Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Bowei Huang 2/Archive

Evidence submitted by RUL3R
User:A1DF67 used to have the account User:Bowei Huang, he requested a name change, after this change, User:Bowei Huang was registered again, making similar edits to User:A1DF67 (old) (new), and User:Bowei Huang even blanked A1DF67's user talk page.

124.168.169.61 has removed comments from both user talk pages and from his own when warned about removing comments. WHOIS info for this IP returns Australia as its location, which is a topic edited frequently by the aforementioned accounts. > RUL3R >trolling >vandalism  12:51, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users
--AussieLegend (talk) 10:31, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Related discussions
 * Archived at Administrators' noticeboard/Archive206
 * Current (as of 2 January 2010) at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents
 * Please just indefinitely block this account. We know that the old account name was used by the editor, we also know that if someone else has taken over it then this is a clear case of impersonation. If it is not impersonation then the old user is now using two accounts, which is not allowed. Either way, that original account name should be blocked indefinitely. - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 11:54, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I actually saw this coming before it happened (this Help desk/Archives/2009 December 15 in particular) and guessed that Bowei Huang was either intending to really vanish/stop editing or far more likely intending to start afresh with a new account. I didn't want to be seen a stalking and so let it be for a while. Once I saw Bowei Huang had created a new account with exactly the same name, it was obvious he wasn't exactly hiding this new identity and seeing nothing extremely bad in the first few edits, decided to let others deal with it (I also semi forgot about it). As to why Bowei Huang wanted to start afresh, perhaps it's because people were starting to express major concerns about his editing with even some thoughts of banning. See also this     which is perhaps fairly enlightening. My hope had been that Bowei Huang would actually change his behaviour but it looks like this isn't happening. Note that there are several other IPs, in particular Special:Contributions/60.242.166.182 & Special:Contributions/203.214.19.205 although I think it's more often forgetting to log in then an attempt to hide his identity or avoid scrutiny. There is also Special:Contributions/Brickfield although this hasn't been used in a while Nil Einne (talk) 01:24, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
User:Bowei Huang has been blocked indefinitely by User:CambridgeBayWeather. If the account is operated by an impostor, then s/he is blocked. If the account is operated by User:A1DF67 then s/he should use that account only. DrKiernan (talk) 21:18, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Conclusions
User:A1DF67 warned not to engage in sock puppetry again. –MuZemike 22:46, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

20 April 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

This IP has continued the pattern of disruptive editing associated with Bowei Huang's earlier account, their current account under its old name, and a different IP, that was observed in this investigation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/A1DF67/Archive AlexTiefling (talk) 17:02, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

This got eaten during my original posting:

In particular, the IP has made edits to the Reference Desk archive to remove people's criticism of Bowei's characteristic fire-and-forget questions: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2011_September_20&diff=prev&oldid=452307745 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Archives/Miscellaneous/2011_September_21&diff=prev&oldid=454638702 The two accounts both make tendentious-looking redirects: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Republicanism_and_religion&diff=prev&oldid=483495474 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=National_government_of_America&oldid=485475616 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Empire_of_America&oldid=485477491 They both ask similar questions on the RefDesk, and then never follow them up: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities&diff=prev&oldid=484288676 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Miscellaneous&diff=prev&oldid=487463453 And they both blank their user talk pages, to suppress evidence of criticism: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:110.174.63.234&diff=prev&oldid=487451274 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bowei_Huang_2&diff=459421392&oldid=456401136 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Bowei_Huang_2&diff=437798998&oldid=427284735 Bowei has a long history of trolling the Reference Desk, and I'd encourage any admin to take that into account during this investigation. AlexTiefling (talk) 17:06, 20 April 2012 (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 looking much into Bowei Huang 2's behavior, I have blocked 110.174.63.234, which clearly belongs to him without needing to check, and that should restrict him to his main account. --MuZemike 21:55, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

17 May 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

There's no smoking gun here; it's simply that, on the same day:


 * 1) User:Bowei Huang 2 was blocked for disruptive editing—in particular, creating useless redirects.
 * 2) User:Realotter (created three days earlier) began editing—and virtually all of their edits have been to create useless redirects.

