. --Akhilleus (talk) 03:02, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Roboscreech (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Drunkboxer (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Jeanshortscollector (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Cooldood246 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
75.143.219.73 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
75.72.31.221 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

Delicious carbuncle (talk) 18:52, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Roboscreech (talk · contribs) added their own inappropriate images to several food-related articles . Almost immediately after I removed the image from Hero sandwich, Drunkboxer (talk · contribs) reverted my edit. Both users have uploaded similar images of pizza with hamburgers on top . This may be a case of meatpuppetry (no pun intended) rather than sockpuppetry, but the behaviour by both accounts is similarly disruptive.

All listed accounts were involved in an edit war on Truel and Mexican standoff involving the repeated addition of an image (the same image for both articles).

I'm not his sockpuppet or even a meatpuppet by the strictest definition. We are friends but I've had this account for a while and it wasn't created to support his edits. Furthermore disagreeing with one user about an image isn't disruptive. I think user Delicious carbuncle hates one particular image and is getting very bent out of shape over it as he has run out of arguments to counter my (very reasonable) points listed on the talk page. It's just a picture of a sandwich buddy, calm down. Drunkboxer (talk) 19:09, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
This is just a case of someone being angry because their argument doesn't hold up. Not only did the Hero page not have an image, but the image provided was very accurate. Just because Delicious carbuncle doesn't like bacon on his hero, doesn't mean that it isn't a very common topping (the very definition of a hero is an italian themed sandwich with two different meats). But in any case, this should be discussed on the Hero page, not here. The user is clearly disappointed that their senseless edit was countered with a logical argument and has resorted to intimidation. Merely the fact that Drunkboxer and I are friends, and occasionally look at each others contributions, does in no way mean we are puppets in any exaggeration of the term. Roboscreech (talk) 6 August 2008 (UTC)
I think the edit wars on Truel and Mexican standoff suggest that there's more involved here than my supposed dislike of bacon. Even though the edits are old, I've added a couple of accounts involved in that debacle (including the originator of the image so fiercely defended, Jeanshortscollector (talk · contribs)). Hope this helps. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 20:32, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Curses! He's on to us Roboscreech, my master! Our plot to upload relevant images of food and illustrations of clichés from cowboy movies has come unraveled! It is my recommendation as your Subcommander that you disengage puppet units Cooldood246 and Jeanshortscollector, their cover has been blown. Damn your eyes, user Delicious carbuncle, you win this round, but we shall live to upload our sinister sandwich images another day!!! Drunkboxer (talk) 21:23, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Comments
Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Jakezing (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

84.134.57.121 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
84.134.95.229 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
84.134.86.183 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
84.134.125.114 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
84.134.79.149 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
84.134.92.179 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
84.134.56.88 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
84.134.56.88 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
84.134.105.160 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
84.134.112.193 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
84.134.74.21 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
84.134.126.213 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
84.134.65.233 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
84.134.68.243 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
84.134.65.59 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
84.134.70.238 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
84.134.95.228 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
84.134.87.148 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
84.134.96.185 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
84.134.88.242 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
84.134.102.27 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

Tocino (talk) 20:03, 7 August 2008 (UTC)


Evidence

This is more than just sockpuppetry it is also a case of wikistalking. This anon has been following me around leaving comments on my talkpage such as this: , blanking my talk page: , reverting my edits on non-Kosovo related topics: . The user doesn't have a very good grasp on the English language as evidenced by the comments he leaves on my talkpage (I've left some of them up so that others can see what I'm dealing with). The reason why I believe User:Jakezing is behind all of this is because he exhibits very similar behavior. First of all the anon and Jakezing are pro-Kosovo Albanian. They both speak poor English, here is an example from Jakezing: . Like the anon, Jakezing has followed me around on to non-Kosovo related subjects, for example I added a new message on the 2008 article which we agreed on the talkpage (here is my edit: ) , only for Jakezing to come out of nowhere and re-add the old message without explanation: . Also somehow he found this comment by me on an obscure talkpage and he responded negatively: . Jakezing also has a bit of a temper, as evidenced by this edit sequence on someone else's talkpage: But what finally put it over the top was just a hour or so ago I posted my thoughts on the Kosovo-related subject and Jakezing responded within in minutes by berating me like he has done in the past. Well sure enough the anon made his return just minutes after Jakezing posted and of course he said that I should be banned. Later Jakezing defended the same anon. Here is the entire edit sequence: . Now I am pretty sure it is Jakezing who's doing this. If it's not him then I have other names that I suspect.

Comments

Your arguments are very weak. Do you have any more evidence that may have come to light?  Asenine  18:38, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Given that all the suspected IP range falls under 84.134.X.X, you should request for checkuser. OhanaUnited 22:01, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
How do I do that? --Tocino 21:17, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

122.106.15.15 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

116.0.23.211 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
122.106.34.195 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

Severo 12:57, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Following on from a few months ago, 122.106.15.15 (talk) has been disruptively editing Martin Vinnicombe. He has been blocked for one week following repeatedly making this edit, and has since made it using alternate IPs (, and ). As 122.106.15.15 (talk) has been blanking the talk page also, but not as a sockpuppet.

Comments

Only edits on Martin Vinnicombe. Banned for one week on puppetmaster IP address due to disruptive editing.

Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Barryispuzzled (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Puzzledbarry (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
ProsperoX (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Sycorax13 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Bodleyman (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Felsommerfeld (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Tokomak1689 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Looneytune007 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
DigbyDaDog (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Anneharkey (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Picksauce (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
CoolDream (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

Xover (talk) 16:18, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

User:Barryispuzzled is an adherent of the Baconian theory of Shakespeare Authorship and wrote most of the former article (he has also self-published a book on the subject). A while back he tried to nominate the article for GA using the User:Bodleyman account here, and then proceeded to use the User:Felsommerfeld and Bodleyman account to debate with himself and other editors in what I can only assume was an attempt to create disruption and discredit the opposing points of view (for instance, the account Felsommerfeld was used to take an extremist view opposed to Barryispuzzled's own goals). The GAN archive here gives a fairly good overview of what happened (there are other edits strewn over multiple pages, but those are mostly incidental). Several editors were caught up in the incident (myself included) and tried to work with the apparently separate accounts to reach consensus, with little luck.

The whole thing culminated with this (Barryispuzzled admitting to running Bodleyman, Felsommerfeld, and Tokomak1689 as Sockpuppets). At which point I filed an incident at WP:ANI here (where User:Edgar181 added the apparent sockpuppets: Looneytune007, DigbyDaDog, Anneharky, Picksauce). This was followed by this (invective, personal assault), and escalating to this and this (Barryispuzzled threatening physical violence against myself and another editor). The the threats combined with the sockpuppetry and other actions got him indef-blocked (by User:Nick) and as best I can tell (I may be wrong) the Barryispuzzled account is still blocked.

