Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/あすぺるがあすぺしゃりすと/Archive/4

Suspected sockpuppets

 * ( original case name)

For the Dhivehi name / "Sspae erger", see these two edit summaries.

For the Georgian name / "Spisergera", see these two similar edit summaries.

For the Amharic name / "Complexity", see two MORE similar edit summaries.

I believe this should be filed under another sockmaster, however, the original name is evading me. General pattern of accounts with non-Latin alphabet language names making two edits to their talk pages in Japanese. . Schrödinger's jellyfish &#9993; 02:59, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Comments by other users

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

Sockpuppet investigations/あすぺるがあすぺしゃりすと32.220.205.180 (talk) 03:17, 28 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Thank you so much - and as I thought, ja:利用者:სპისერგერა. Schrödinger's jellyfish &#9993; 03:20, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Spicy (talk) 14:25, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Case moved under correct name. Adding more socks per similar user talk page behavior, caught with edit filters. for sleepers, thanks. 0x Deadbeef  →∞ (talk to me) 06:59, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
 * These are them:
 * ,, closing. Spicy (talk) 14:27, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
For "3", see characteristic diff - compare to previously blocked socks at Special:Contributions/სპისერგერა & Special:Contributions/UKɔƒE.

Second user is a potential sock - more edits than would normally happen & mobile ones at that to talk page, but identical first three characters. CU requested for sleepers, and maybe someone who can view edit filters with what was found in the previous report. Schrödinger's jellyfish &#9993; 03:52, 2 February 2024 (UTC)


 * "アスペ3", per machine translation, is "Aspie 3". "アスペツー", also per machine translation, is "aspe two". Schrödinger's jellyfish &#9993; 04:12, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Not that many today.


 * I wonder why we bother to block these. They don't do anything besides writing harmless nonsense on their talk page in Japanese. I suspect if we stopped playing cat-and-mouse with them, they'd get bored and go do something else. Anyway, blocked and tagged, locks requested... Spicy (talk) 12:59, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
 * How about ? They appear to be DUCKY and may have more. (and given that sleepers have some degree of technical seperation). 0x Deadbeef →∞ (talk to me) 14:48, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
 * And re: they don't do anything besides writing harmless nonsense on their talk page in Japanese. Note that they sometimes do make edits, see Special:Contributions/アスペルガー キワミ usually they target pages containing asperger's syndrome (hence ASPE or アスペ in their names) but it is possible that they will vandalize if they don't get blocked. 0x Deadbeef →∞ (talk to me) 14:55, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Ducky enough, and confirmed to and to . Locks requested.   Girth Summit  (blether)  17:16, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
Characteristic diffs for #1, #2, and #3. Usernames all Asperger's related.

Likely sleepers, CU requested. Schrödinger's jellyfish &#9993; 03:49, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * #4, also Asperger's related username. Schrödinger's jellyfish &#9993; 03:56, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * . Also added more socks caught with the edit filter. (Japanese edit summaries, adding numbers to user talk page, blanking own talk page, username differences) Please check for sleepers. (Also, OP: it would probably be better if reports for this sockfarm are filed less frequently, it is probably more satisfying for CUs to catch 50+ socks in a week or more instead of doing this repeatedly each day, since we already had a CU check yesterday, also the disruption this sockmaster does is minimal) 0x Deadbeef →∞ (talk to me) 05:38, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 13:26, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 13:33, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Dreamy Jazz</i> talk to me &#124; my contributions 13:33, 4 February 2024 (UTC)


 * . Dreamy <i style="color:#d00">Jazz</i> talk to me &#124; my contributions 13:34, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
WP:DUCK, just taking out some trash.  Zoe Trent Fan 🎤💍 02:53, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Spicy (talk) 10:40, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
 * CU requested and . There is also whose edits to user talk also match with the past socks. Please check for sleepers. <span style="font-family:Iosevka,monospace">0x Deadbeef  →∞ (talk to me) 03:42, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
 * etc. Spicy (talk) 10:42, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
More obvious socks, either writing Japanese edit summaries or writing numbers before blanking. There are some more username-based suspicious accounts that were brought up on my talk page, like which translates to "Esspaerger" (phonetically similar to asperger). I'm wary of them being less obvious so have not listed all of those here (hopefully they appear from CU checks) <span style="font-family:Iosevka,monospace">0x Deadbeef →∞ (talk to me) 10:11, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Comments by other users

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

Vanamonde93, you've tagged the socks as sockpuppeteer, not sockpuppet. 32.220.205.180 (talk) 19:50, 14 February 2024 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Please check for sleepers, as per above. <span style="font-family:Iosevka,monospace">0x Deadbeef →∞ (talk to me) 10:12, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * All of the accounts above are ✅ to each other and to some previously blocked socks. I can't help but wonder if we're being trolled here; there's no effort being made to edit content, or indeed do anything except register the username, and it's more effort to check each account than it is to create each one. I rather think these should be blocked on sight going forward. Perhaps someone cleverer than me can create an edit-filter that finds these. Vanamonde93 (talk) 18:06, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Have an idea for abuse filter, can I email you? -Lemonaka‎  05:33, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
 * A filter for this exists. I will block them on sight the next time I encounter them instead of SPI. <span style="font-family:Iosevka,monospace">0x Deadbeef →∞ (talk to me) 06:27, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
 * retagging as CU confirmed socks under あすぺるがあすぺしゃりすと. <span style="font-family:Iosevka,monospace">0x Deadbeef  →∞ (talk to me) 09:00, 15 February 2024 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
Quack quack quack, あすぺるがあすぺしゃりすと is back. (This week's sock report)