I'm not asking for CheckUser as I've got no reason to request one, but I wouldn't be one bit surprised to find out that he had a few other accounts as well. Dori ☾Talk ⁘ Contribs☽ 08:10, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

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

It's not the first time the user has indulged in shenanigans. He started out as "Bowei Huang", and then adopted the new name "A1DF67" 2 1/2 years ago, as part of a scheme to try to hide his previous activities. He fooled no one, and then an admin assigned him to "Bowei Huang 2". The problem is that 2 1/2 years later he's still messing around. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 11:24, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
A disruptive account, with no constructive edits, and pretty clearly a sockpuppet. Sock indefinitely blocked, both accounts tagged. Ready to close. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:23, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

20 May 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Once again, he's creating unnecessary redirects and re-adding material to various law-related articles. Looks to me like it might be time for a rangeblock, if possible. Dori ☾Talk ⁘ Contribs☽ 01:48, 20 May 2012 (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

 * Dori, since this has been sitting here for so long, can you tell us whether the disruption is still going on with any other IPs? ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:29, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Looked at some of the articles edited by the IP and it dosen't look like the issue is ongoing. Feel free to relist if needed.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  02:26, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

28 June 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

The usual slew of redirects. Some that they've both edited: Legal justice, Legal injustice, and Punitive injustice. Dori ☾Talk ⁘ Contribs☽ 03:30, 28 June 2012 (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

 * WP:DUCK: indefinitely blocked. AGK  [•] 23:55, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

26 July 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Brand new user comes in and immediately starts to create redirects and vandalize Human responsibilities…. Dori ☾Talk ☯ Contribs☽ 01:01, 26 July 2012 (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

 * Quite evident it's them. Blocked (non-CU block) and tagged. Elockid  ( Talk ) 03:01, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

16 September 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Bowei Huang, who has used socks in the past was well known for their persistent questions about James Randi on the RD  even after being told to ask James Randi themselves. We see the same from the very first 2 questions from Utilitarianism  Nil Einne (talk) 06:22, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Observation - The username also reflects BWH's enduring obsession with philosophical systems, and the new user's second edit was to delete his own signature, which is also a characteristic BWH behaviour. WP:DUCK, I feel. AlexTiefling (talk) 11:53, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Can something be done to block that pest's underlying IP for some long stretch of time? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:30, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * From memory of when BWH uses an IP, at least one of the IPs is fairly dynamic and belongs to a major Australian ISP, so probably not. Nil Einne (talk) 12:40, 17 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Would that you could block the range and tell everyone that this one guy is the reason no one else can get in. Then the problem might "fix itself". ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 19:18, 17 September 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Obvious sock blocked and tagged. (Non-CU block) ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:29, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

04 July 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

I submit both users' entire edit histories as evidence. They both repeatedly post barrages of questions about God, the Devil, and other perceived polarities to WP:RD/H, and ignore the answers. When I remarked to FG591 this morning that their posting style seemed familiar, they deleted my comment, which is what inspired me to track down the earlier account. And here it is. AlexTiefling (talk) 11:19, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

I now see that Republicanism was eventually blocked as a sock of Bowei Huang 2. Duck season! AlexTiefling (talk) 11:32, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I think this should be reconfigured as part of the lengthy Bowei Huang 2 SPI series. I've also asked the blocking admin whether the underlying IP(s) can be blocked, or whether it would affect too broad a range. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 12:21, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Moved page to proper master. An admin has already sock blocked them, so nothing left to do but the paperwork.  Closing. Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124;  WER  15:35, 4 July 2013 (UTC)

24 May 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Xylocode exhibits a very familiar editing pattern. Numerous new redirects, mostly relating to Christianity - especially evangelicalism - politics, and Australia. And now the next phase has begun - hit-and-run questions on the Reference Desks, more or less directly asking for our opinions on highly subjective aspects of the same topics. I've played this game through to its conclusion several times already; this time I'm handing it over to the admins. AlexTiefling (talk) 22:26, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

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


 * These seem very likely to be the same user. Both spend most of their editing time creating political and Christianity related redirects, and both consistently remove posts from their user talk page, or blank the entire page, without using edit summaries. (See contributions and user talk pages for evidence)- MrX 16:04, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I would ask that after Xylocode is blocked that we nuke their contributions per WP:EVADE. Many of them such as Institute for Christian Economics and some of these redirected to Christian right are harmful.- MrX 16:10, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Seconded. AlexTiefling (talk) 19:33, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Blocked, nuked, closing. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 00:06, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

25 March 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

The evidence is presented in the edit history at 60.241.116.90's talk page, where I WP:Pinged two WP:CheckUsers and two non-WP:CheckUsers who are familiar with this editor's WP:Sockpuppetry. The two WP:CheckUsers, Elockid and DeltaQuad, did not comment for whatever reason. The two non-WP:CheckUsers, MrX and AlexTiefling, did comment. Flyer22 (talk) 08:39, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