Today User:Puzzledbarry shows up, with an identical user page to what Barryispuzzled used to have (both pages identify the user as a specific named person), and makes this edit (Puzzledbarry admitting to being a sockpuppet of Barryispuzzled). The edit repeats outright an accusation previously only slightly veiled made by User:ProsperoX in this edit (see also: related edit). The ProsperoX account and User:Sycorax13 were created within 24 hours of eachother, both look like the previous sockpuppets of Barryispuzzled (same MO for the User page and User Talk page), same general pattern of comments on the relevant article talk pages.

Puzzeldbarry admits to being a sockpuppet of Barryispuzzled (doesn't even try to hide it). I'm pretty much convinced ProsperoX is too, but I only suspect Sycorax13 is (there's no clear evidence indicating it, a checkuser would probably be needed to determine for sure).

Comments
  • I have blocked User:Puzzledbarry as an obvious sock of indefintely banned User:Barryispuzzled. Several of the others have already been blocked as well. Several remain to be checked though. -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:57, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • I've added User:CoolDream, who is pretty obviously a Barryispuzzled sock: see here.
  • I firmly believe all the accounts should be indef-blocked because they are all clearly the same account. Deny any requests for unblock.--Recoverer (talk) 19:44, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
  • I have a question. If two users have two identical IP addresses how does that prove that they are the same person? It's possible that they could be related or frequent the same institution. Also, I can't believe how worked up you all get by sock puppets! This McCarthy-like indignation seems massively out of proportion to the act. I think that Knowledge (XXG) seems to be a magnet for people with empty lives who need to create a BAD GUY to release their frustration on. To me Barry is an extremely talented GOOD GUY that some of you lesser talents are trying to demonize. I am happy to be his friend and give him my support here. Lifetime ban? LOL! "Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities." (Albert Einstein) GemmaVI (talk) 10:17, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions
  • Most of the socks already blocked. Barry can go to as many Internet cafes as he wants, he's just not bright enough to evade our very smart community. Good job guys. Scarian 22:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Generalmesse (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

ITALONY (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Bendiksen63 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Teresita100403 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
200.253.161.2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

--noclador (talk) 08:08, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence
Comments


Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Jsaxton86 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

HeartTransplant (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

--Omarcheeseboro (talk) 13:41, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

This concerns a disturbing vandalism attempt on the page List of fatal bear attacks in North America by decade.

I noticed this strange entry:

Nick Ruberto, 22, male
September 5, 2007
Black
Whilst drinking with his friends in Ely, Minnesota, the unfortunate Mr. Ruberto wandered into the woods to urinate. He never returned. Upon waking up the following morning, his friends found his mauled remains 60 yards (55 m) away from the cabin. The bear was later captured and killed by the Minnesota DNR.

There was a reference with a link to the Minnesota Star Tribune newspaper. Nothing came up. I did a search on Google. Nothing besides links to the Knowledge (XXG) article. Since this was a recent event, I assumed there would be other articles on the web about it. Due to the lack of reference, I deleted the suspected entry and figured if there is a reference, let the person revert my edit and put a reference in and it'll be settled. Immediately user Jsaxton86 reverted my edit, but still did not provide a valid reference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=List_of_fatal_bear_attacks_in_North_America_by_decade&diff=228635646&oldid=219840847

He said you needed a Star Tribune membership to see it. I became a member, searched through the paid archives for an abstract, still nothing came up. In addition, I contacted the Minn. Department of Natural Resources and didn't receive a confirmation, and also found a MySpace page for Mr. Ruberto and his wife - no evidence of a fatal bear attack.

After I again took out the info about Mr. Ruberto, user HeartTransplant (notice no other edits before or after) appeared, reverted so the info about Mr. Ruberto appeared again, and said this:

I see the reference just fine, I don't know if I'm doing something right that omar is doing wrong, or if he's just attempting some sort of bluff here...

Rev: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=List_of_fatal_bear_attacks_in_North_America_by_decade&diff=228635646&oldid=220069592

After I again reverted back to take out the entry, no other action was taken. User gave up pretty quickly apparently.


Comments


Conclusions


The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Jj0909jj (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Somenewuser (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

--Snigbrook 03:13, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Jj0909jj was blocked indefinitely in March 2007 for "disruption, chronic vandalism and copyright violation" and has used several sockpuppets (see Category:Knowledge (XXG) sockpuppets of Jj0909jj, Category:Suspected Knowledge (XXG) sockpuppets of Jj0909jj, and Knowledge (XXG):Requests for checkuser/Case/Jj0909jj.

A new user, Somenewuser (talk · contribs) has been making some unusual test edits with summaries such as "auto confirming" on articles about Microsoft products, the same subject of many of Jj0909jj's edits.

Somenewuser has also vandalised User talk:386sky; similar to an edit by already blocked sockpuppets Newlycreatedusername (talk · contribs) and several edits by another already blocked sockpuppet 386sky (talk · contribs): . --Snigbrook 03:13, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Update: Edit by Somenewuser identical to one by another blocked sock Bjspot (talk · contribs), changing a font in a userbox to Comic Sans. --Snigbrook 03:23, 10 August 2008 (UTC)


Comments


Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
Nassir49 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
172.142.152.111 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
172.159.46.71 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
172.202.34.55 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
83.67.90.254 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
90.217.109.162 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Themadmullah (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

RedThunder 12:39, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

First: see Knowledge (XXG):Requests for adminship/nassir49 for use of the suspected socks !voting support for an obvious WP:NOTNOW. Other IP addresses (see their talk pages) have been used to revert edits that the user did not find to their liking and edit war on articles related to Somaila. See the discussion on the RFA for more evidence.

Comments

The cases against Themadmullah and 90.217 are pretty much open and shut. There's nothing about Nassir49 that would inspire someone to create an account and vote in his RfA two minutes later. QUACK!. I'd also be pretty suspicious of Realist2 for voting neutral :). The other ones are also pretty likely, but a little less obvious. Paragon 22:08, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

IHeartAshleigh (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

....Crunk&B....Artist.... (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Aspects (talk) 17:45, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

User:IHeartAshleigh was recently indefinitely banned for "vandalism, creation of fake music articles, sockpuppetry, block evasion" on August 8th for continually making fake music articles about "Jamahl Seden" and adding information about this fake artist into song articles. On August 9th User:....Crunk&B....Artist.... made his first edit recreating a speedily deleted Template:Jamahl Seden that IHeartAshleigh originally created.

....Crunk&B....Artist... added the template and the exact same template to No Air that IHeartAsheligh did . ....Crunk&B....Artist... made the exact same edit to Bad Boy that IHeartAsleigh did . ....Crunk&B....Artist... has been adding information about "Jamahl Seden" that IHeartAsleigh made up. ("Jamahl Seden" comes up with four Googlehits with two of the four being Knowledge (XXG) articles/templates.

