Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Alansohn (talk | contribs) at 02:41, 20 January 2008 (→Open cases: add new case for latest abuse by User:Racepacket). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 02:41, 20 January 2008 by Alansohn (talk | contribs) (→Open cases: add new case for latest abuse by User:Racepacket)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

This page has a backlog that requires the attention of willing editors.
Please remove this notice when the backlog is cleared.

v t e Noticeboards
Misplaced Pages's centralized discussion, request, and help venues. For a listing of ongoing discussions and current requests, see the dashboard. For a related set of forums which do not function as noticeboards see formal review processes.
General	Administrators Main Incidents Bots Bureaucrats Centralized discussion Closure requests Education Interface admins Main Page errors Open proxies VRT Oversight User permissions
Articles, content	Biographies of living persons Copyrights Questions on media Problems Dispute resolution External links Fringe theories Neutral point of view Original research Pending changes Reliable sources Resource requests Scalable vector graphics Spam Blacklist Whitelist Style Titleblacklist Translation
Page handling	History merges Mergers Splits Moves Protection Importation XfD Articles Redirects Categories Templates Files Miscellany Undeletion
User conduct	Conflict of interest Contributor copyright Edit warring and 3RR Sanctions Personal restrictions General sanctions Contentious topics Sockpuppets Usernames (Requests for comment) Vandalism
Other	Arbitration Committee noticeboard Requests Enforcement Edit filters Requested False positives Questions Help desk Teahouse Reference desk New articles Requests for comment Village pump Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous WikiProject proposals Discussions for discussion
Category:Misplaced Pages noticeboards

Shortcut

]

Noticeboard archives
Administrators' (archives, search)
349	350	351	352	353	354	355	356	357	358
359	360	361	362	363	364	365	366	367	368
Incidents (archives, search)
1157	1158	1159	1160	1161	1162	1163	1164	1165	1166
1167	1168	1169	1170	1171	1172	1173	1174	1175	1176
Edit-warring/3RR (archives, search)
472	473	474	475	476	477	478	479	480	481
482	483	484	485	486	487	488	489	490	491
Arbitration enforcement (archives)
328	329	330	331	332	333	334	335	336	337
338	339	340	341	342	343	344	345	346	347
Other links
Talk Sockpuppet investigations Backlog

The suspected sock puppets page is where Wikipedians discuss if a fellow Wikipedian has violated Misplaced Pages's policy on sock puppets. Cases on this page are evaluated primarily on the basis of behavioral evidence, and the editors and administrators who look at the reports typically do not have the ability to determine what IP addresses Misplaced Pages editors are using. If you believe your case requires an IP check, please go to requests for checkuser.

Sometimes users who appear to work with a common agenda are not sockpuppets (one user, multiple accounts), but multiple users editing with the sole purpose of backing each other up, often called "meatpuppets." Meatpuppets are not regular Wikipedians who happen to agree with each other; they are accounts set up by separate individuals for the sole purpose of supporting one another. For the purposes of upholding policy, Misplaced Pages does not distinguish between meatpuppets and sockpuppets. Please see Misplaced Pages:Sock puppetry.

Administrators

Administrators, please see Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/Administrators for detailed instructions about how to determine sockpuppets, archiving, etc. for editing here at Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets (WP:SSP). This has recently been updated and therefore administrators should read over the minor changes that have happened.

Reporting suspected sock puppets

view • edit

Before creating a report at Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets (WP:SSP), please be sure that:

The problem is current; if the suspected sock puppets have not edited recently, the case will likely be closed as stale. If the problem is not ongoing, just watch the user and report when you see a new instance of abuse.
You have strong evidence. To learn what can be evidence, see here. If your evidence is weak, then it will be nearly impossible to reach a determination of sockpuppetry. All your statements should be supported by diffs.
The sockpuppet account you suspect is not already blocked.
The sockpuppet account you suspect is not already reported. Look through open SSP cases for usernames frequently associated with your suspect. Both older and newer cases, many of whose accounts are now blocked, show up in the categories for sockpuppeteers, sockpuppets, and suspected sockpuppets.

Assume good faith, if possible. An alternate account that is not used for abuse does not warrant a complaint. Keep in mind that users may sometimes make mistakes, so in cases where an alternate account is largely used for legitimate activities, it may be appropriate to ask the user before making accusations. The problem might merely have been caused by a mistaken login or other absent-mindedness.
Fill in the names. Clicking "Start a case" with a new case name-or-number opens a fresh page, with a form ready to be filled in. The puppetmaster's name will be automatically filled in as the filename; if this is not correct, due to added numbers like "(2nd)", replace the {{SUBPAGENAME}} tags with the puppetmaster's username. Also replace the placeholder names SOCKPUPPET1 and SOCKPUPPET2 with the account names of the suspected puppets; add or delete these lines as needed. Always leave out the "User:" prefix.

Make your case. Now write up your evidence in the "Evidence" section. This should describe why you believe there's puppetry occurring, however obvious it might be. If this is not the first time the user is suspected, links to other cases you know about should be provided as well. The evidence should point to one or more instances of illegitimate use of the puppet account. Include the diffs to support your statements. Sign and timestamp your case with ~~~~ on the line below "Report submission by"; preview your report for any problems; and, when you're satisfied, save it.

To start a case report about suspected sockpuppetry:

Cases are created on subpages of Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets.
To do so, add the username of the puppetmaster (the main account, not the sockpuppet!) -- and the number of the case, "(2nd)", "(3rd)", etc., if there were previous cases on that username -- into the box below.
Leave out the "User:" prefix. Replace only the word PUPPETMASTER, leaving the rest as is.

Example: if there were already two cases about User:John Doe, the new case would be titled:
Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/John Doe (3rd)

Then click "Start a case". You will be taken to a page where you can fill out the report.
After you've saved the report, come back to see the remaining instructions below this box.

Use of this form is deprecated. Please use Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations.

List your case for review in the WP:SSP open cases section here. Add the line {{Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/PUPPETMASTER}} (or PUPPETMASTER (2nd) or PUPPETMASTER (3rd), etc.) at the top of the list, just below the section header. (Again, remember to replace PUPPETMASTER with the actual account name, without the "User:" prefix.) Save your edit. Check to see that your report shows up at the top of the list, just below the "Open cases" header. If there's only a red link, check that the spelling of the username and the number match the filename you created.
Notify the suspected users. Edit the user talk pages (not the user pages) of the suspected sockpuppeteer and sock puppets to add the text {{subst:uw-socksuspect|1=PUPPETMASTER}} ~~~~ at the bottom of the talk page. If this is not the first time the user is suspected, the most recent evidence page should be specified by adding "(2nd)" or "(3rd)", etc., after the user's name: {{subst:uw-socksuspect|1=PUPPETMASTER (2nd)}} ~~~~ or similar.
Consequences. If the evidence shows a case of clear abuse, with no serious doubt, an administrator may block any sockpuppets, and take further action against the puppetmaster. In less severe cases, administrators may quietly monitor the account's activities.
Checking further. In some cases, where there is significant abuse and yet puppetry is not certain, it might be appropriate to use technical means to detect puppetry. See Requests for checkuser (WP:RFCU) for details.

Open cases

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.

User:Racepacket

Suspected sockpuppeteer

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

Suspected sockpuppets

Runreston (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
207.91.86.2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
(already identified as a sockpuppet of Racepacket via an earlier checkuser - see Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Racepacket) Xcstar (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
(already blocked as a sockpuppet of Racepacket via an earlier checkuser)

Report submission by

Alansohn (talk) 02:39, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Washington Birthday Marathon - Article was created by Runreston, but the only known previous Misplaced Pages reference to race was added by Racepacket in Henry A. Wallace Beltsville Agricultural Research Center (this diff). Only other edit to this article is by User:207.91.86.2, a confirmed sockpuppet of Racepacket.

