Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Boulayp/Archive

Report date May 6 2010, 17:56 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets



Users are making nearly identical edits to Sri Chinmoy such as this and this. may also be related. (Filed on behalf of ) —DoRD (talk) 17:56, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Evidence submitted by —DoRD (talk)
 * Thank you, DoRD. Drmies (talk) 18:37, 6 May 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users

Requested by —DoRD (talk) 17:56, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
 * CheckUser requests


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

I don't see evidence of edit-warring; I'm assuming the reason is repeated vandalism to a BLP. I think it's an appropriate reason to CU. Auntie E. (talk) 03:48, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅. Also:
 * --jpgordon:==( o ) 18:10, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * All 4 now blocked. —DoRD (talk) 18:18, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
 * All 4 now blocked. —DoRD (talk) 18:18, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

and their socks are all exclusively making substantially the same edits to Sri Chinmoy in order to avoid being reported for edit warring. On 24 February the apparent newcomer added controversial material to the article that was already extensively covered in the article:. They were reverted by me with edit-summary explanation, and after replacing the material  was reverted by an uninvolved editor:. I left a gentle warning on 's usertalk about edit-warring:, and within 8 hours created 3 socks: , , and , who all posted negative controversial material to the Sri Chinmoy article, most all of it either already in the article, or if not already in the article then poorly or questionably sourced. When the socks were reverted three times by an article watcher (Riquix), , , and the first sock (Lazyfoxontherock) was usertalk warned by ,  created a fourth sock, , to replace the material:.

This sockfarm is very obvious, but I'd like a CU so that sleepers can be checked for.

[PS: This article attracts extremely POV editors -- either rabid followers or extreme detractors -- and very few neutral editors. When new POV editors arrive and their contributions are edited, modified, or removed (with cause), they tend to sock. In the past I've already posted a couple of SPIs of sockfarms focused on this article.] Softlavender (talk) 11:55, 28 February 2020 (UTC)


 * Addendum to and clerks: Two of the socks in this case added unusual and obscure material regarding "Mirra Alfassa ( known as Mère )",  identical in text  to additions made by the various socks in the 2010  SPI: , , , , , , , . So yes, this is the same sockmaster and the two SPIs should be merged. Softlavender (talk) 00:27, 29 February 2020 (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
✅ + . This is probably related to Sockpuppet investigations/Boulayp, which is very stale. There is some technical evidence and the behavior evidence is fairly obvious. I'll let a clerk decide whether this case should be merged into the other. For the moment, I'm blocking the socks without tags.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:45, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Another one, . Blocked without tags.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:49, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Merged and closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  10:09, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
 * The tagging is incorrect. I have not confirmed the latest accounts to the master. Please fix (best would be confirmed to each other and suspected to the master).--Bbb23 (talk) 13:08, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Done. It would be great if we could upgrade the SPI script to make it possible to tag accounts with those dual (altmaster) tags. Doing it manually is quite waste of time.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  18:47, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

PluckyCod and ShamefulSausage  are adding the same bogus link that various previous socks have attempted to add ("Mother's agenda") to the Sri Chinmoy article -- see archived SPIs referring to these diffs from previous socks:, , , , , , , , ,.

PuzzledLapwing is another Chinmoy SPA and is adding and edit-warring over a BLP-violating comedy send-up of Chinmoy,.

AmazedLollies is another Chinmoy SPA, removing positive material from the article.

The first two socks are extremely obvious members of the original sock farm. The second two are suspiciously similar enough to check. I'm also requesting CU in order to find any sleepers. Softlavender (talk) 03:00, 4 May 2020 (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

 * ✅ PuzzledLapwing, & . The rest are, except the master obviously. --  Amanda  (aka DQ) 21:40, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
 * DrKay (talk) 16:31, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

All 11 12 accounts are focused on editing negatively on or re: Sri Chinmoy, generally in a trolling manner. Often as only one or two edits per account. All (except Madhyamasakti, who was CU-blocked by Bbb23 in March but not yet added to this list) within the past 2.5 months. Accounts that have more than a couple of edits are either Chinmoy SPAs or Hinduism SPAs.

SriSriSriPatrick is the main (most active) account, and main troll, of this sub-group. This includes creating attack pages on Chinmoy:, ,. This account is also adding negative claims about Chinmoy to other articles which already exist on Wikipedia:, , , ,. Created an entire article on a farm in Iceland just so they could add negative material about Chinmoy:.

OeilDuCyclope is tag-team editing with SriSriSriPatrick on U Thant Peace Award, and !voting to keep SriSriSriPatrick's attack pages using the same trolling language: ,.

ZestySyrup's single edit is a negative Chinmoy assertion on List of avatar claimants, which GiddyRhino immediately added to  and SriSriSriPatrick did as well three days later  and re-added the entire claim three times after others removed it for inadequate sourcing, , , and added additional unsourced Chinmoy-related material to the article , and added material to the article using a deceptive edit summary. After SriSriSriPatrick's edit wars were reverted, SheepishCockatoo came in to do more of the same on that article:.

GrumpyLocust and CrummyOwl  showed up to defend SriSriSriPatrick's attack page, as their only edits.

CrushedCurlew is merely probable, having only one edit which was borderline neutral but still intended to be negative (see edit summary), but the intent of the edit, the edit summary, the single edit, and the username similar to most of the others make this a very probable sock.

In short, this gang of 11 12 or more socks has taken up (after this page protection for persistent sockpuppetry expired) where the gang SPIed in May 2020 left off.

I'm also requesting CU in order to find any sleepers. Softlavender (talk) 02:47, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Added: PeacefulMussel was created 2.5 hours after this SPI was filed, making the same trollish edits. Softlavender (talk) 05:47, 20 July 2020 (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

 * - A number of these have a similar username pattern to recent Boulayp socks, plus overlap at AfDs. Something is certainly fishy here. GeneralNotability (talk) 02:59, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Group 1 are ✅) to each other and to and :
 * Group 2 accounts are ✅ to each other and, as a group, to group 1:
 * Group 3 are ✅ to each other and very very to group 1:
 * All . Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:52, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Group 4 are ✅ with group 1 but have no edits:
 * Group 4 is also ✅ to, who is a confirmed sock, so all are blocked. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:58, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Group 2 accounts are ✅ to each other and, as a group, to group 1:
 * Group 3 are ✅ to each other and very very to group 1:
 * All . Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:52, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Group 4 are ✅ with group 1 but have no edits:
 * Group 4 is also ✅ to, who is a confirmed sock, so all are blocked. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:58, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Group 3 are ✅ to each other and very very to group 1:
 * All . Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:52, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Group 4 are ✅ with group 1 but have no edits:
 * Group 4 is also ✅ to, who is a confirmed sock, so all are blocked. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:58, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * All . Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:52, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Group 4 are ✅ with group 1 but have no edits:
 * Group 4 is also ✅ to, who is a confirmed sock, so all are blocked. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:58, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * All . Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:52, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Group 4 are ✅ with group 1 but have no edits:
 * Group 4 is also ✅ to, who is a confirmed sock, so all are blocked. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:58, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Group 4 is also ✅ to, who is a confirmed sock, so all are blocked. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:58, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Group 4 is also ✅ to, who is a confirmed sock, so all are blocked. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:58, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Group 4 is also ✅ to, who is a confirmed sock, so all are blocked. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:58, 20 July 2020 (UTC)