Comments


Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Pianomusic (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Monsterchicken (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
64.148.36.103 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

Ecoleetage (talk) 19:44, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

In the AfD discussion regarding the case of the article for Douglas haddad, it appears that the aforementioned trio of editors seem to share the exact same arguments, style of writing (none of the three sign their input) and editorial focus (all of these accounts appear to be SPA offerings designed solely to promote the Douglas haddad article and nothing else). My apologies if this accusation is off-base, but from what I am reading I cannot imagine that these three accounts belong to three different people.


Comments
Sockmaster and sockpuppet are now informed of this case. OhanaUnited 21:53, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
If I can, I would request the running of a Checkuser to verify if these three accounts have the same genesis. Thanks. Ecoleetage (talk) 04:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
A check user could be useful. It may be that they just thought alike and have similar goals. The similarities certainly were striking. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 15:42, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions
  • I won't take any action per above. I agree they are very similiar. Take it to WP:RfCU and see what happens. I'd bet £10 at odds of 2 to 1 that they're the same, anyone willing to accept the bet? Scarian 22:18, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Signsolid (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

88.109.195.218 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
88.111.69.135 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

-- Fyslee / talk 22:33, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

See also:

It looks like we have a pretty obvious case of block evasion and sockpuppetry. After serious edit warring and insulting other editors, User:Signsolid gets repeated warnings, which he promptly deletes, but finally stays quiet. An IP from England then appears using his same odd arguments and edit wars until blocked for 24 hours. Another IP from the same place appears less than 24 hours later (a block evasion) with the same odd arguments and continues the edit war. Then Signsolid reappears and continues his deletion attempts against consensus.

An administrator also has the same concerns, which were treated with disdain (twice) and the admin insulted. Signsolid then went ahead and ignored those warnings and edited against consensus yet again.

While deletion of comments and warnings from one's own user talk page is considered evidence that they have been read, this user seems to be intent on ignoring and hiding them, which is not collaborative behavior, and thus violates the spirit of Knowledge (XXG). His attitude towards his own deletion of a warning was this insult to the warning administrator:

I strongly suspect that Signsolid has used two IPs to evade a block and continue an edit war against consensus and against warnings from other editors. Please perform a WP:RFCU, then block the user indefinitely and block the user's IPs if there is confirmation of abuse. This form of abuse is especially egregious and needs to be stopped. The fact that Signsolid returned and continued to edit war in spite of clear warnings indicates that preventive action is necessary to avoid repetition of this disruptive behavior.

This report is being filed with the encouragement of admin LessHeard vanU:

This report includes much from a discussion at the circumcision talk page found here and here.

Comments

I have notified the involved party/parties. -- Fyslee / talk 22:50, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

In spite of this case, one IP has continued the edit war by deleting against consensus. -- Fyslee / talk 07:31, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions
  • I have blocked Signsolid for 24 hours, it's obvious those IPs are him. The autoblock should take them out of the game for 24 hours (which is as long as I would've been willing to block them for). Scarian 22:22, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Upward15 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Leaningleft35 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Redbear175 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
NorthCarolinaboy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
FemaleVoter15 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
146.129.133.9 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
more forthcoming

Report submission by

Cumulus Clouds (talk) 18:35, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

The contribs for Northcarolinaboy and Leftleaning15 overlap almost completely, this are relatively new accounts, each trying to insert the same revision into a dozen or so unique articles. Generally, they tend to be unsourced blp violations for Democrats standing in 2008 elections or, rarely, uncontested copyedits for Republicans. I suspect this user registered Leftleaning15 after the latest round of pov revisions, and had registered Northcarolinaboy after a rash of warnings was left on his talk page for vandalism and content removal on the same pages they're editing now.

Redbear175's entire edit history is contained within Geoff Simpson, a Democratic candidate in Washington state, where he has tried numerous times to insert unsourced allegations that Simpson is a wifebeater. Northcarolinaboy left a message to the same effect on the talk page of User:Truthteller47th which, given that Simpson's district is the 47th, sounds to me like it could be somebody with a conflict of interest. The latter account should be watched (I've removed their unsourced pov edits as well), the rest should all be blocked for abusive sockpuppetry.

I've added another name, based on the exact same criteria as above and I'll continue adding them as they register new accounts.

I've added an IP which is registered to the King County Government which has edited most of these articles before and which I suspect is the sole user behind all these accounts.

Update: I believe these edits are coming from the Legislative Aides to King County Councilmembers Reagan Dunn and Kathy Lambert. In this diff, an IP registered to the county makes an edit to Central Washington University and adds the name of a person serving as the aide to Kathy Lambert. IPs in the same range have also made extensive edits to Reagan Dunn where, more tellingly, the article was written almost entirely by Theswede01, whose only edits are to that article and whose name is substantially similar to the other accounts listed here. Around the same time, someone on the same IP range edited Central Michigan University to include the name of the legislative aide to Reagan Dunn. I suspect these are the same person.

Most of the edits originating from this IP have engaged in the same pattern of POV whitewashing that these other articles have seen, and they seem focused largely on either King County history or articles for various members of the Washington Republican caucus.

Comments

I am responsible for the multiple accounts (Upward15 being one of them) making some of the same changes – repeatedly. I got carried away and I abused my privileges. I know some of what I did was inappropriate. I’m sorry. I feel bad and I will abstain from editing Knowledge (XXG). I feel admonished and I’m sorry. I will leave a similar message on Scarian’s page. I hope that my mistakes won’t harm my co-workers ability to participate on Knowledge (XXG). I am responsible for the multiple accounts and I take full responsibility. Thank you. 206.188.48.225 (talk) 17:50, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Gaby_de_wilde (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Gdewilde (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
HawkNo1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
84.104.135.195 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Go-HERE (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) Account blocked already.
Go-here.nl (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) Account blocked already.


Report submission by

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Guyonthesubway (talk • contribs) 21:14, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Response to comments on talkpage of puppet using puppeteer account. User_talk:HawkNo1 Only edits by puppet account are off topic rants, would guess that puppeteer attempting to protect primary account.

Comments
HawkNo1 only made 5 edits, which I believe is not a concrete evidence. Nevertheless, the suspicion is on solid ground. OhanaUnited 21:46, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
New Evidence:
Original account was user:Gaby de wilde. Examine User_talk:Gaby_de_wilde where he also takes credit for using user:84.104.135.195 post block. Guyonthesubway (talk) 13:45, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Not directly evidence of sockpuppetry but a little background information:
Go-here.nl (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). First name - username blocked because it was the name of his web site.
GO-HERE (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). Also got username blocked.
Gaby_de_wilde (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). Note block log.
User routinely removes everything including warnings from his talk page, making it more fiddly to document his history. --Athol Mullen (talk) 15:54, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Highly likely. Early on 8 August, HawkNo1 was warned about personal attacks. Three hours later on 8 August, gdewilde replied as if the warning had been directed to him "... just because I'm crazy doesn't mean you don't have to be kind and friendly to me". GRBerry 16:26, 11 August 2008 (UTC)


http://magnetmotor.go-here.nl/ website owner identifys himself as Gaby De Wilde, accounts have had links to this site.