14:41, 13 January 2008 Runreston began article. This edit, which created a complete, properly-formatted article, is all the more bizarre as the first edit from someone who has claimed below that he is only first learning how Misplaced Pages works.
14:45, 13 January 2008 Runreston corrected link
17:43, 18 January 2008 207.91.86.2 - Added external link to Racepacket.com web site

DC Road Runners Club - Article created by Racepacket

14:16, 7 March 2007 Racepacket (started article)
17:26, 12 March 2007 Racepacket (expanded description of races)
14:42, 13 January 2008 Runreston ‎(add link to Washington Birthday Marathon)
14:46, 13 January 2008 Runreston (removed orphan tag)

Henry A. Wallace Beltsville Agricultural Research Center

14:43, 13 January 2008 Runreston - wikified link to Washington Birthday Marathon
18:13, 24 October 2007 Racepacket (Washington Birthday Marathon)

Marathon‎ - Article previously edited eight times by User:Xcstar (three of which are shown below), previously verified as a sockpuppet of Racepacket per Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Racepacket

14:47, 13 January 2008 Runreston ‎ (→Finish times for non-professional runners - changed section heading)
14:55, 13 January 2008 Runreston ‎ (→Marathon races - used proper name for Marine Corps Marathon)
04:32, 15 December 2007 Xcstar (→Multiple marathons) (undo)
15:41, 14 December 2007 Xcstar (→Multiple marathons - 100 Marathon club) (undo)
15:30, 14 December 2007 Xcstar (→Multiple marathons - repeats in same marathon)

Dean Karnazes

14:51, 13 January 2008 Runreston ‎ ‎ (clean up) (top)
04:33, 15 December 2007 Xcstar (→North Face Endurance 50 - main)
09:04, 19 November 2007 Xcstar (more encyclopedic tone)
08:53, 19 November 2007 Xcstar (moved details out of lead paragraph)
08:49, 19 November 2007 Xcstar (→Overview - copy editing)

User Pages - brief stub

14:57, 13 January 2008 User:Runreston by Runreston - created page with "My interests are running and marathons."
13:43, 1 November 2007 User:Xcstar by Xcstar "I am a runner"

Dane Rauschenberg - this article is near and dear to the Racepacket / Xcstar / Runreston sockpuppets, with Racepacket nominating the article for deletion, Xcstar then taking the baton and abusively editing the article including 96 of his 200+ edits to this one article alone (plus another 40 to the article's talk page) before being caught as a sockpuppet. After one brief day of non-Rauschenberg edits, User:Runreston has dived in with some half of his edit history dedicated to this one article and its talk page.

14:31, 19 January 2008 Runreston
14:30, 19 January 2008 Runreston
14:29, 19 January 2008 Runreston
14:25, 19 January 2008 Runreston
14:19, 19 January 2008 Runreston - remove description as runner and characterize Rauschenberg as "motivational speaker", change fundraising total to $34,000 (removing sourced count of $43,000)
13:52, 18 January 2008 Runreston - remove description as runner and characterize Rauschenberg as "motivational speaker", change fundraising total to $34,000 (removing sourced count of $43,000)
12:43, 7 January 2008 Xcstar - remove description as runner and characterize Rauschenberg as "motivational speaker", change fundraising total to $34,000 (removing sourced count of $43,000)

Edits to Chicago area articles. The two have edited articles related to the Chicago area, for locations three miles from each other (see map).

14:19, 20 January 2008 D'Angelo by Runreston - added link to D'Angelo Natural Spring Water, an article created by Runreston and speedy deleted shortly thereafter. D'Angelo Natural Spring Water is located in East Dundee, Illinois
11:50, 4 January 2008 Sleepy Hollow, Illinois by Racepacket

Comments

The fact that User:Runreston's edit history overlaps almost completely with Racepacket / Xcstar, and the fact that Runreston's edit history consists almost entirely of edits to the Dane Rauschenberg article raises significant concerns that we are seeing the same abuse we saw earlier. None of the actions here are indicative of a user new to Misplaced Pages.

The syllogism of Racepacket = Xcstar = 207.91.86.2 has already been conclusively proven at Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Racepacket. The fact that our brand new editor User:Runreston has an edit history that syncs up exactly with all three of these users -- there is no article other than his user page that the three known sockpuppets have not also edited -- provides rather conclusive evidence that we are dealing with sockpuppetry, and that all of the users involved should be promptly blocked/banned to prevent any further abuse of Misplaced Pages policy, as has been a chronic problem with these users and the Dane Rauschenberg article.

A permanent block is clearly justified for User:Runreston, and it should be abundantly clear that a ban on User:Racepacket is long overdue, particularly in light of the fact that a block was imposed just days ago has been so blatantly flouted.

This is all very confusing, but it appears that the author is concerned that it took me seven edits to accomplish what a more experienced person could do in one edit. I am still learning how to do this and will try to become more efficient as I gain more experience. Runreston (talk) 19:14, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I'd have to say that someone whose first edit was the creation of a properly-formatted new article and who seems to have ample understanding of the syntax of the reference templates is someone who has demonstrated a clear track record of prior Misplaced Pages edits. Sockpuppetry should be a word that is a well-established part of your vocabulary. Alansohn (talk) 20:32, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
I'd assume good faith here, it could well be a friend of the editor, as people do introduce one another to websites they're interested in... I just hope it's not meatpuppetry. --Solumeiras (talk) 20:37, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
- The editing pattern speaks for itself, but there is indeed the infinitesimal possibility that these are two different people who happen to share the exact same editing interests. Meatpuppet or sockpuppet, the use of another false identity in a continuing pattern of abuse that needs to be ended, both puppet and puppetmaster. Alansohn (talk) 20:44, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I speak from experience. An admin on here accused me of being a sockpuppet of an indefinitely blocked editor, who had "good hand, bad hand account" sockpuppets about a year ago - and it's forced me to declare my user history on my userpage. Either way, I suspect it's probably a friend who's meatpuppeting for him (is that even a proper term?) As it were, I was introduced to Misplaced Pages by friends, so I speak from experience. I agree with your points though, Alan. --Solumeiras (talk) 20:53, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

Very convincing case. Blocked IP 24 hours and Runreston indef. Blocked Racepacket one week and final warning. What shows this is socking vice meatpuppeting is the appearance of Runreton right after the Xcstar was blocked. Tagged all. — Rlevse • Talk •

UPDATE, Checkuser just confirmed Runreston is NOT Racepacket, but keep an eye out for new editors on that topic. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:51, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

UPDATE, Checkuser now says "likely"] — Rlevse • Talk • 01:14, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Bauer-3

Suspected sockpuppeteer

Bauer-3 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Liambres (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Liam is egg (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Lbreslin (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Clongowes1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

MKolt now 20:03, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Creation of articles R.Osborne, Rob Osborne, Liam Breslin, L. Breslin (et al.) and insertion of links to them into Clongowes Wood College and List of Arsenal F.C. players‎. Articles appear to be hoaxes, and the additions of the links come from all of these accounts.

I can supply specific diffs if need be, but the evidence seems more compelling when seen directly in the histories of the affected articles, particularly Clongowes Wood College.

Comments

I don't believe that this user is specifically using accounts to avert/evade a block, but there is clear use of multiple accounts by the same person for vandalism.

Added User:Clongowes1. NawlinWiki (talk) 21:37, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

Bauer-3 had a final warning, and neither he nor the socks made disruptive edits after that. Had the sock edits been known, the account would have received a short block. I will place a 48 hours block on the main account to deter further violations of policy and guidelines, and indefinitely block the alternate accounts that were used abusively. Jehochman 04:12, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Dr who1975

Suspected sockpuppeteer: Dr who1975 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets: France a (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log); Loads more too!

