Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/123.124.233.241/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

This IP (114.253.207.79) was created just today to converse in a survey on talk:Taiwan. The only other articles he/she has edited are the same ones as editor 123.124.233.241 has also edited such as Mariano Rajoy, and Felipe VI of Spain. Plus he starts his conversation the same exact way ... To John Doe. This is a duck in the oven trying to influence talk:Taiwan. Fyunck(click) (talk) 19:30, 25 May 2018 (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

 * - CheckUser evidence may not be used on IP's. Sir Sputnik (talk) 21:01, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * One IP blocked and one inactive. Closing. Sro23 (talk) 00:32, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

I was about to file a SPI request on this, and I found out there was already a previous SPI on this very same IP from a couple months ago. The two additional IP accounts here have only been used to fill and/or comment in move discussions.

This started with 111.194.18.194 requesting moves for Hongzhi Emperor, Tongzhi Emperor, Heshen, Jiaqing Emperor and Jiajing Emperor. These five were subsequently supported by 123.121.173.87, who pointed out no additional reason for support but "Reason mentioned above". User spotted that these two IP accounts were located in the same city and began editing the day of these requests, with edits only pertaining to this single interconnected set of move discussions. 123.121.173.87 also requested a move for Emperor Xuanzong of Tang at about the same time as they supported the other moves. Then, the suspected sockmaster account (123.124.233.241), which also happens to share the same location as the previous two IP accounts, proceeded to support the move of all six previously-mentioned move requests under the same reasoning as 123.121.173.87 ("Reason mentioned above"). In all cases, the suspected sockmaster also replied Dekimasu that "In addition, what do you think about the proposal put forward by 111.194.18.194, Dekimasu? You should focus on the page-moved proposal here, instead of the irrelevant behaviour of 111.194.18.194". They did the same at Talk:Emperor Xuanzong of Tang, but naming 123.121.173.87 instead. 123.124.233.241 also happens to have a contribution history on Chinese emperors-related articles in the days previous and concurrent to all six move requests (check    ). The two suspected sockpuppet accounts had been already warned by Dekimasu on 26 August.

The suspected sockmaster has repeteadly tried to ignore the issue on the basis that such a behaviour "is irrelevant" to the move discussions and that, if anything, such a behaviour is 111.194.18.194's fault despite evidence connecting all three IP accounts and after having been told (by user Dekimasu,  and myself) that using more than one account to try to give the impression of more support for a position than actually exists and/or to contribute to the same discussion in a way that suggests they are multiple people is not allowed, but the IP account kept arguing that this was not relevant to the discussions. Note that while I was writing this SPI report, the IP has warned to report me in several talk pages, despite the presented evidence.

Also worth noting is that a previous SPI on this IP on May this year revolved on a similar incident of the user using two accounts to try to influence a discussion in a China-related topic. The user also proceeded to blank their user talk page on 21 August, which up until then was full of warnings.  Impru20 talk 15:46, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment. Also worth noting is that all of the IP's edits (including their reply below) are from a mobile phone, and that all of the IPs fail to sign their comments when posting them (an editing pattern which is very characteristic from the suspected sockmaster).  Impru20 talk 19:37, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

To Impru20 : I think the sockpuppet incident in August 2018 is misunderstanding. Here are my reasons: First, the investigation should focus on this incident in August 2018 only, not the previous incident. It is different between the past and now. Second, you responded 5 page-moved proposals made by the user 111.194.18.194 very quickly before the user 123.121.173.87, why did you do so? Can I say that you have the similar problem? Third, the user 123.121.173.87 simply responded the proposal made by the user 111.194.18.194 "Support. Reason mentioned above." I seem that there is no problem. Fourth, the user 123.121.173.87 put forward a page-moved proposal, someone (like user Dekimasu) thought that the user 123.121.173.87 is a sockpuppet of the user 111.194.18.194, just because the content is similar and the two user located in the same city. The user 123.121.173.87 put forward a similar page-moved proposal like the user 111.194.18.194. All page-moved proposals show in Requested moves and can be known by everyone. So I guess that because the user 123.121.173.87 is young, he/she just regarded the the proposals made by the user 111.194.18.194 as a model, to put forward his/her proposal. It isn't likely to be a sockpuppet. The user Dekimasu thought that the two user located in the same city, so they are sockpuppet. It is so ridiculous. There is a large population in a big city. It is too normal. Fifth, after the user Dekimasu put forward his idea about the sockpuppet incident in the 6 page-moved discussions, I made the response to let him back to the proposal itself, because the discussions are about page-moved proposals, not the sockpuppet investigation. I tried to avoid making snowball by talking about the sockpuppet investigation (which is irrelevant to the page-moved proposal itself). But Underbar dk and you continue to make the snowball in the 5 page-moved discussions. Why don't you do the sockpuppet investigation in other page at the beginning? I guess that you just want to oppose the proposal in the abnormal way. Sixth, It is my normal right to edit the Wikipedia pages as a user (such as editing Chinese emperors-related articles and blanking my user page). It is irrelevant to the sockpuppet incident. In conclusion, the sockpuppet incident in August 2018 is misunderstanding. The user Dekimasu, Underbar dk and you are too sensitive. Here is all my reply. Let the meaningless investigation pass.