Editor claims to have 'retired'. He's done this before, to take a little break. Account should be blocked anyhow. Guyonthesubway (talk) 20:08, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions
  • I have indef blocked Gdewilde, it's obvious he's evading an indef block on his original account. I haven't touched Hawk because there isn't enough evidence right now. Bring it up again if he edits more. Scarian 22:27, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Muntuwandi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Pseudowandy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

FunkMonk (talk) 21:47, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Muntuwandi is back to disrupt the Origin of religion and Negroid articles again.

Comments
Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
172.190.110.89 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
YouAdvertiseTheIPHONE? (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Promoting?OnWiki?GetAClue? (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

Booglamay (talk) - 14:29, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Various creations of Volchatno under different guises (most all new usernames seem to refer to advertising on WP)

Volchatno
Volano Volchatno
Comments


Conclusions

All from above as well as some others already blocked. The IP is a dynamic AOL IP and will probably never be used by that vandal again (when creating YouAdvertiseTheIPHONEEE? (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log), he already had a new IP), so deleted the IP user page to not frighten off the next user who gets this IP assigned and wants to edit here. Not sure what this request is for, really obvious socks like these can be reported to WP:AIV. --Oxymoron 15:42, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
Ananny (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
74.14.123.238 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

freshacconcispeaktome 15:11, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

This IP address has been used to both blank and recreate the deleted and slated article on the artist Terry Ananny (who is the editor in question) on User talk:Jane Rushmore. That talk page has a protection reuest pending. Under this IP address, Ananny continues to add her name to various lists as well.

Comments


Conclusions
 Completed. IP blocked for 2 days. Account blocked for 1 week (because it's blocked 2nd time in less than a week). OhanaUnited 02:31, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Muntuwandi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Pseudowandy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

FunkMonk (talk) 21:47, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Muntuwandi is back to disrupt the Origin of religion and Negroid articles again.

Comments
Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
Emomurga (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
204.13.163.36 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Sfmonkey415 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Davem, the Son of God (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

Mayalld (talk) 21:04, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

User created Lowfares.com, IP immediately leaps into action to defend against Speedy deletion (twice). Denies being the same person, and claims to have been hanging out at SD category, yet there is no evidence that this IP has shown prior interest in CSD. Suspicion that the user has logged out to remove the CSD as an IP user to evade the ban on removing from his account.

IP editor has started editing the article, adding content.

Sfmonkey415 is brand new account, weighed in to Afd within a minute of registering to opoose deletion.

Davem, the Son of God yet another new account, this time with a name that is clearly an personal attack on me, weighing on on 3 AfDs I submitted, and vandalising this report (now reverted)

Comments

All blocked. — Werdna • talk 08:09, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions


The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Davesmith33 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Davesmith34 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
See also Knowledge (XXG):Suspected sock puppets/Davesmith33 for the first round of this fiasco.


Report submission by

-mattbuck (Talk) 16:47, 9 August 2008 (UTC)


Evidence

User appeared on Talk:Top Gear (current format) (), picking up from where they left off with their previous (blocked) puppets. Figured someone should know. -mattbuck (Talk) 16:47, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments


Conclusions
 Completed. Blocked by Islander OhanaUnited 21:56, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Mr.Teorolf (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

MrRolfe (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Ow i hurt my toof (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

Excirial 20:32, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Yesterday a user called Mr.Teorolf has been creation G3 pure vandalism pages called Toofy mcjack before receiving an INDEF block. In this article this user himself claimed that he has another sockpuppet by the name of "Ow i hurt my toof", which is highly likely considering the name of the account. Today a user called "MrRolfe" has been pages called Toofy, containing the exact same claims and vandalism. User is claiming to be absolutely innocent, however in this case, i have taken the liberty of not assuming WP:AGF.

Comments
  • Comment by nominator I am mainly starting this case to make sure i am not wrong on this issue. In the unlikely case these accounts are not sockpuppets of eachother, i am in gross violation of WP:AGF and WP:BITE. Excirial 20:16, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions

All indef'd. Tagging Ow i hurt my toof as the master. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:06, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Inshiningarmor (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Singleschmingle (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

--Falcon Darkstar Kirtaran (talk) 18:04, 8 August 2008 (UTC)


Evidence

User:Singleschmingle is a single-purpose account created to nominate Terren Peizer for AfD here and here. The account I think might be the master (and I'd bet it may be a sock puppet too) is a single-purpose account doing nothing but arguing with people at Terren Peizer, which was also prodded by the anonymous user User:69.86.244.16 (whose prod was denied due to no reason given for it, and then added again). The next edit saw User:Inshiningarmor nominate it for speedy. Another IP, User:71.167.248.41, prodded again], but it's worth noting this is from a different ISP (Verizon, not earthlink). User:Singleschmingle seems to have more or less the same opinion on this article as User:Inshiningarmor. Also, it's very strange to me that so many users with almost no edit history and anonymous users would have enough knowledge of Knowledge (XXG) procedure and templates to make cases based on WP:RS and use the citation needed template to replace citations so frequently, prod the article, speedy the article, and nominate the article on AfD. However, I think this could really benefit from checkuser, as I'm very unsure about this. The user might or might not be the same as one or both the anonymous ones. While they come from two different ISPs, he could have changed ISPs or have more than one place where he edits. --Falcon Darkstar Kirtaran (talk) 18:04, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Comments

Here are a couple more IP's:

Conclusions

Blocked sock indef, master one week. Left IPs alone due to their wide spread in range. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:59, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Imelda Marcos (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Axl Goddamn Rose (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Pussycocktail (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Pussycock (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Dannyboygirl (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

William Graham  04:27, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Original vandalism: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Something_Awful&diff=230231397&oldid=227947568 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Something_Awful&diff=230232600&oldid=230231676 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Something_Awful&diff=230400756&oldid=230312353 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Something_Awful&diff=230400756&oldid=230312353 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Something_Awful&diff=230417038&oldid=230412412 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Something_Awful&diff=230417892&oldid=230417158 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Something_Awful&diff=230428314&oldid=230423629

Comments

User created account "Axl Goddamn Rose" but has not used it. http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Special:Log&user=Imelda_Marcos

Conclusions

Axl Rose blocked for username violation, Dannyboygirl blocked as a vandalism-only account. That's the lot, I think. Gb 13:03, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
Lollipopgirl (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
Penitron (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

Arbiteroftruth (talk) 05:02, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Admitted by this user here. Although userpage has since been deleted, admins can refer to that user's deleted contribs for more details.