Report submission by

Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 10:45, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

One of the many blatant sockpuppets of France a - see this edit to another of their userpages. This is characteristic of all the socks, to edit each others' userpages and make insults!

Defense

I made an unsportsmanlike edit but I am not France A. I have never made the type of vandalising edits France A has made to Doctor Who pages. The edit of mine above was a response to France A vandlising my home page through one of his sockpuppets. I apologize if this behavior has inadvertantly mislead anybody.

It should be obvious I'm not France A.

France A started activity on "13:09, 24 January 2007"... my first edit was on "01:30, 17 June 2006". France a wasn't even on the scene when I started my account.--Dr who1975 (talk) 16:03, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Has France A or any of his sockpuppets ever shown an interest in The Untied States Congress?

Has France A or any of his sockpuppets ever put up a lot of user boxes saying things like they have degrees from FSU and GSU.

Has France A or any of his sockpuppet's ever shown an inetrest in local American political figures such as Sandy D'Alemberte, Pam Resor, or Jamie Eldridge?

I can put up more examples if you like. If you look at the history of my edits, the behavior in no way matches any of France A's behavior. The only thing I have in common with him is an interest in Dr. Who.

Porcupine is being overzealous. France A has upset a lot of us. I made a mistake.--Dr who1975 (talk) 14:45, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Here's another one, I just created Louisiana's 6th congressional district special election, 2008 yesterday... I doubt France A, who probably lives in Engalnd, would ever take an interest in Louisiana politics.--Dr who1975 (talk) 15:40, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Comments

Oppose: I've been asked by User:Dr who1975 to comment.

User:Porcupine's complaint is insufficient on its face. The complaint rightly shows a single instance of vandalism. However:

that vandalism was not planted anonymously- it clearly belonged to User:Dr who1975, who has had a WP account much longer than the suspected sockpuppet;
vandalism is not enough to make a case for sockpuppetry;
the complaint does not make a case that User:France a is in anyway related to User:Dr who1975
it's hard to defend against a sockpuppetry complaint because it requires proving a negative. How can someone prove they didn't do something. Nevertheless, User:Dr who1975's defense, while not great, is still more than sufficient to dismiss this complaint.

Therefore, I believe this complaint should be dropped.

On the other hand, I doubt User:Dr who1975's medical school background and I don't think he/she is even a doctor at all :-). —Markles 18:51, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I think the last comment about my "medical school backround" was a joke (i.e. the "Dr" in my name). I have never claimed to be a doctor. I'd be laughing if it was on my discussion page instead of here.--Dr who1975 (talk) 19:47, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes it was. —Markles 21:29, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Question What evidence is there that User:Dr who1975 is the same individual that operated France a? --Kife 19:56, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Answer All the other accounts of France a left silly messages just like that on the pages of the previous ones that had already been blocked. Therefore, when a DrWho fanatic leaves a silly message just like that on the pages of a previous one that has already been blocked, I see a certain correlation.--08:01, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Simply stating something does not make it true. You have to provide evidence. Which ID's of France A's left such a message... you have to cite instances where a confirmed sockpuppet left such a message..... my ip address, 67.62.103.180, has never been accused of being asockpuppet of France A. I did use it 6 months ago to leave messages on 2 of France A's discussion pages where I called him a wanker. I told you it wasn't vandalism at the time and there wasn't repeated instances of this behavior. My IP (which was not mine before June 11) has never been used for vandalism of wikipedia pages.--Dr who1975 (talk) 02:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Request I need somebody to submit a Checkuser between me and ~~User:MrClaxson~~ User:Brinstar... ~~MrClaxson~~ Brinstar is a confirmed sockpuppet of France A (confirmed with chekuser) and he has engaged in edits this very day. Time is of the essence as the edits become satle and therefore ussless for checkuser... plus, I am not allowed to request one for myself. A checkuser request is the only sure way to provemy guilt or innocnce.

He has not edited since July 2007, actually, which is probably something to do with the fact that he's blocked.--Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 22:15, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

You're right, I meant User:Brinstar. It was an easy enough mistake to make since I'm not him. All of the following confirmed France A sockpuppets from Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/SaxonUnit have activity within the last two weeks.

Brinstar appears to be active even today. I desperatly need a checkuser against any or all of them to prove my innocence.--Dr who1975 (talk) 22:38, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Some clarification:
Brinstar was unblocked by me; some email conversation led me to think perhaps I'd misidentified him as a sock. Normally we automatically refuse Dr who1975's request, since checkuser is not any good at proving innocence; it can only provide evidence of guilt. But since I'd unearthed these annoyances, I checked Dr who1975, and found no IP or geographic relationship between the Dr and the SaxonUnit gang. Different hemispheres, actually. In checkuser language, Unrelated. --jpgordon 04:15, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Different hemispheres..as I suspected... the Saxon gang is in Europe (or maybe Austrailia/New Zealand), I'm in the U.S.--Dr who1975 (talk) 04:19, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Aside: I've reconsidered Brinstar and blocked him again. --jpgordon 19:56, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Just as long as everybody knows I'm still not him.--Dr who1975 (talk) 20:06, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Oppose per all of the above, it is pretty obvious this should be dropped ASAP. — BQZip01 — 08:45, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

I am not the least bit convinced by these accusations. Archiving and untagging the suspect Dr who1975 (talk · contribs). Jehochman 04:38, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

User:UkraineToday

Suspected sockpuppeteer

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

Suspected sockpuppets

193.243.156.214 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
80.249.229.122 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Melbcity (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
193.243.156.191 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Ukraine2006 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
217.12.205.67 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Timberframe (talk) 14:58, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

The strogest evidence concerns 193.243.156.214. This IP was used to manually revise his auto-inserted username from 193.243.156.214 to UkraineToday in http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:UkraineToday&diff=prev&oldid=155390393 the day before UkraineToday was indefinitely blocked on 4th September 2007- that's the clincher, since he's writing in defence of UkraineToday in the first person and 193.243.156.214 has continued to be used following the block. Likewise, 193.243.156.214 responded to a question addressed to UkraineToday in http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Craats&diff=155213656&oldid=155098962. (And this on the user page for Craats - the name of the author of the blogsite cited in http://en.wikipedia.org/Richard_Wynne which I have twice removed as contrary to WP:BLP - coincidence?)

Supporting evidence

Same topics - Current Ukrainian and Australian politics, in particular continuing the lines taken by UkraineToday in http://en.wikipedia.org/Constitutional_Court_of_Ukraine and http://en.wikipedia.org/2007_Ukrainian_political_crisis

Comments

This user is also responsible for deleting a bot message from Melbcity's talk page concerning an image of Kiev (see http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Melbcity&diff=prev&oldid=184448364). Melbcity's writing shows exactly the same characteristic spelling errors and aggressive style towards other editors as UkraineToday, and again the twin tie-ins to Melbourne, Australia and Ukraine; could this be another of his sock puppets? More - compare the edits in Andrew Landeryou (of Melbourne) by MelbCity on 11/02/2006 http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Andrew_Landeryou&diff=39201304&oldid=35862896 and by 193.243.156.191 the next day http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Andrew_Landeryou&diff=39319008&oldid=39318840 - they are identical. I'm not saying for certain that 193.243.156.191 and 193.243.156.214 are one and the same, but they have the same narrow contribs interest - Ukrainian politics and Melbourne, and 193.243.156.191 also cites the dubious http://melbournecitycouncil.blogspot.com (looks to me very much like a plug by a vested interest).

The same names - UkraineToday and Ukraine 200x crop up in two Ukrainian news sites, currently in forum.pravda.com.ua/ and in the past in en.for-ua.com/forum/. He has been banned from the latter several times and has used many different user names to evade the bans (exactly the same behaviour as I'm seeing here). Both publications have histories of allegations that he is Anthony van Der Craats, author of melbournecitycouncil.blogspot.com, which makes his citations of this blog self-publicity.

