Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bobi987 Ivanov/Archive

31 October 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

After User:Bobi987 Ivanov was blocked for first time he continued his disruptive behaviour with different IP addresses, 3 of them listed above. Then he was blocked 2 more times for evasion. On the same day of hist last block (2 weeks) (24 October 2014) the User:Chakmak111 account has been created and he continued the same discussions Talk:Yane_Sandanski and pushing the same changes as User:Bobi987 Ivanov  with similar (partially the same) summaries. StanProg (talk) 11:22, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

User:Bobi987 Ivanov: '''It must be said that my edits have always been historiographically confirmed. I never was banned for vandalism and disruptive behaviour, but because I was refusing to discuss my edits (which I considered, and consider absolved subject), but which I wouldn't do any more in the future.''' I was told that: "— Berean Hunter  (talk)  00:17, 17 October 2014 (UTC): Simply put, it isn't the material that you are trying to introduce but rather it is your behavior that is getting you blocked."


 * As I said, my edits have always been historiographically confirmed. I always provided more than one source to confirm what I add. If Chakmak111 or else decide to support me, that's because my edits were correct.

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

User:Chakmak111 first appeared three days after User:Bobi987 Ivanov was blocked for two weeks. The block came as result of him evading a previous block. He waited until the new account was auto-confirmed and plunged back into the edit-war he received his original block for. This is Bobi987 Ivanov's last edit on Ilinden–Preobrazhenie Uprising and Chakmak111 went on to do the same,. That's Bobi987 Ivanov and that's Chakmak111 on Yane Sandanski. Bobi's edits on Todor Panitsa in comparison with Chakmak's. Furthermore, Chakmak continued Bobi's discussions at both Talk:Todor Panitsa and Talk: Yane Sandanski. Both users find it hard to create proper links to articles and talkpages, and they both use bold text in excess. -- L a v e o l  T 22:34, 2 November 2014 (UTC)  L a v e o l   T 22:34, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
I ran into Chakmak and blocked before I saw this SPI. Running CU is a good idea, though--clearly this person can't stop. I also blocked an IP, 217.16.88.13. I have not yet looked at the other IPs, but I'm getting kind of tired of this person so I'll leave it up to the experts. Oh, I added a month to the master's block, but I would not oppose an indefinite block. (Also: ping and .) Drmies (talk) 02:57, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
 * The following accounts are.
 * . PhilKnight (talk) 13:50, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
 * . PhilKnight (talk) 13:50, 6 November 2014 (UTC)
 * . PhilKnight (talk) 13:50, 6 November 2014 (UTC)

19 November 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Yet another sock of BobyIvanov. The sock appeared after his latest block. It edits articles in the same area, with his characteristic text in bold. Additionally, the IP address listed here corrects his edits and engages in edit-wars in the same pages that the new sockpuppet edits. The IP is from the range mentioned in earlier cases. -- L a v e o l  T 10:51, 19 November 2014 (UTC)  L a v e o l   T 10:51, 19 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Additional information - the new user proceeded with making pretty much the same edit as the original puppeteer, his previous puppet, and the IP associated with him.-- L a v e o l  T 07:19, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Adding to the list of evidence - the newest puppet went on to edit a talkpage previously edited by the sockmaster. His comments there are more than telling:  I was editing another article, and it led me here, onto this one. Interesting discussions. Earlier today I was accused for “sockpuppetry” about this editor who had initially added these references to this article, and had afterwards been blocked, like - forever. I was falsely accused, off course. But, as I understood the information says that he / she (probably he) was banned not for vandalism, but inappropriate behavior, lack of discipline and other technicalities, and yet, his / her edits have been removed, even though he / she featured them with an academic source after this discussion. -- L a v e o l  T' 05:51, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
 * OK, I like history. So what? And, yes - yesterday, working on another article led me to Boris Sarafov, where I noticed the uncertainties and /or probable historiographical manipulations that had been put in Boris Sarafov, like several others had noticed before me. What's my sin, again? Radko Kovac (talk) 13:26, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' Someone edited my typo, and I'm a sockpuppet? Radko Kovac (talk) 11:01, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
I've tagged the puppet based on duck. In addition to everything says, I've looked stylistically at the new account and the blocked master and puppets, and they are amazingly the same, particularly the edit summaries. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:23, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

16 July 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

The new user is battling on the same pages as and one of his sockpuppets  were actively edit-warring on. The username itself is once again (as is the case with Bobi987) a simple combination of a first name plus three numbers. The new sockpuppet avoided writing any comments or engaging in discussion until finally [commenting on an article] and thus exposing the very same style - poor English combined with the usage of bold and capitalized text. The very same style was characteristic of the original puppeteer as the previous cases show. Moreover, the new user seems as fascinated with Teresa Carpenter, Hristo Silyanov, and a fascist writing from Greece as the original puppeteer was.  L a v e o l  T 22:31, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

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

To me, this new editor does indeed look like a sock puppet. I think that CU must be requested. Gameroffun (talk) 13:18, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - There is nothing to compare Iordan666 with. The master and all previous socks are .  Vanjagenije   (talk)  16:51, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Iordan666 hasn't edited in over a month, all CU data is stale, behavioural evidence is circumstancial at best, and case filer was CUblocked... closing with no action. ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  23:06, 31 August 2015 (UTC)