Comments

From everything else they look totally different so I guess it is up to looking at the deleted userpage. ·Add§hore· /Cont 08:48, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

Nothing whatsoever to go on other than the (deleted) assertion of (now blocked) Penitron, so there's no way of knowing if it's true or not. Since Lollipopgirl hasn't edited for a while, I'm not going to block her on the off-chance that the troll was telling the truth... Gb 12:59, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Mediatemple (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

88.71.12.92 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

Euryalus (talk) 03:42, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Apparent multiple !voting in an AfD by an account and an IP address with identical editing styles, formatting mistakes and a single common interest.

  1. Single purpose accounts - both the account and IP are solely focused on deleting the Media Temple article.
  2. Tag team article edits - the first edit from the IP address was to query why a PROD tag posted by the account had been removed by another editor. The IP then re-added the PROD tag using an identical rationale..
  3. Same format errors - both the account and the IP mistakenly describe PROD tags as AfDs.
  4. Tag-team on incorrectly located AfD - On 6 August 09:00 the IP address posted a malformed AfD on the article talk page. The account swiftly appeared to !vote supporting the IP address before another editor removed the incorrectly located material..
  5. Tag-teaming at actual AfD - A malformed AfD was lodged by the IP address then immediately !voted upon by the account which also corrected the IP's format error. The IP address then reappeared and !voted twice using the same reasoning as the account had used minutes before. and )
  6. No edit session overlap - on 6 August the IP address edited from 08:31 to 09:12 then ceased. The account started editing at 09:26 until 11:49, then disappeared until the IP address returned 2 hours later. Later edits are further apart but the sessions remain in sequence.


Comments
The IP address has been notified. OhanaUnited 06:26, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
My mistake. Thought I'd already done that. Euryalus (talk) 06:52, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Having been involved with trying to sort out the PROD/Afd issue, I should say I originally thought that Mediatemple was the account created by the IP when the IP found it couldn't create Afd pages, to that extent a legitimate change to registered editing. The re-use of the IP afterwards to vote stack is obviously wrong though if it is indeed same person. -Hunting dog (talk) 07:01, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
I discussed this with another editor and we both came to the same initial conclusion that this could be someone who just forgot to log in with some edits. If so there'd be no harm in that. However, the use of both accounts in quick succession for the misplaced AfD on the talk page, then again at the actual AfD strongly implies the two accounts are a deliberate vote-stacking exercise. That said this appears to be a new editor - if sockpuppetry is confirmed the striking of the multiple vote and a stern warning might be a valid option. Euryalus (talk) 07:12, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
In this case, the account is most likely blocked for a short duration (24 to 48 hours) purely for against vote-stacking purposes because I have to give credit for IPs unable to create pages. Nevertheless, thanks for brining this to my attention. I admit I forgot about this IP restriction on page creation rule. OhanaUnited 07:45, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
User:Mediatemple would appear to confirm this is his/her IP address here. I've struck the multiple vote at the AfD. Euryalus (talk) 10:40, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Since he admitted and apologized, I guess I will give him a warning and let him get off without a block. Sounds fair? OhanaUnited 17:06, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Yep, sounds like an good solution to me. Euryalus (talk) 21:04, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions
Warning issued on the condition that the sockmaster sticks to his account and not any IP accounts. Case closed. OhanaUnited 21:32, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
70.251.239.143 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
Davkal (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

ScienceApologist (talk) 21:12, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

He's baaack.

Comments


Conclusions

Knowledge (XXG):Suspected sock puppets/DavidYork71 (2nd)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
Ananny (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
CanadianArt (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
74.14.122.125 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

freshacconcispeaktome 03:51, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

This user is at it again, recreating an article that had been deleted under AfD. This is her new account. The IP address is one she is using to remove the speedy delete tag of the recreated article.

Comments


Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Jeffrey Vernon Merkey (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

69.2.248.210 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

Toddst1 (talk) 20:08, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence
Jeffrey Vernon Merkey (talk · contribs) has a long history with wikipedia including legal issues. See Knowledge (XXG) talk:Requests for arbitration/Jeffrey Vernon Merkey/Proposed decision#Knowledge (XXG) is not a Government. Recently this WP:SPA ip user has appeared and been heavily editing Jeff V. Merkey, adding self-published info, etc.
RFCU initiated: Knowledge (XXG):Requests for checkuser/Case/Jeffrey Vernon Merkey  Inconclusive Toddst1 (talk) 00:33, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Comments
I am a low level engineer at CR&T in Orem Utah and I work in the shipping dock on the bottom floor in a 6 x 6 office with an air condtioner hanging out of the back window. Merkey is well known in the local area, and I am not afraid of him coming after me legally since about all he could get is a cardboard box full of nothing. You can check my IP if you like. My name is none of your business, and I am more than a little surprised at how afraid of him you people seem to be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.2.248.210 (talk • contribs) 20:34, 5 August 2008
Conclusions
Well, since even CheckUser's result is inconclusive and can't tell us whether they are socks or not, SSP doesn't seem to be able to do anything more than giving comments. OhanaUnited 04:32, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
Rickyboleto (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
Paulbrackley (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
132.185.240.124 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

Mayalld (talk) 11:51, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

PM created a clear autobiography Ricky Boleto, and I warned him about autobiographies, and tagged the article for issues (including {{autobiography}}) First sock came along and removed tags, whilst making identical mistakes of wiki syntax. Then logged out IP user took over on the tag-team making identical errors. IP address belongs to the BBC, the employer of the article subject.

Comments


Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Whsc1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Whsc2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Whsc3 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Whsc4 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Whsc5 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Whsc6 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

-- Comandante {Talk} 02:59, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence
  • The obvious similarity of the usernames.
  • Edit 1, Edit 2, Edit 3, Edit 4, Edit 5. All of these edits were made by each of the Whsc accounts except for Whsc1 (talk · contribs) to the article Andy Harter over roughly a month; each edit either vandalized the page or supported that vandalism (such as Edit 4, made by {{User|Whsc3)) which isn't vandalism by itself; however, the same account did vandalize the page later, as seen in Edit 5. Note that the similarity and intent of the edits appears to link the accounts together.
  • Edit 6, Edit 7, Edit 8. These edits, while not vandalism in the strictest sense, were nonetheless reverted. The edits were also made within minutes of each other on the same day to the article Nintendo GameCube by Whsc5 (talk · contribs) and Whsc6 (talk · contribs). This further points to the accounts being used by the same person.
  • There is no direct link between Whsc1 (talk · contribs) and the other accounts besides the similar usernames and the fact that this account and Whsc6 (talk · contribs) have vandalized the articles Vietnamese people and Asian people (as seen in Edit 9, Edit 10, Edit 11), two articles with related topics. The only other possible link between the first account and the others is that Whsc1 and Whsc6 both became active again on 08/03/08 EST, editing minutes apart (see Edit 9, Edit 10, and Edit 12).
Comments