It seems that 193.243.156.214 is just the latest of several manifestations of blocked user UkraineToday. The behaviour is remarkably similar, as is the dual theme - Ukraine and Melbourne. You could say the same of non-current users 81.17.128.174, Ukraine2006, 193.243.156.191, and 217.12.205.67 and Melbcity. All the IP addresses relate to ISPs in Kharkov, Ukraine. If these aren't all the same person then that town must be breeding people with very specific interests in Melbourne.

Of these alter egos, Ukraine2006 and Melbcity appear to have been used in good faith before UkraineToday was blocked, and while they highlight multiple identities I see no evidence of malicious intent. I mention them here only because they form part of the bigger picture encompassing the external evidence below. Similarly 193.109.100.247 appears to have been used only in good faith before UkraineToday was blocked but should be considered as a potential future sockpuppet IP. The same could be said of 193.243.156.191 had it not been used to add a self-publicising link. 217.12.205.67 was used to self-publicise another of his blogs, Ukrainetoday.blogspot.com; the user account was subsequently blocked for this and other and for extreme bias(see http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:217.12.205.67). 81.17.128.174 was blocked as a sockpuppet of UkraineToday in September 2007.

Some of this is speculation on my part but the admins could quickly confirm whether Melbcity's IP comes from Melbourne or Kharkov, and whether Ukraine2006 and UkraineToday share IP with any of those I listed here as being behaviourally similar.

External evidence

In the above I have limited myself to facts which are verifiable from within the wikipedia environment. Outside of this environment I moderate a forum from which UkraineToday alias Ukraine2006 was banned for gross POV pushing and flaming attacks on fellow users. Since this ban he has emailed me from time to time using various usernames and IP addresses. These confirm that UkraineToday, Ukraine2006 and Anthony van Der Craats are all one and the same entity and have used IP addresses including 80.249.229.122 and 193.243.156.214, both of which have been used to edit Misplaced Pages since UkraineToday was indefintely blocked on 4th September 2007. I am prepared to make my email account accessible to a reputable Misplaced Pages editor in order to present the email headers containing these user names and IP addresses in their as-received state. Like all the other IP addresses I've mentioned, 80.249.229.122 is based in Kharkov.

This evidence confirms my sockpuppet suspicions and also supports other editors' concerns (as well as my own) that this user is using Misplaced Pages to publicise his personal blogsite and in turm cite his own work as external references for his contributions to Misplaced Pages articles, including the biography of a living person.Timberframe (talk) 14:33, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

193.243.156.214 is an obvious sock. Melbcity, 193.243.156.191, and Ukraine2006 have not edited since 2006, so I'm not convinced since he stopped before UT was blocked. 80.249.229.122 (inconclusive) and 217.12.205.67 (already blocked indef as open proxy) have not edited recently. Blocking 193.243.156.214 for one month-block evading sock, looking into others more. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:06, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

This page has been blanked as a courtesy.

User:Malcomjrjr

Suspected sockpuppeteer: Malcomjrjr (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets: 75.30.151.26 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Thedjatclubrock :) 03:06, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Both Users have added similar text to Aurora (astronomy). See Diffs and . Both diffs are within 5 minutes of each other and they have a similar edit summary.

Comments

Appears to be almost certainly the same WP:SPA operating both accounting (vandalizing same section in same manner, with same edit summary). A checkuser could probably confirm this, but since both are vandalism only accounts, an indef block might be more appropriate. MBisanz 21:34, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Oppose Umm...pardon being the wet blanket here, but each of these accounts have specifically one edit with a single warning on each talk page (You have gone from a basic warning to indefinitely block). To indef block here would be extremely harsh and unwarranted. A simple warning could have sufficed in this case. Give this person a chance to change their ways. After all, this is the encyclopedia anyone can edit. Two edits that violate policy to be followed by (effectively) banishment seems to be overkill. — BQZip01 — 09:03, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

Good points from both reviewers. These are assuredly the same person. One edit each doesn't justify indef, but this was vandalism in each case. Also, you can't indef an IP unless it's a TOR server, etc. It's probably a throw away account too. If I'd come across this as soon as it happened, I'd block 24-48 hours, but as it was 3 days ago, I'm only warning. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:07, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Tooj217

Suspected sockpuppeteer: Tooj117 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets: Tooj217 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) and everything at Category:Misplaced Pages sockpuppets of Tooj117

Report submission by

Marlith /C 02:31, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

This is one of a chain of socks used to vandalized the Geek article.

Comments

This diff seems to indicate that 217 considers himself to be 117. Probable sock. Indef block on 217 as vandalism only, 117 is more complex, probably AIV issue. MBisanz 21:58, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Comment by uninvolved BQZip01 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Given this self-proclamation that he is a blocked user, I see no reason not to treat his as such. I edited a few things here for clarity. — BQZip01 — 02:21, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Already blocked and tagged. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:27, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Editorhwaller

Suspected sockpuppeteer

Editorhwaller (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
I believe the User contributions and his repeated comments on my and the McGill University Talk page clearly show that User:68.45.132.38 is an anon IP sock of indefinitely banned editor User:Editorhwaller. But for some reason, this anon IP seemed to escape the indefinite ban. He has been blocked for 31 hours but I would like to suggest the block be indefinite, as per User:Editorhwaller. Thanks, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:08, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets

SOCKPUPPET1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
SOCKPUPPET2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Evidence

Socks show no contribs, asked for more info. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:19, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Comments

With no comments, evidence, or additional users and a couple of days passing, I suggest this SSP case be dropped. It can easily be copied and reinstated if more information is provided. As it is now it smears a user's reputation with no rationale. — BQZip01 — 09:07, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

Closing, nowhere near enough evidence provided. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:30, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

User:ElboMisery1993

Suspected sockpuppeteer: ElboMisery1993 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets: BRClover2008 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log); KyleE2011 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log); Rsdg2011 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log); Counrymusic2007 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • 21:49, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Editing patterns suggest that User:BRClover2008 is a sock of ~~banned~~ indef-blocked user User:ElboMisery1993; constant unnecessary edits to Billy Ray Cyrus discography, Lady Antebellum and other similar pages. Note that the three other listed socks have already been indef blocked, as their edit histories indicate a similar pattern to the puppeteer.

One example is the constant and unnecessary addition of dashes to discography tables; see this diff for example. Also, the insistence on having his or her way, and demanding that the tables not be changed back; see here. And finally, the addition of unsourced info regarding upcoming singles; see here.

More evidence: User:ElboMisery1993 and the other socks showed a similar pattern of making unnecessary changes to discography tables as well; see here, here, here, here, here, here, etc.

None of these edits by BRClover2008 truly constitutes vandalism (at least not yet), but given the puppeteer's penchant for starting out with similar semi-legit edits and then spiraling into vandalism, and given the obsession with Billy Ray Cyrus, I believe that BRClover2008 is indeed a sock of ElboMisery1993.

Comments

Asked for more info. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:15, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Note: User is now uploading incorrect info; see this diff. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • 22:10, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

More incorrect info in this diff; "Stay With Me (Brass Bed)" was not a #1 on the Radio & Records charts. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • 03:33, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

The diffs and the fact that the socks were all created in sequence after the prior one was blocked convince me. He's now blocked. — Rlevse • Talk • 10:52, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Diegogrez

Suspected sockpuppeteer

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

Suspected sockpuppets

Musicfan48 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
MisterWiki (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
190.82.192.218 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
190.82.193.247 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
190.82.200.58 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
190.82.200.80 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Jespinos (talk) 06:35, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

The accounts are used for doing edits related to a likely false autobiography of the user Diego Grez and spam for a personal website of the same person (Enciclopedia DG). In the case of MisterWiki (former Bodoque57), it is more obvious seeing his contributions on Wikimedia Commons , particularly this.