The following accounts are CU blocked but need tags and a lock request:

The following accounts are DUCK blocked but need tags and a lock request (and possibly CU):

The following accounts are CU blocked and tagged, but need a lock request:

The following accounts have been blocked without CU confirmation or edits, but locks have been requested:

The following accounts are ducky by username:

There are other accounts that are slightly less ducky, and are listed here. ClumsyOwlet (talk) 21:11, 22 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Never mind, more ducks were spotted at the sock pond. Note the username similarities. ClumsyOwlet (talk) 04:09, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Don't forget . ClumsyOwlet (talk) 01:52, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Log says that was created by 嫗瑰蘋嫗ピオラ. ClumsyOwlet (talk) 03:17, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * And another one, . Actually caught them in the process of blanking their user talk page. ClumsyOwlet (talk) 04:46, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * And they're back: ClumsyOwlet (talk) 02:35, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Also, could a CU look at the already blocked to make sure?
 * also did something a bit different on their talk page. ClumsyOwlet (talk) 03:15, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
 * And another one blanking their talk page just now: . ClumsyOwlet (talk) 03:27, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Never mind, there is now. ClumsyOwlet (talk) 03:29, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

More suspicious accounts: and the still unblocked ones here:  ClumsyOwlet (talk) 02:47, 3 March 2024 (UTC)


 * just confirmed it. ClumsyOwlet (talk) 03:09, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Comments by other users

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


 * After reading up on some of the CU comments, do we know the extent of their disruption on the Japanese Wikipedia? My big concerns with these socks are that they're either Isechika (whose names in Japanese are offensive, outing editors, or otherwise unacceptable - not to mention more harmful edits to mainspace) or they're using en wiki's general unfamiliarity with them to register a ton of accounts to disrupt globally. I do think they're minimally disruptive here at worst, and harmless (albeit prolific) here. If it's a waste of CU resources and time, I'm alright to cease submitting any further requests for this sockmaster in spite of my concerns. <small style="color:#0080FF;background:#EAEAFF;border:2px solid;border-radius:4px;padding:0 4px">Schrödinger's jellyfish &#9993; 21:39, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Going off of:
 * it does look like they're just registering here and attempting to go over to ja wiki. <small style="color:#0080FF;background:#EAEAFF;border:2px solid;border-radius:4px;padding:0 4px">Schrödinger's jellyfish &#9993; 21:42, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * @0xDeadbeef and @Spicy. They were changed their editing patterns and started to vandalize articles after getting confirmed. see  -Lemonaka‎  04:54, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
 * This is what usually happens on jawiki. This has happened before, however. (see this, for example). ClumsyOwlet (talk) 13:11, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
 * This is what usually happens on jawiki. This has happened before, however. (see this, for example). ClumsyOwlet (talk) 13:11, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - please check for potential sleepers. <span style="font-family:Iosevka,monospace">0x Deadbeef →∞ (talk to me) 15:07, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Based on the edit filter, I also found:
 * <span style="font-family:Iosevka,monospace">0x Deadbeef →∞ (talk to me) 15:10, 23 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I have to ask, because I keep wondering. Is there any indication that systematically seeking out, compiling, checking and blocking these accounts is ultimately providing a tangible benefit from an abuse prevention perspective? As far as I can tell, many of them never edit enwiki, and the ones that do only do so on their own talk pages. Basically all of them are long gone by the time they are blocked. Now, it is undesirable for someone to constantly produce these accounts, no doubt about it. But considering that getting blocked by the hundreds for years on end has done nothing to dissuade them, I'm not sure whether it's worth our time. Ultimately, it seems that the outcome remains essentially the same whether or not we end up investing our time: The accounts still get made, they still post a few words about building renovations or somesuch on their talk pages, and that cycle still repeats, with basically no reader-facing consequences. --Blablubbs (talk) 19:28, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I very much agree. There's no point to blocking them and I'd even argue that even just blocking them would go a bit against WP:DENY. Though won't they run out of IP addresses? They seem to be really good at block evasion. I think in the case where the occasional user vandalizes and removes mentions of Aspergers syndrome, we can always use protection. <span style="font-family:Iosevka,monospace">0x Deadbeef →∞ (talk to me) 04:15, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Though won't they run out of IP addresses? - the history of this case should indicate that that is very unlikely. Spicy (talk) 16:09, 25 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I"ve run the sweep and blocked what I found, all my taggings from 19:02 to 19:09 today are them. Courcelles (talk) 19:09, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Case closed, doesn't seem to be anything else to do for now. Courcelles (talk) 19:47, 5 March 2024 (UTC)