There is also a connection at Andy Harter.I suspect role accounts, possibly at a school. Kevin (talk) 03:36, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I have blocked all these accounts indefinitely. I'll get around to tagging them at some point. Kevin (talk) 04:00, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions

All tagged. OhanaUnited 20:03, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Hatashe (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Amy Covington (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Mehrinwub (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
117.18.224.170 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
117.18.224.169 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

Benea (talk) 23:51, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

User:Hatashe has recently been active on a number of Bangladesh related articles, uploading images and making substantial copyright violations. A couple he added to Baro Vatra were deleted from commons earlier today as blatant copyright violations. A new user account was then created later, User:Amy Covington, which as well as trying to create an article/redirect (Hatashe Channel, currently up for speedy delete) which matches Mehrinwub's confused method, seen here. They have also tried to re-add Hatashe's pictures removed from the Baro Vatra article earlier today, seen here. The common pattern of a confused sense of what public domain, etc means is also evident. They all edit the same string of articles, often with very similar edit summaries, (Mehrinwub and Hatashe, use of the word 'coz', etc.) All three have been particularly active on the articles Baro Vatra and Nanikhir. On the latter, an ip, User:117.18.224.170 pops up, with the same pattern of edits, even signing himself as Mehrin. An ip in the same range User:117.18.224.169 also actively edits these same topics in the same patterns.

User:Amy Covington engaged in setting up numerous stubs of the type like Big Vatra, all of which did nothing but hint at User:Hatashe's favourite subject Baro Vatra. De728631 (talk) 00:14, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
here Mehrinwub edits Hasanuzzaman, currently a redirect to the cricketer Muhammad Hasanuzzaman, to create a biography of Hasanuzzaman Talukdar Shemul. This is coincidentally who User:Hatashe claims to be on his userpage. Benea (talk) 00:17, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Comments


Conclusions

Master blocked 24 hours. Socks blocked indefinitely. Enigma 23:20, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

ColourWolf (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

218.186.13.3 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Plagues Of Truth (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Arbiteroftruth (talk) 19:05, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


Evidence
  • - A comparison of a legit edit and edits made by the IP listed above. The storyline features the same radical, terrorist oriented crap that ColourWolf has inserted on Knowledge (XXG) almost a year ago.
  • Plagues Of Truth, although he has not made any bad edits, fits the category of ColourWolf sockpuppets for two reasons: A. the user edits only Power Ranger and Singaporean actors and dramas, the set of pages that ColourWolf edits. Neither he nor ColourWolf has ventured beyond those pages. B. The account is trying to establish legitimacy before massively vandalizing Knowledge (XXG). ColourWolf has been known to do this before. User:PowerClown123 is a good example.

ColourWolf's reign of terror has gone on long enough. It's time for everyone to stand up against this.

Comments
  • Plagues of Truth has made three edits, all of which seem to be in good faith. Surely this is a bit silly to then say that, because his 3 edits have been about the same two topics he is therefore a sock? The weird thing about someone making good edits to establish legitimacy before massively vandalising topics is that it looks exactly the same as someone making good edits to establish legitimacy. After looking at his edits one of the edits is nothing to do with the power rangers; your evidence is therefore "he has made good faith edits to one of the topics that ColourWolf has, therefore he must be a sockpuppet of colourwolf". By slapping a big "suspected sock" on this users page you may have scared off a potentially valuable user; editing the same page as colourwolfs socks is not grounds on its own for being a sock; if it was then from the page history you'd have been blocked for all your reversions. Ironholds 10:38, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Look again . Arbiteroftruth (talk) 16:06, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Also, how are we vandal and sock fighters suppose to do our job when we welcome socks with open arms? This guy is clearly a vandal, for he only edits the topics that ColourWolf edits. Arbiteroftruth (talk) 16:09, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
You have got to be joking. Please tell me you can see the flaw in the sentence "This guy is clearly a vandal, for he only edits the topics that ColourWolf edits." Contributing to 2 particular topics is not grounds for sock accusations unless said topics are moving every page to page_on wheels or similar. I note that you quickly reverted the edit you linked to even though it appears to be useful (clarifying a sentence) and in good faith. I also note that the user is now editing pages other than the two topics edited by colourwolf, which by your own admission implies he isn't a sock. Ironholds 18:18, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions
I'm pretty confident that the IP is ColourWolf. But no evidence on Plagues Of Truth = ColourWolf. OhanaUnited 22:15, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Per Ohana. I will block the IP (if it already hasn't been), but I will not touch the other account due to lack of evidence. Try not to present your cases in such an overly draconian sort of fashion, Arbiteroftruth. It's not the end of the world :-) Scarian 23:43, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Footballfan190 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Titaniumviper (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
216.93.231.149 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

Darkspots (talk) 07:47, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Titaniumviper (talk · contribs) was created three minutes after Knowledge (XXG):Requests for adminship/Footballfan190 4 was closed NOTNOW. The two userpages bear a remarkable similarity to each other. Titaniumviper banged out a few edits in quick sucession that day to several articles, at least one edited earlier the same day the day before by Footballfan190 (talk · contribs), African Bush Elephant. No further contributions until today, August 4, 2008 when Titaniumviper supports Knowledge (XXG):Requests for adminship/Footballfan190 5, exactly three minutes after its transclusion. There is no reason for a new user to watchlist WP:RFA.

Comments
Please don't accuse all of the commentors here of bad faith. Sockpuppetry is viewed as a relatively serious offense on Knowledge (XXG), and we are merely interested in getting to the bottom of this. I assure you, there is no bias against you in particular, or any other candidate who has previously failed RfAs. In fact, RfA has no bearing in this whatsoever, bar the fact that it prompted this case. Your explanation may prove to be true, but that is why some of us have suggested WP:RFCU. Just a word to the wise, if you are indeed "guilty", it's better to fess up and get the slap on the wrist than to continue to bilk us. Wisdom89 (T / ) 22:47, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
  • The conclusion seems to be that there should be an RCU. In that case, I suppose this report is moot and can be closed. Anyone volunteering to file the Request for Checkuser? Enigma 23:04, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions

The consensus seems to be that checkuser is the way to go in this case. I think it's pretty clear evidence, but I asked User:Scarian and he said to take it to checkuser and to close this. So I'm being bold. Feel free to reference this case in the checkuser request. Enigma 23:24, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Outcome The checkuser confirmed that Footballfan190 operates the Titaniumviper account and edits from the IP address. Footballfan190 was blocked for a month and the rollback rights were removed from the account, and Titaniumviper was indef blocked . Darkspots (talk) 08:39, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
Markashworth (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
203.194.16.90 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

Mayalld (talk) 12:13, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Master is only editor on IPEXL Search, which has recently been recreated after previous speedy deletion. Upon nominating again for speedy deletion, this IP, with no edit history suddenly removes the speedy. Strongly suspect that this is just the master logged out and pretending to be adifferent person to remove speedy tag.