Comments

Hi! I'm Mister Wiki, and i'm are friend of Diego Grez, but i'm not Diego Grez, he use my account and the signature in commons and upload many pictures about he, i'm not Diego Grez.--MisterWiki (talk) 00:22, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

How can I say to Jespinos, I'm NOT Diego Grez, also i can collaborate for deduce what DIEGO GREZ is an vandale. He is making vandalism right now in http://demo.opensourcecms.com/mediawiki/index.php/Main_Page. Please, dont block me, I'm not guilty. --MisterWiki (talk) 03:01, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions

I do not think there is sufficient evidence to block MisterWiki at this time. I have protected Diego Grez so it cannot be recreated, again, for the nth time. Perhaps that will also discourage further sock puppetry. MusicFan48 (talk · contribs) is already blocked. There's nothing more to do here, so archiving. Jehochman 03:11, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

User:EiWit

Suspected sockpuppeteer

Eir Witt (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets: EiWit (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log); 86.141.8.127 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Jonathan § 22:38, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

User has been adding links to the user page, obvious sock.

Comments

User:EiWit is linked to User:Eir Witt via tags on user pages. --Rocksanddirt (talk) 04:50, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

They haven't editted the same page, but it seems a strong possibility that they are the same person. Suggest a checkuser to confirm EiWit is the same IP. MBisanz 21:43, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Support Low grade sock abuse. IMHO, a warning should be given first on his/her talk page. If continued, a block would follow. I've used an IP address to edit my page before. Though these accounts should share the fate of User:Eir Witt accordingly. — BQZip01 — 21:59, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

Action was already taken--named accounts indef, IP one week. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:51, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Blodhol

Suspected sockpuppeteer

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

Suspected sockpuppets

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

Report submission by

Ghanadar galpa (talk) 02:20, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Contributions to related articles. Insertion of identical pseudohistorical claims in high-ranked articles racism and racism by country

Comments

See my post ] for background.

I strongly recommend a checkuser (code G). There's evidence to suggest these two editors are the sock or meat puppets. More importantly, they do not appear to be truly new editors, and may be part of a larger group. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 21:03, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Blodhol identified a drawer, no a dresser, full of socks. They have been blocked. Good work. Jehochman 02:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Rothchild

Suspected sockpuppeteer

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

Suspected sockpuppets

Timbermile99 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Bingehighmen (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Flymanmcgee (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
ChildofRoth (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Pimpmacro (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Happydudewater (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Mistersupter258 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

--Skylights76 (talk) 07:06, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

The suspected sockpuppeteer, Rothchild, was blocked for 48 hours and then indefinitely after I reported his/her trolling and bad faith edits on the administrators' notice board.

Timbermile99's account was created soon after. Timbermile99 reverted three of my recent edits in a row: , , and , within minutes of each other. The articles were unrelated to each other, so I'm certain the user was simply working off my user contributions page. Also, the edit summaries did not reflect the actual edits.

After the Timbermile99 editor was blocked for being a vandalism-only account, another editor, Bingehighmen appeared. He made two edits continuing his previous vandalism, and was also blocked. After Bingehighmen was blocked, Flymanmcgee appeared and began harassing another user, and was then blocked. Creation of further sockpuppets by this user is ongoing (see their contribs for evidence).

The sockpuppets have basically admitted their sockpuppetry in edits to others' user pages and talk pages.

Comments

The suspected sockpuppeteer has likely been using Misplaced Pages for a long time (probably using other sockpuppets as well), as he/she seems to know a lot about Misplaced Pages and esoteric areas like WP:LAME as discussed on Rothchild's talk page and in the conversation about Rothchild on the administrators' board.

Timbermile99 added numerous userboxes to his/her talkpage and made some small edits to a couple random articles before reverting my edits. I believe this was done in an attempt not to look like a sockpuppet. Also, the user posted an inappropriate question about adding color to text in the administrators' notice board, again no doubt to appear legitimate.

After I filed this report, Timbermile99 posted this fraudulent sockpuppetry notice on my talk page, and engaged in further personal attacks.

I commented about this before on AN/I and the user's talk page, this user is displaying a ammount of knoledge rather detailed for a newcomer, including LAME, SOCK, AGF and ABF, I would say that Rothchild himself is a sockpuppet of someone else, and its probable that someone o=is either banned or blocked, perhaps a check user is in order. - Caribbean~H.Q. 00:24, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Conclusions

I believe Rothchild created the sockpuppet Timbermile99 and several others after being blocked, then proceeded to revert my edits and harass others to "get revenge." The individual continues to create new accounts, harass editors, and vandalize articles. I believe that all of these accounts should be blocked indefinitely, and action should be taken, if possible, to prevent this individual from further account creation and harassment.

It's been eight days. Presumably the person has give up, or the autoblocks have nailed their IP addresses.All of the above accounts are already blocked. There is nothing else to do here. I am closing this report. Jehochman 02:55, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

User:LDEJRuff

Suspected sockpuppeteer: LDEJRuff (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets: 139.55.53.166 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log); 67.140.145.96 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

treelo _talk 02:49, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

This user is using these IP addresses as means to prevent image orphaning which is one of his main motives regarding the Foster's Home for Imaginary Friends satellite articles. A WHOIS check on the IP addresses indicate they possibly originate in Little Rock, AZ but the sockpuppeteer made it evident they were connected after edits to my talkpage.

Comments

Hello, it's me, LDEJRuff, and I just wanted to appologize for my actions to Treelo, and I will never do anything like that again. I've been this way ever since I got banned from Never Forgotten by Cynthia "Sparky" Read, and I'm still angry at her, and Tina "CGAussie" Fazzalari for hating my videos at YouTube, and kaytea who betrayed me (and I'm pretty sure she has a Misplaced Pages account here). But nonetheless, I'm sorry, and I'll never abuse anyone ever again. And BTW, Treelo, I'm not from Little Rock, AZ, I'm from Campbellsville, KY.
~~LDEJRuff~~ (talk) 13:01, 12 January 2008 (EDT)

Your issues are your own and an irrelevancy to this case, don't bring them here. I still believe that the IP addresses and your account are linked given the same motives even with the discrepancy between locations. --treelo _talk 14:28, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I said that I am sorry. I do not want to get kicked out of Misplaced Pages, like how I got kicked out of Never Forgotten.
Also, I only posed as those IP Addresses so that I can get your attention, to reply in my talk page. As I said before, I do not want to get kicked out of Misplaced Pages, and, as the slogan says, it is an encyclopedia in which anyone, or should I say "everyone", can edit, including me!
~~LDEJRuff~~ (talk) 14:50, 13 January 2008 (EDT)

Being blocked can be temporary, not permanent. Even if you are blocked, you can certainly come back and edit after your block.

Conclusions

User has confirmed they used both IP addresses as sockpuppets. --treelo _talk 20:55, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Comments by uninterested BQZip01 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Specific evidence of sockpuppetry seems to be lacking here. The only way to find it is to wade through the edits of a user and 2 IPs. Given the backlog in this section, this is a major problem with this nomination. Without specific evidence, this is going to be too time-consuming to research. IMHO, your case should be made before submitting it here, not after.
Just because a registered user uses an IP address, it does not mean they are in violation of WP:SOCK. I myself have used an IP address to mention a few things and make posts (I cannot log in at work, though I can edit via an IP address). As long as you are not using it in a malicious manner, I see no reason to block someone for such a violation.