123.124.233.241

18:38, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

(Because I couldn't connect with Wifi suddenly and had to use my cell phone traffic just now, the IP address was changed to 117.136.0.167 and 117.136.0.165, but the comment above was still made by me (123.124.233.241). It isn't relevant to the sockpuppet incident. Please don't misunderstand. Thanks!) 18:38, 27 August 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.136.0.167 (talk)
 * Firstly, I mentioned the May 2018 incident briefly to illustrate that there is past precedent for sockpuppetry on your part.
 * Secondly, if you think I'm sockpuppetrying myself, you should provide evidence for that and possibly fill a SPI yourself, explaining which accounts I'm allegedly using as socks. This, instead of launching wild accusations. Make sure, however, that those who you intend to frame are indeed sockpuppets; otherwise, your attempt could backfire spectacularly.
 * Then, the fact that this comment of yours has been edited by three different IPs accounts (117.136.0.167, 117.136.0.165 and 2409:8900:1f04:b78d:ff35:ff73:4e9c:2c87) does little to help justifying the absence of sockpuppetry, given the provided evidence. The three of which, btw, also happen to be located in the same city as the previously reported IPs.
 * Also of noting is that you say that because I couldn't connect with Wifi suddenly and had to use my cell phone traffic just now, the IP address was changed to 117.136.0.167 and 117.136.0.165. How curious that 111.194.18.194 and 123.121.173.87 also happen to conduct mobile phone edits; and how curious that these, such as the IP accounts you confirm as yours, do all fail to sign their comments.
 * Finally, yes, the behaviour you attempt to excuse is highly likely to be viewed as sockpuppetry; to the point that three different users (Dekimasu, Underbar dk and myself) did reach that same conclusion from the same evidence. If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and says 'quack', then it probably is a duck.  Impru20 talk 19:31, 27 August 2018 (UTC)


 * The 123.124.233.241 address is currently actively contributing to RMs, see this which they have even added an unsigned template.  Crouch, Swale  ( talk ) 10:59, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
I have blocked 123.124.233.241 for two months. The other IPs have not resumed editing. If they do, this case should be reopened. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:35, 30 August 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

The IP switched to mobile to leave a message at a page move proposal gloating that the IP they used to open the nomination wasn't blocked, as their very first edit. . WP:DUCK _dk (talk) 16:38, 31 August 2018 (UTC)


 * Another IP is used to remove the sockpuppetry notices, still claiming innocence.. Adding that IP here for block evasion. _dk (talk) 19:49, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
 * It seems that the IPs are related to indef blocked sockpuppet master, as evidenced by the block on the last IP and the similar choice of words. _dk (talk) 21:15, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

I suggest leaving this SPI open for the duration of the ongoing RMs at these articles, since the sockpuppetry looks persistent. The 7-day discussion period is about to expire, though maybe a SNOW close would proceed given the situation. Impru 20 talk 20:19, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
 * I added another IP sock who again went on to remove the sockpuppetry notices and post yet another support !vote . Note that this IP has already been blocked, but I'm adding it here nonetheless as it would still be part of the present case. Impru 20  talk 10:18, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Adding yet another IP sock . Impru 20  talk 15:03, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
 * And another one . Impru 20  talk 15:19, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * 2409:8900:3200::/48, closing. GABgab 15:29, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Removed the SPI notices added by on all the Requested Moves that 111.194.18.194 requested. See diffs. Also only contributed to these requested moves and nothing else (see contribs ). Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me &#124; my contributions 11:18, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

I would suggest any uninvolved editor to close down the RMs at Hongzhi Emperor, Tongzhi Emperor, Jiaqing Emperor, Jiajing Emperor, Heshen and Emperor Xuanzong of Tang, as the normal seven day listing period has elapsed. By this point, it is fairly obvious that these have a snowball's chance in hell of succeeding, and they have just become a hotbed of disruption for the sockpuppet (just check the pages' history:     ). I would ask for page semi-protection, but being talk pages with open RMs would make such a protection feel awkward and also unlikely to be granted (unless the disruption continues after the closing of the RMs). Impru 20 talk 11:37, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The sock did it again (check     ). I have reported the IP account to AIV .  Impru 20  talk 11:49, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
 * and again... I will close. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me &#124; my contributions 12:09, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
 * I have reverted their edits yet again, but they will surely come back. Impru 20  talk 12:11, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
 * All RMs have been closed as not moved. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me &#124; my contributions 12:20, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
 * And the IP account has been blocked as well . Impru 20  talk 12:22, 2 September 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets

 * stale, but obvious.
 * stale, but obvious.
 * stale, but obvious.
 * stale, but obvious.
 * stale, but obvious.
 * stale, but obvious.
 * stale, but obvious.
 * stale, but obvious.
 * stale, but obvious.
 * stale, but obvious.
 * stale, but obvious.
 * stale, but obvious.