Comments

Totally false. Mayalld is just upset I removed his speedy notice. 203.194.16.90 (talk) 12:16, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Their edits look totally different, Made at totally different times. I would probably say this is false also. ·Add§hore· /Cont 13:09, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer
Ananny (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Suspected sockpuppets
333faulkner (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Jane Rushmore (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
SunnySkies (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Canadianlibrary (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
76.64.154.169 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report submission by

freshacconcispeaktome 22:15, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

There is evidence that all these users are the artist Terry Ananny. User:Ananny claimed copyright of Ananny's work. When the article was deleted and User:Ananny was questioned about WP:COI, this was changed to User:333faulkner. All edits concern Terry Ananny, both as an article (twice deleted at AfD), plus under various lists (see User:Jane Rushmore for many of these). After the final deletion, User:Jane Rushmore, then User:SunnySkies and finally User:Canadianlibrary have attempted to recreate the article (it has been salted), recreated under various configurations (all caps, lower case, etc.), various talk pages, plus spamming lists with Ananny's website. A good deal of evidence is available to admins under the deleted talk page for the Terry Ananny article. This has been going on for months (years actually--the first article was in 2006). This user has been disrupting Knowledge (XXG) and refusing to believe the process of AfD (see the talk page for TERRY ANANNY, plus the user talk page for User:Jane Rushmore. This editor also uses various IP addresses to get around blocks (see User:Canadianlibrary for example).

Comments


Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Issacharoff (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Red Udvar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Dzi2000 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
69.140.157.73 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

Delicious carbuncle (talk) 15:18, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

User:Red Udvar has recreated the article Jeremy Issacharoff, previously deleted as a result of Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Jeremy Issacharoff. This is presumably an autobio. IP editor 69.140.157.73 (talk · contribs) has subsequently edited that article, as they did with the previous version, and they have inserted references to the article subject into other articles. See Knowledge (XXG):Suspected_sock_puppets/Issacharoff and deleted contribs for User:Dzi2000 evidence.

Comments

Red Udvar was blocked and tagged the first time, nothing to do here. — Rlevse • Talk • 10:20, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions


Suspected sockpuppeteer

ColourWolf (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

218.186.13.3 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Plagues Of Truth (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Arbiteroftruth (talk) 19:05, 3 August 2008 (UTC)


Evidence
  • - A comparison of a legit edit and edits made by the IP listed above. The storyline features the same radical, terrorist oriented crap that ColourWolf has inserted on Knowledge (XXG) almost a year ago.
  • Plagues Of Truth, although he has not made any bad edits, fits the category of ColourWolf sockpuppets for two reasons: A. the user edits only Power Ranger and Singaporean actors and dramas, the set of pages that ColourWolf edits. Neither he nor ColourWolf has ventured beyond those pages. B. The account is trying to establish legitimacy before massively vandalizing Knowledge (XXG). ColourWolf has been known to do this before. User:PowerClown123 is a good example.

ColourWolf's reign of terror has gone on long enough. It's time for everyone to stand up against this.

Comments
  • Plagues of Truth has made three edits, all of which seem to be in good faith. Surely this is a bit silly to then say that, because his 3 edits have been about the same two topics he is therefore a sock? The weird thing about someone making good edits to establish legitimacy before massively vandalising topics is that it looks exactly the same as someone making good edits to establish legitimacy. After looking at his edits one of the edits is nothing to do with the power rangers; your evidence is therefore "he has made good faith edits to one of the topics that ColourWolf has, therefore he must be a sockpuppet of colourwolf". By slapping a big "suspected sock" on this users page you may have scared off a potentially valuable user; editing the same page as colourwolfs socks is not grounds on its own for being socks; if it was then from the page history you'd have been blocked for all your reversions. Ironholds 10:38, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions


The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

ColourWolf (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

218.186.9.4 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
203.116.59.28 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Arbiteroftruth 17:02, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


Evidence

- made by ColorWolf - made by 218.186.9.4 - made by 203.116.59.28

All edits contain the same content. All are fictitious information, and I have verified them as fake after watching the series after the Internet. These information also found its way into the Wu Cheng Yi article.

These users have seriously compromised the integrity of the Honour and Passion page with their fake edits and bogus sources.

As proven by the edits made above, all three users have some form of coordination, and thus, they are co-conspirators in a vandalism attack.

Comments

I moved the reporter's comments up, to comply with standard formatting. I'm not sure what we have here. It looks like sock puppetry, but I'm not 100% sure. I also don't know what to do about it - maybe block the IPs for a day for revert warring, but we can't permanently block the IPs because the edits were not simple vandalism. Likewise for the main user: maybe block him for a day, and if he gives a good explanation, then unblock. The article might need to go through dispute resolution. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 13:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

There is no need to go through DR, because the contents this guy has inserted is FAKE! People have verified that. This is not a dispute. This user severely crippled the integrity of a page by inserting fake contents! We are not arguing about POV or opinions here. We are arguing about the veracity (or lack thereof) of the edits ColourWolf has made. Arbiteroftruth 00:32, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Comments

Could be socks but looks like edit content dispute too. Pls provide diffs showing false info. Also, you may know it's false, but how can I tell that? Much of this is in Chinese too. Rlevse 02:05, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I will offer this. The following links are links to the final episode of the Honour & Passion TV series on YouTube.

Part 1 of 5
Part 2 of 5
Part 3 of 5
Part 4 of 5
Part 5 of 5

Mediacorp Channel 8 provides English subtitle for this show, so there exists no language barriers. Look at them and you will know that the Colourwolf edits are absurd and bogus. Arbiteroftruth 06:20, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Ignoring the fact that having to verify sources by reading subtitles from a Youtube video is annoying, the only concrete evidence that these users are socks is that they edit the same pages, perform (roughly) the same edits, and the IPs have the same ISP. Other than that, a checkuser would have to get this one, as the only thing we can block them for is edit warring. Shadow1 (talk) 13:22, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
Conclusions
  • This isn't strong evidence of sockpuppetry. At this point, User:ColourWolf looks more like a throwaway account than a genuine contributor (that could easily change if s/he returns and contributes constructively). A genuine problem here is that both User:ColourWolf and User:Stormynight91 violated 3RR on Honour and Passion on October 10; both users will be warned.
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Jean Girard (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Lieutenant Jim Dangle (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

— Athaenara ✉ 00:35, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

See Knowledge (XXG):Suspected sock puppets/Jean Girard. This is the latest of more than a dozen accounts which have been used to create and re-create the same elaborate hoax article.