Accordingly, I recommend this case be withdrawn/removed until such a time as specific and convincing evidence can be presented (assuming WP:SOCK violations currently exist or come into existence in the future). This discussion can always be referenced later if needed. — BQZip01 — 01:41, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

It does not appear that any administrator action is required, so I am archiving this report. Jehochman 02:38, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Jjmalone

Suspected sockpuppeteer

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

Suspected sockpuppets

Mcblogger (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) already confirmed
Rickcoffer (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Amplifiedlight (talk) 05:31, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Please see prior submission and confirmation of sockpuppetry. This user user:Rickcoffer (which is a mis-spelling of a local activist who supports the candidacy the article's subject) has inserted vandalism 1 2 of similar nature to the prior sockpuppet accounts (Jjmalone and Mcblogger, which was also an impersonation of a local supporter), examples 1 2. Again, this new user account has no history of edits other than this article.

~~Recommend banning of the account.~~

(blocked indef now) Amplifiedlight (talk) 08:08, 11 January 2008 (UTC).

Submitted article for semi-protection through at least primary election ending March 4th, 2008.

Comments

Conclusions

I have blocked all of the accounts indefinitely because they are being used abusively for vandalism, with no significant number of useful edits. Jehochman 23:12, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

User:N EVERYTHIN!

Suspected sockpuppeteer: N EVERYTHIN! (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets: RIGHT UP THE WALL! (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Xdenizen (talk) 00:32, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

This edit to Ruth Kelly

Comments

EVERYTHIN did that edit, how does it show socking? — Rlevse • Talk • 01:06, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Looking at both contributors histories, it appears they both vandalized Ruth Kelly, but in different ways at different times. Not necessarily sock puppetry. MBisanz 21:39, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

I disagree, it appears they both have the same POV's to push and both have similarly recognisable usernames. Edits are near enough at the same time, on both days. Rudget . 22:03, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Yikes! Sorry for the late response here. I've had internet access issues. If memory (and a review of the edit history) serves me rightly, this article has been the subject of consistent homophobic vandalism. On the day I filed the sockpuppet report, the article was being vandalised from a number of similarly named accounts, which were being blocked one after another. It may be that I have the order of the contributions wrong. Nevertheless, I maintain that these accounts are sockpuppets. Xdenizen (talk) 08:14, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Oppose Not enough evidence linking the two for sockpuppetry. I admit that the two edits are both vandalism (the older one simply needs to be blocked), but the new one is the one that concerns me. It only has two edits. It could be someone who simply logged in to vandalize the article. That said, the easy solution here is a request for a checkuser to verify that these are or are not the same person. This edit history is sufficient for such a request. Once the checkuser goes through, it should quickly ascertain guilt or innocence. — BQZip01 — 08:53, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

Moot. Both accounts have already been blocked indefinitely as vandalism only accounts. Hopefully the user(s) behind them will give up soon. Otherwise, the article may be semi-protected. Jehochman 22:18, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Marcus2

Suspected sockpuppeteer: Marcus2 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets: 70.101.182.149 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log); 70.101.160.105 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

treelo _talk 15:30, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

In an ongoing discussion over the reliability of some references within The Powerpuff Girls article, this user has been using these IP addresses as sockpuppets to bolster their opinion on the factuality of these sources and their inclusion in the article. The puppetmaster has been vocal in the past towards his dislike of the subject

One of the puppets has also asked a question at WP:RSN using the same reasoning that the puppeteer has used in the past against the sources.

Comments

So this is your "proof". It doesn't seem valid to me. I am not a sockpuppet. But from what I've noticed through thorough research, he apparently used other IPs on other language Wikipedias, I'm guessing by forgetting to log in. I have read Marcus's work and I agree with him. It seems that I have absorbed all of this and I think alike with him. Have you ever heard the expression "Great minds think alike?" 70.101.182.149 (talk) 22:46, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Just to be aware, I've opened a case at Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Marcus2 for both the IPs listed here. Yng varr 11:25, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Result of the checkuser has confirmed that the IP addressses and Marcus2 are linked. --treelo _talk 14:59, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

The RFCU case filed against Marcus2 and the IPs confirmed them to be linked, so this case can be closed now. Spebi 22:51, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Hermossa13

Suspected sockpuppeteer

Hermossa13 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Report submission by

g026r (talk) 01:41, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Chuckie berry (talk) 01:13, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

All accounts used solely for the editing of items related to articles The Realm of No!/The realm of no! (Deletion log for the former: ).
When article was deleted, newly created user Hermossa13 recreated the page under The realm of no!, and proceeded to defend the article as having been deleted due to a vendetta against it.
Item is an unpublished/rejected home-brew adventure for a roleplaying game, of which fewer than a dozen copies may exist and which all three users appear to have a rather strong opinion on the notability of; as such, it is unlikely that this many people would know of it and would appear here all at once (all accounts created within the past couple of days) to create articles related to it.

Chuckie berry (talk) 01:13, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Obvious same user making multiple edits under at least 2 seperate IPs, one of which is located in the state of Virginia of US and the other the other located Amsterdam of the Netherlands.

Comments

Added two user IPs and reason for the addition. Chuckie berry (talk) 01:13, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Added another IP which is editing article to remove AfD tags with the same style comments as others. -- g026r (talk) 02:26, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Added another sock account Chuckie berry (talk) 04:55, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Added two more accounts. -- g026r (talk) 05:05, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm only seeing edits from User:130.149.160.175 and User:190.50.192.32 and they don't appear to overlap. Were others deleted? MBisanz 21:48, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, the various articles and images the other accounts had created or edited have since been deleted. -- g026r (talk) 15:26, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

It is beyond reasonable doubt that these are the same user. I will tag and block all of them as there is evidence of serious disruption. Jehochman 21:35, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

130.149.160.175 (talk · contribs) was previously blocked as a Tor node. Edits from that account may represent more than one user. Jehochman 21:48, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

User:CompScientist

Suspected sockpuppeteer

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

Suspected sockpuppets

New IP addresses/users as of 10 March 2008:
75.7.148.121 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Seicer (talk) (contribs) 03:43, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

A discussion initiated by one of the IP addresses at Talk:Nissan GT-R challenged the validity of the discussion and the consensus achieved in a prior discussion relating to the term, supercar. The comments therein, by the starting IP address and the three others, revolved around the same line of comments and assumed bad faith on part of other editors. The discussions at Talk:Nissan GT-R mirror that of CompScientist.
The IP addresses have reinstated original research and vast amounts of unsourced materials to supercar, beginning with this IP edit:

1st: 08:42, 8 January 2008 by 71.156.48.66
2nd: 18:58, 8 January 2008 by 75.7.233.121
3rd: 19:33, 8 January 2008 by 75.7.233.121
4th: 20:13, 8 January 2008 by 75.7.233.121
6th: 21:52, 8 January 2008 by 75.8.98.85

These IPs were also used to make false AIV reports on some of the other users involved.

22:28, 8 January 2008 by 75.8.98.85
22:06, 8 January 2008 by 75.8.98.85
21:54, 8 January 2008 by 75.8.98.85
20:17, 8 January 2008 by 75.7.233.121 (cumulation of two)
by 75.7.233.121
01:24, 9 January 2008 by 75.3.251.3

- Daniel Case (talk) 05:05, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Various IP addresses were adding in blank section headings as a potential POV-fork.

00:44, 16 January 2008: Latest, but they are all pretty much the same. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 03:46, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

A new batch of very similar edits to CompScientist has appeared by Wikipeadian (talk · contribs):

Nissan GT-R:

15:08, 2 February 2008
20:21, 2 February 2008
23:50, 2 February 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seicer (talk • contribs)

Vietnam War:

I'll request a CU tonight. Seicer (talk) (contribs) 00:31, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

And... with Mcknight11 (talk · contribs):

Vietnam War:

01:42, 17 February 2008
03:36, 18 February 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by BusterD (talk • contribs)

Comments

IP addresses evading block of CompScientist for edit warring, 3RR.
Currently, Nissan GT-R is locked due to edit warring between CompScientist and various individuals, and supercar is locked due to edit warring between the IP addresses and various individuals.
I am sending this for IP Checkuser, and if this proves to be CompScientist, a lengthy block for disruption, abuse and repeated sock puppetry will follow. Jehochman 15:14, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

The IPs were confirmed by checkuser and I have lengthened the existing block to one month for block evasion and disruptive sock puppetry. Jehochman 21:25, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

User:RobJ1981

Suspected sockpuppeteer

RobJ1981 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

JB196 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Eyrian (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Dannycali (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
JohnEMcClure (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Burntsauce (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Jasdhf1981 (talk) 13:19, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

I'm a regular editor and need to avoid on-wikipedia harassment from possible socks or proxy editors. I hope that it is useful so taking this route so admins can see if this merits investigating/action. I've found this editor to be borderline attacking others, making accusations against users. I wish to remain anonymous and feel someone should pay attention to the case.

