Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Battomi/Archive

05 August 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

I have been loath to start this SPI, mainly because we're dealing with a newbie and someone who not only doesn't understand how Wikipedia works (not for promotion of non-notable pseudoscientists, not for addition of unsourced content, refuses to sign posts, etc..), but seems incapable of doing so, even after repeated requests to use only one account and to sign comments. Communication is difficult, so I've cut him lots of slack, but after ignoring multiple warnings about using multiple accounts, he now thinks we can't see through this and denies doing so.

All accounts edit the same articles, using the same arguments, in the same threads, and using very broken English. Mbreht has also edited Battomi's userpage. I have been keeping track of the socks and their activities here:


 * Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Mbreht


 * Users involved:




 * Special articles involved:


 * Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ignat Ignatov - history
 * Ignat Ignatov - history
 * Evidence of possible hoax: This edit removed names with a suspicious pattern, similar to the name of Ignat Ignatov: Marin Marinov, Anton Antonov. Are these real people at all?


 * Thermography - history
 * Additive color - history
 * Kirlian photography - history
 * Bioresonance therapy - history
 * Medical biophysics - history
 * List of biophysicists - history


 * Evidence (just an example showing same style and language)


 * By 85.118.193.189
 * By Battomi
 * By Borromi
 * By Mbreht

Other editors have also warned them, but to no avail. -- Brangifer (talk) 23:49, 5 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Per DUCK I still think they are the same person. To suddenly come and edit the same articles, using the same broken English syntax, using the same arguments, and responding, regardless of which one has been addressed, to discussions as if they were the same person, indicates they're the same person. The flow was unbroken, without any indication that the discussion was with several people. They never spoke to each other. There was no pretense to be more than one person, yet that person was using multiple accounts, seemingly oblivious to the fact we're not supposed to do that. In that sense there was never any attempt to deceive, until just recently, when a (naive newbie) denial was made (per comment from IRWolfie below).


 * I would suggest that all but Mbreht be blocked and that he be warned to use only that one account. I see no need for stringent sanctions against him, but he needs help/adoption. He doesn't understand our notability requirements, and he doesn't communicate in English well enough to manage here. -- Brangifer (talk) 03:32, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

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

Note that the editor claims that they are different editors, so this isn't a case of alternative accounts:. IRWolfie- (talk) 11:01, 6 August 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
— Berean Hunter   (talk)  14:45, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * to confirm extent of socking.
 * The following are related to one another:

— Berean Hunter   (talk)  12:58, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
 * looks . No comment with regards to the IP. Tiptoety  talk 17:25, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Borromi also created an alternate account. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:55, 6 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Moved case name to Battomi; blocked master 48 hours, 2 socks indeffed & tagged.