Comments

See also: Caldwell & Martinez & Others (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views).


Conclusions
Page deleted and salted. Accounts blocked indefinitely. Jehochman 00:47, 3 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Tom Sayle (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

79.73.93.44 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
79.74.63.15 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
79.74.0.15 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

JGHowes - 21:08, 2 August 2008 (UTC)


Evidence

Block-evading sock using anon IPs to add false information to bios of living persons, such as John Walker (organist) in last 48 hours. By his own edit on my talk page, he has linked his blocked username to IP79.74.63.15 and the warnings left on those anon IP talk pages. See this diff. Likewise, by his edit at User talk:Wafulz, he has linked IP79.73.93.44 to his blocked account, see this diff.

Comments

These dynamic DSL IPs all resolve back to Tiscali UK Ltd, origin AS9105.

Contribs from this range follow the same edit pattern, disrupting the same articles, etc., and are being used only for disruptive edits from blocked user Tom Sayle, who has "promised" to create alternate accounts, he says. A range block should be considered.

Conclusions

Over 262K users would be blocked to cover all three IPs. I've semiprot'd the page instead. Tagged users. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:32, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

96.247.37.61 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

119.94.3.120 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
119.94.0.250 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
122.144.118.160 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
58.69.106.184 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
119.94.0.238 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
119.94.11.144 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
122.52.185.53 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

Editor437 (talk) 02:56, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

A number of IP addresses have attacked myself and Dave Zirin with POV edits and refused to discuss them in good faith. They follow similar patterns. Either, the edits are POV edits on Dave Zirin or they revert edits I make on other articles. Basically, they follow me around and revert my edits.

After reverting a number of my edits, 96.247.103.165: talk changed her//his talk page to say"I'll just change my ip address and make all you admins at wikipedia go apeshit.", seeming evidence of intent to sockpuppet.

Recently, the address listed blanked the talk pages of: 119.94.3.120: talk 119.94.0.250: talk 122.144.118.160: talk 58.69.106.184: talk 119.94.0.238: talk 119.94.3.144: talk 122.52.185.53: talk

They may also be using the following IPS: 122.3.11.211: talk 96.247.37.46: talk 119.94.12.16: talk 122.55.57.9: talk 119.94.15.176: talk 75.208.6.68: talk 96.247.103.165: talk

Comments

These IPs all resolve back to the Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company, and are probably dynamic DSL IPs. As such there is probably on actual attempt at sockpuppetry here, just the user getting a different IP whenever they connect. The edits themselves are a problem that will have to be solved by reverting and blocking individual IPs if they are active. There are too many IPs here for a range block I would think. Some of these /16 blocks have good IP edits that we can't discourage. Kevin (talk) 06:44, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

Too many IPs to block via range blocks and if it's dynamic it wouldn't do much good anyway. The article is semiprotected. If disruption spreads to other articles, we can semiprot them too. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:57, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Autonomous LifeGap (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Ultimate LifeGap (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Sentient LifeGap (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

 Channel ®   23:34, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Puppetmaster has been blocked indef, is now back with a similar username and exactly the same vandalism on the same (rather obscure) article.

Comments

Just found Sentient LifeGap as well.  Channel ®   01:22, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

Indef'd. Block evading socks. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:10, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

MatthiasKnab (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Hedgewiz (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Endangeredspecies (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Opalesque (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

—DragonHawk (talk|hist) 18:35, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Edit history for all three users shows they have only made edits in relation to Alternative Alternatives, which is currently at AFD. All three have made "keep" arguments at that page, using very similar writing styles. "Endangeredspecies" has (as of this writing) made only one edit, at the AfD. I'm not sure how serious this is, but I thought it worth reporting.

I think this might go back further, MatthiasKnab (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)'s early version of Alternative Alternatives see here shows startling similarities to the rejected proposed page at Knowledge (XXG):Articles_for_creation/2008-07-22#Alternative_Alternatives by Special:Contributions/Opalesque. I'm also somewhat intrigued by the naming of the last account, having been involved from early stages in this deletion discussion -- I'm named for the Cape hunting dog which is quite obvious from close perusal of my contribs. That animal is co-incidentally an 'endangered species'. -Hunting dog (talk) 21:27, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
also please note that the Opalesque link is the main thing that Special:Contributions/Endangeredspecies is keen to preserve, see - Hunting dog (talk) 21:33, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
Good catch. I'm adding Opalesque (talk · contribs) to the suspect list, and notifying same on user talk. —DragonHawk (talk|hist) 02:16, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
Comments


Conclusions

Talk about obvious SPAs and vote stacking. Indef'd all. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:01, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Yamchaken (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

63.87.6.102 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
6 synth pop (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

andi064 17:50, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

User is well known nuisance editor who pushes POV edits and continually makes unreferenced false edits to music related articles, against the consensus of editors. This has been dealt with as normal by editors, however user edit wars once edit is undone and uses IP edits (from single fixed IP) to conduct edit war and/or add petty vandalism. IP talk page has had numerous vandalism warnings and blocks, and a week block is currently in place. User is using ‘Good hand/Bad hand’ sock edits using IP and Sock '6 Synth pop'. This User has had numerous words of advice and warnings about nuisance. Whilst user is not a hard core vandal action needs to be taken to stop blatant sock puppetry. Check user should confirm all three suspected socks are the same person; edit histories display further evidence, with edits within minutes of each other to same article using same tone.


Comments


Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Jean Girard (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

StockMarket12 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

Enigma 18:11, 1 August 2008 (UTC)


Evidence

See Knowledge (XXG):Suspected_sock_puppets/Jean_Girard. Creating the same hoax articles as other Jean Girard socks.

Comments


Conclusions
Strong evidence suggesting sockpuppetry. Blocked master sock for 1 week and indef for sockpuppet. OhanaUnited 22:37, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Editor652 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

190.4.12.5 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by
Evidence

190.4.12.5 immediately edited the same set of articles that Editor652 compulsively changed census figures in, along with his habit of editing South American airport articles. Let's try a six-month block this time.

You might want to look at such histories as

all previous socks of Editor652.

Comments


Conclusions
The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Undercovergals (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Tropicalstormshirley (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Marthaerin1812 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Amandajoan1872 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)


Report submission by

♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:12, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Evidence
  • Prime example - the four users edit the same pages, and in a span of seven minutes three of the users edited the page, adding false information without sources; the kicker is that the edit summary was the exact same for two of them.
  • A simple look at the user contributions show several similar patterns, such as using the phrase Update Edition in the edit summaries - , , ,
  • Users mark nearly every edit as minor.
  • All four have edited the page Drought in the United States
Comments
Conclusions

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

↑