User:JB196 primary editing/deletions related to wrestling articles. RobJ1981 has parallel assumptions of bad faith and anti-"in popular culture" edits shared by suspected meat puppets and engages in numerous wrestling deletionism that seem to match JB196, in fact he has hundreds if not 1000s of wrestling related removals, deletions, AfD nominations and a interest in editor TJ Spike, whom JB196 also disagrees with (the first post is from JB196):

It may be worth checking to see to what extent the known JB196 socks argued with TJ Spike; numerous RobJ1981 anti-TJ Spike edits., , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .

RobJ1981 has continued doing so recently (notice also the rivalry with TJ Spike): , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .

Similar behavior against Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , [http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_Happy_Meal_toys_%282nd_nomination%29&diff=172872089&oldid=172770090 .

Notice that part of that dispute involves an editor named 3bulletproof26. Now, notice JB196 problems with the same editor: , .

Additional evidence of a JB196/RobJ1981 versus 3bulletproof16 over wrestling articles:

JB196 versus 3bulletproof16: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

RobJ1981 versus 3bulletproof16: , , , , ,

Notice as well the harassing accusations andANI similar to Dannycali (recently blocked as a JB196 sock puppet after checkuser), Eyrian (who admitted using the alternate account named JohnEMcClure to "test limits"), and RobJ1981 (who has strikingly similar edits and accusations as JB196, Eyrian, Dannycali, and JohnEMcClure). The above are sample of their (JB196 and RobJ1981's) edits on 3bulletproof16's talk page. There's, again, even more to this dispute in the similar dispute of JB196 and RobJ1981 with TJ Spike in reverting and ANI threads elsewhere. It may be worth seeing if any of the other determined or suspected socks or meats or proxies have also engaged in conflict with 3bulletproof16 and TJ Spike that strengthen the likelihood of a connection, or disruptive relationship.

So, JB196, an editor mostly interested in wrestling articles, has his main dispute toward the end of his editing life is with 2bulletproof16 (someone suspected as being a TJ Spike sock). RobJ1981â€™s main dispute in his edit history is also with TJ Spike/3bulletproof16. Moreover, JB196 finished editing in 2006 around the same summer that RobJ181 started.

Part of what led to JB196 troubles (as well as those confirmed alternate accounts) involved incivility, personal attacks, etc. again, consider the following warnings to RobJ1981 and disputes: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , (notice that JB196 and RobJ1981 had problems with TJ Spike and the one to protect TJ Spike talk page is Alkivar),

, , , , , , , , ,

RobJ1981 is also edit warring/conflict with other users: , , , , , , , , , , .

So:
1) RobJ1981 has had issues with 3bulletproof16, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles and TJ Spike, just as JB196 did;
2) Dannycali, who has accused users of stalking, was recently blocked as a JB196 sock or meat after a check user and RobJ1981 has offered similar accusations against the same editors that Dannycali did;
3) RobJ1981 has a history of persistent and determined claims of harassment against editors, even if told to let it drop. And RobJ1981 even disagreed to an offer at mediation in one of the disputes. Notice JzGâ comment to RobJ1981 compelling: "Having proven beyond reasonable doubt that they are separate accounts, creating a second sockpuppetry case against them looks a lot like harassment. I have deleted it. Do not pursue that line again." His aggressiveness towards others even after well-established admins told him otherwise.

Also, RobJ1981 has AFD articles that Eyrian originally nominated: Eyrian:, RobJ1981:

Comments

Similar opinions doesn't always mean it's the same person. I think you are just trying to cause trouble, which is bad faith and unnecessary. You claim you are a regular editor, yet your account only has edits on today's date. So to make this clear: you make a new name, just to accuse others of being sockpuppets? That's a bit hypocritical. Have them do a check user on me, it will prove I'm innocent and you are just assuming bad faith/causing trouble. Also I want to point out, all those links aren't even relevant. I didn't have time to go through them all, but here's some examples to explain my edits. 28: I removed the wrong year category, as it's the original release year that is the only category listed for video games (the video game project has mentioned this many times on their talk page when the issue has been brought up). I also added a relevant category for the game console it's for. 29: I removed cruft from the article. The heights and so on aren't useful for the encyclopedia. Check any other wrestling game article, all that information is never listed. 67: I removed a dead link from the article. 74: this was a matter of category cleanup, and removing a wrong template. Many of those articles listed I wasn't even reverting TJ, so the heading of "notice also the rivalry with TJ Spyke" doesn't exist in every edit. It's wrong to just group all those together, when many don't even involve him. In my view, this user is just trying to find anything I removed from wrestling articles. It's called cleaning up the article. I don't have a grudge against wrestling articles. You might as well throw in all my other edits into this, and claim I have something against all subjects I edited, because I've removed things from those as well. Give me a break, this claim is just stupid and full of nonsense. RobJ1981 (talk) 17:09, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I've commented at AN/I. Some of the diffs do seem to be the wrong edit , and I dont think the departed Eyrian has anything to do with this. The general pattern does seem to raise some concern./ I unfortunately am not able now to properly look through all the evidence, DGG (talk) 19:58, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

I don't need all these diff to solve this. Note the submitter's name pattern on a keyboard. This SSP case is also his one and only edit. Note the last four accounts are indef blocked already, and JB196 hasn't edited since 2006. RobJ1981 seems a constructive editor. The submitter is obviously a sock of someone trying to get at RobJ1981. I've blocked the submitter indef. What I don't know of whom the submitter is a sock but a CU would tell us. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:56, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

User:MathStatWoman

Suspected sockpuppeteer

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

Suspected sockpuppets

Report submission by

Pete.Hurd (talk) 05:05, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

User:MathStatWoman sockpuppeteer (confirmed by Checkuser admins Kelly Martin & Fred Bauder), see summary of behaviour here), has been blocked three times for repeated copyvio contributions, repeated vandalism and repeated disruption. She has a history of abusive sockpuppetry and disruptive edits related to the now deleted Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Roberta Wenocur subject in particular. Articles on Wenocur have been deleted four times already, the fifth is now at AfD. MathStatWoman has not edited since Aug 06 (none have any of her previously identified sockpuppets have edited past Sept 06, except for one, which made edits to userpage removing the sock template Feb 07).

The most recent R. S. Wenocur article was created by User:Alfred Legrand. Other pages created by MathStatWoman and since edited by User:Alfred Legrand include Marion Cohen (twice survived AfD by non-consensus), and Mark Pinsky.

A confirmed MathStatWoman (by Fred Bauder here) sock is User:Philly Student, and MathStatWoman has edited Philadelphia related articles such as the Philly suburb article Ardmore, Pennsylvania, example (problematic) edits: , . Alfred Legrand's also displays an interest in Philadelphia topics, making some problematic edits: (e.g. & ).

MathStatsWoman complained that Utz chips ought to be deleted , Alfred Legrand's put a prod tag on it (). Alfred Legrand has also created some very odd food-related articles, such as Sweet Muenster Cheese, the (now deleted) Harvest Moon Cocktail and Whole stuffed camel. He's also made edits attributing the invention of recipies to R.S. Wenocur, e.g. the pomegranate martini , the harvest moon beer coctail . In a similar edit User:Samuel Kotz attributes a recipie for Sweet Muenster cheese (note difference in capitaliation from the Alfred Legrand article) to R.S. Winocur .