 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

117.136.0/24 should be blocked for IP editing for a few weeks, it's a round-robin gateway. All of these IPs are involved in reverting back talk page discussions as their last edit, or inserting the same text into multiple articles. Obvious socks are obvious. SchmuckyTheCat (talk) 10:05, 10 September 2018 (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
You have not presented any evidence in the form of diffs. Mostly all you've said is it's "obvious", which is not evidence but a conclusion. You need to present evidence for at least each range of IPs (say one IP in each range) and for the one named account, who, by the way, is not "stale", which is a term of art when discussing sock puppetry.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:12, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Bbb23 - I've blocked the IP range 117.136.0.0/24 for one week due to repeated disruptive edits on Talk:Republic of China (1912–1949). I looked through the other IPs listed and decided to hold off. Whether or not these ranges are causing disruption to certain pages and if these are all connected remains something that needs more proof, but I do see disruption by some IPs and ranges to different pages and somewhat recently (last edited more than a few days ago). Just pinging you as an FYI about the block I made.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   12:21, 10 September 2018 (UTC)


 * None of the IPs have edited recently. Closing. TonyBallioni (talk) 05:40, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Self evident all IPs from the 123.150 range (only those 3, 178 never edited) are same editor e.g. [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:123.150.182.180&diff=prev&oldid=884377539] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:123.150.182.177&diff=prev&oldid=884377128]. Two other IPs are stale, I'm mostly including because help make case of abusive sockpuppetry if evidence connecting range to older IPs isn't enough although 124 could be worth blocking. 123.150 IP is highly interested in mostly historic governments and dynasties, as with previous incarnations of this editor. Interest in Chinese dynasties, not so unusual given geolocation but does include emperors and their naming [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Xuande_Emperor&diff=prev&oldid=883448702] and the ROC 1912-1949 [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Republic_of_China_(1912%E2%80%931949)&diff=prev&oldid=876912099] as with previous incarnations. Interest in diverse range of others more unusual [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kingdom_of_Hungary_(1920%E2%80%931946)&diff=prev&oldid=873650922] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_monarchs_of_Persia&diff=prev&oldid=873650434] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Abdullah_of_Pahang&diff=prev&oldid=882449192]. 124's interest may be historic but is similar [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Republic_of_China_(1912%E2%80%931949)&diff=prev&oldid=836060609] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kingdom_of_Italy&diff=prev&oldid=839436567]. 111 is concurrent with the recent issues and is the same [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dynasties_in_Chinese_history&diff=prev&oldid=876906139] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kingdom_of_Great_Britain&diff=prev&oldid=876788246] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pahlavi_dynasty&diff=prev&oldid=876966928]. Such interest are fine, but both 124 and 111 !voted in this RM on CCTV New Year's Gala [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:CCTV_New_Year%27s_Gala&diff=prev&oldid=876903777] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:CCTV_New_Year%27s_Gala&diff=prev&oldid=876752986]. 123.150 self removed their !vote [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:CCTV_New_Year%27s_Gala&diff=876752878&oldid=876752799] about 1 minute before the 124 IP !voted. But later tried to remove SPA tags (of yet other IPs) [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:CCTV_New_Year%27s_Gala&diff=876807984&oldid=876786956]. Either we have 3 editors from Chinese ISPs with a great interest in various world governments and dynasties, who also happened to all participate in that RM, or abusive sockpuppetry involving multiple !votes and other fiddling. Per the previous SPI, such abuses in RMs is also a hallmark of 123.124. Frankly, although not surprising Chinese editors most interested in RM, and timing means may be when others will look at article, most of !votes seem suspicious given the wording etc [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:CCTV_New_Year%27s_Gala&diff=878170887&oldid=878168018], also reflected in the move review [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Move_review/Log/2019_January&diff=877524592&oldid=877523653] (other IP's with similar interests e.g. Special:Contributions/123.113.78.173). Sockpuppet_investigations/123.150.182.180 was opened in response to that but 123.150 IP stopped editing for a while so was closed (and perhaps too broad). Wonder if may be worth blocking 124.127.203.116 long term considering resurrection after several months for RM. Nil Einne (talk) 12:14, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Just noticed Special:Contributions/117.136.0.0/24 seems to be up to their old tricks so may be due for a re-block. (Note the "year in" [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Year_in_Germany&diff=prev&oldid=879004098] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Year_in_East_Germany&diff=prev&oldid=878992504] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1707_in_England&diff=prev&oldid=878990653] seems to be another interest of their's since at the new year, 123.150 left like 55 of these messages [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ernstblumberg&diff=prev&oldid=876165453] with new year greetings and requesting creation of '2019 in country X'.) Nil Einne (talk) 12:29, 21 February 2019 (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

 * I've blocked the IP range 123.150.182.0/23 for one week due to the disruption. The other individual IPs are much too stale for me to do anything with, so I'm leaving them be. Closing SPI...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   08:59, 22 February 2019 (UTC)