Comments

Many of these have been confirmed at Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Alfred_Legrand. CM (talk) 18:33, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

Checkuser confirmed a number of sock puppets, and they were blocked. It appears that no further administrative actions are required here. Jehochman 15:05, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Fila3466757

Suspected sockpuppeteer

Fila3466757 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Farlack907 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Farlack913 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Greenock125 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
ScotRail DBSO (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
ScotRail421 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
FA53764968566fgtu7757 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Rydo12345678 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Stewart 22:12, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

Fila3466757

Incorrect information added
Possible threats to other users on talk page
Inappropriate reversal of route information
Addition of incorrect information very doubtful
Inappropriate reversal of route information
Inappropriate language on talk page
Admission that Farlack931 and ScotRail421 are sockpuppets following query by Admin User:John.
threats to other users on talk page
Message onto a sockpuppet user page
response to old comment of a sockpuppet talk page which ignores and does not respond to the comments being made.

Addition added 10 January 2008

Inappropriate language on talk page regarding the activities on other pages.

--Stewart 06:55, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Addition added 13 January 2008

Abuse to a user who has suggested a means of identifying the issues he has concern with.

--Stewart 09:33, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Addition added 15 January 2008

More inappropriate language and abuse on User:Pencefn's talk page (for something Pencefn didn't do no less).

--Dreamer84 (talk) 11:19, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Farlack907 (Active May to August 2007)

Farlack913

Inappropriate message subsequently blanked by admin User:John.
Inappropropriate message subsequently blanked by User:Signalhead
change data in an infobox even though the text explains the reason for the status quo
Edit to location of station, resulting in invalid wikilink
http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=North_Kent_Line&diff=prev&oldid=172528410
Birkhill location
another incorrect edit to Lockerbie
Lockerbie manager
Comment which should have been on talk page in article. Message posted on talk page by User:Pencefn
Lockerbie reverted by User:Signalhead
Message on own talk page regarding edits on other pages without have understood what was done and why.
another on talk page comment
shouting on talk page
response to Admin comment
response to vandalism warning
Response to an offer of help from an Admin
Response to case set out by an Admin who was not involved with the edit mentioned.
As the initial creator, and a major contributor to the article, this was unexpected and inappropriate
Reversal of route information
Deletion of route information
Incorrect editting of route information
Number of platforms at Edinburgh Waverley
Lockerbie Manager again
Incorrect number of platforms at Motherwell]
Inappropriate message on user page

Greenock125 (active since 18 December 2007)

Used mainly to trawl the internet for pictures which are loaded into Misplaced Pages.
Images deleted in early January now being re upload, examples include:
Although has deleted warnings on talk page does not appear to has taken on board the issues raised.
Meanwhile Fila3466757 posts inappropriate language when the images that do not contain copyright information are deleted.

ScotRail421

ScotRail DBSO (only two edits in November 2007)

Another Lockerbie edit

FA53764968566fgtu7757

Misleading edits reverted by Admin User:John
Incorrect, potentially disruptive, edit

Comments

Suspect that this user, although has made some good edits, is making disruptive edits and place messages on Talk and User pages that contain inappropriate and threatening language. As User:Farlack931 this user changed the number of platforms on a large number of railway station articles which required to be reverted to the correct number.

The creation of multiple accounts appears to be used to make a clean start or possibly to avoid scrutiny. --Stewart 22:12, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Recent posting on the talk page suggest that this user if using the main account to post messages, whilst other accounts, specifically Greenock125 appears to be acting as a feedstock to the puppetmaster. --Stewart 09:33, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

At least some of these accounts appear to be sock puppets, while the connection to others is less strong. There may also be other, undiscovered socks. There appears to be an ongoing pattern of disruption, incivility and perhaps sneaky vandalism. I will file a request for checkuser to see if that can clarify the situation. See Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Fila3466757. Jehochman 22:20, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

The checkuser came back with a list of socks. These have been blocked indefinitely. The main account has been blocked for one week. Jehochman 14:16, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Standshown

Suspected sockpuppeteer

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

Suspected sockpuppets

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

Report submission by

Laveol 21:34, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Evidence

User:Standshown has been edit-warring on a number of articles and especially on 2: Neo-Nazism in Serbia and Ante Pavelić and has done it till the 31 December. On December 30 a new account was created (User:Stagalj) that immediately started warring on the same articles - here are all the reverts from both users on Neo-Nazism in Serbia Stagaji, then Standshown and then again Stagaji , . The other article is Ante Pavelić where Standshown made reverts as follows - that was untill the protection of the article. Immediately after protection expired there was (this is on December 31) and three days later Stagaji continued . Standshown had been previously blocked for similar edits and that might be the reason for the new user creation. It might be just coincidence, but an extremely suspicious coincidence. --Laveol 22:07, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Comments

The "evidence" above is just a frivolous attempt to eliminate me as an opponent in this discussion and in contributing to Misplaced Pages. I only share an honest interest with other editor (Standshown) in improving the quality of Misplaced Pages's articles. The Misplaced Pages's checkuser is free to confirm that I am not the one who uses the same Internet account as the other editor (Standshown).--Stagalj (talk) 01:51, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Just to add up: Immediately after his first revert Standshown provided references for his edits taken directly from Google books (where he most probably just made a simple search) and guess what Stagalj did after his first revert (or maybe a little bit later: - obviously again google booked. --Laveol 15:22, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I've contacted Stagalj. We learned that we live in two different cities, use two different IP accounts owned by two different ISPs.

As to the accusations above, the accuser is obliged to provide a sound proof that both of us used the Google Book Search engine and not, for example, Live Book Search, or Questia search, or a library commercial or proprietary book catalog search tool. One of the accepted proofs might be the format of generated search engine report like or and the clear connection between the reports and our edits seen on the talk page. Also, the accuser is obliged to provide evidence that the edits are comming from the same IP account or that both accounts belong to (and/or are used by) the same person.

--Standshown (talk) 19:11, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually the accuser is not obliged to provide non of this above. I have no privileges to see your actual IPs as the accuser is not an Admin. And the accuser meant that both of you have an almost identical way of providing references - I have not linked Google book cause it was meant as a principle not as the exact way you attained your sources. And as you might notice the accuser has not put the Google book stuff in the evidence section of the report.--Laveol 19:30, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Note The following ISP's seem to also be socks of this user: 72.75.47.110 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) and 66.2.146.41 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). Both of these are in the greater Washington, DC area and have made similar edits. --Strothra (talk) 03:52, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Seconded. This user seems to have an interest in WWII Serb related articles. Until New Year User:Standshown have been in edit war on 2 other articles Serbia (1941-1944) and Puppet state. He hasn't broken WP:3RR as far as I can see, but WP:Edit war is now policy. A single user using multiple accounts to hide the true state of the article (Neo-Nazism in Serbia and Ante Pavelić) is problematic .--Rjecina (talk) 21:48, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

I think there is evidence of sock puppetry, but I am not completely convinced at this time. Therefore, I will file Misplaced Pages:Requests for checkuser/Case/Standshown to see if that provides any further information. Jehochman 20:58, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

The checkuser result is that the two named accounts are

Unrelated, however both have been logging out and using their IPs to evade 3RR or avoid scrutiny. That is not allowed. I will warn both not to do that further. There have been no fresh reverts, so blocking is not necessary. Should edit warring resume, contact me and I will consider whether to apply blocks. Jehochman 20:53, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I have issued warnings to both users. Hopefully this will be the end of it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jehochman (talk • contribs) 21:54, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages

:Suspected sock puppets - Misplaced Pages