To make the evidence clearer, if it's not already clear enough as far as WP:Duck goes, three of Bowei Huang 2's WP:Sockpuppets were reverted at the Irresponsible page, seen here, here and here. IP 60.241.116.90 showed up to make the same edit. That IP has also been editing other articles that Bowei Huang 2 has edited, and edits just like Bowei Huang 2. That IP also blanked this WP:Sockpuppet investigation, and was reverted by Bentogoa. And he then blanked his talk page to remove the notification I left for him concerning this WP:Sockpuppet investigation. Bowei Huang 2 has clearly been roaming around as this IP since March 25, 2014 (since this IP first began editing Wikipedia), and I see no wide-scale damage being done by blocking this IP for a long time. By that, I mean that in the case that this IP is assigned to someone else, it will not be often. Flyer22 (talk) 07:15, 26 March 2015 (UTC) Elockid, thanks. In this specific case, how is one week enough? Like I stated, this IP has belonged to Bowei Huang 2 since 2014; that is clear from the edit history. Therefore, there is no high risk in blocking this IP long-term (for example, for months) as far as this IP getting assigned to someone else goes. After one week, if this is Bowei Huang 2's static IP or sticky dynamic IP, he will be doing what he was doing with it before. The same goes if the block were to end after a couple of months, but at least a couple of months is longer. Personally, I would opt for a year-block. Flyer22 (talk) 22:25, 28 March 2015 (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
/ Flyer22 (Making sure message is received). Hmmm. It seems I've gotten quite a few times now where pings don't actually ping. In future cases, you can just directly contact me. Anways IP blocked for 1 week. Elockid  ( Talk ) 22:14, 28 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Silly me, I was still thinking that we were in 2014. I've amended the block to reflect the nature of the IP. Elockid  ( Talk ) 23:45, 28 March 2015 (UTC)

02 May 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Bowei Huang 2 seems to be back again asking the same [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities&diff=prev&oldid=487463125] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities&diff=prev&oldid=659978166], [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities&diff=prev&oldid=531190294] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities&diff=prev&oldid=659426738]. As is often the case with Bowei Huang 2, their edits to the encylopaedia proper are at least partially problematic [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hell&diff=prev&oldid=659268404] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rights&type=revision&diff=658144309&oldid=658127598] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Johngot&diff=656221710&oldid=656215108] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Johngot&diff=653722298&oldid=653572989]. In case there are any doubts, edits to the rights article [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rights&action=history] strongly suggest these two are the same editor. And as can be seen for the contrib history, most of their edits relate to religion (particularly god and hell), economics related or crime related as I think the history of Bowei Huang case page with their many socks establishes was their interest. I've request check user to at least match these two accounts, and try establish if there any any sleepers. I believe there were fairly recent non IP socks of Bowei Huang 2 which were blocked without a case which these could be matched against too, but I'm lazy to dig them out. Nil Einne (talk) 07:13, 2 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes they are same person and these accounts belongs to Bowei Huang 2.
 * Both create their userpage and UTP in 1 minute and with same characters,, which is similar to a previous sock and right after creating page with 'a', would blank the page.  Occult Zone  (Talk • Contributions • Log) 07:28, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Correct, IP needs to be left alone.  Occult Zone  (Talk • Contributions • Log) 03:50, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

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

I was wondering about one of these accounts, but Nil Einne has reported both much more promptly. For what it's worth, I endorse the assessment that both of these are Bowei Huang 2. AlexTiefling (talk) 10:18, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Just spotted: AlexTiefling (talk) 11:20, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - To compare Johngot and Fivult to each other and to (the only non-stale sock of Bowei Huang 2). The evidence presented above indicates strong possibility of sockpuppeting.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  10:40, 2 May 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅ that =  = previously identified socks of . Blocked and tagged. No comment on the IP, which will need to be assessed via behavioural evidence. -- Euryalus (talk) 08:11, 6 May 2015 (UTC)


 * IP has only had one edit, 10 days ago, so there's little for us to do with it. ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  03:42, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

21 July 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Recently this question was posted at the Ref Desks by IP 123.100.149.51:


 * Is Cuba a poor country? If so, then why does it have a high life expectancy and a high literacy rate?

IP 123 subsequently erased his own IP and overwrote it with the signature of registered user Nineguy.

Note that IP 123's question is almost verbatim (which drew my attention) for one posted at the Ref Desks in March by IP 60.241.116.90 whom admin later suspended for six months:


 * Cuba is a poor country so why does it have a high life expectancy and a high literacy rate?

The latter IP is suspected as being a sock of the indeffed multiple-account abuser User:Bowei Huang 2, see the discussion here which IP 60 deleted from his talk page. Given the overlapping edits, the IP's all geolocating to Australia and the editors' being interested in Australia, and common habits like talk-page blanking, and removing signatures, it seems we have the same user. See Sockpuppet_investigations/Bowei_Huang_2/Archive for a long discussion of common themes. Pinging users, , , and  as familiar with the various past complaints.

may want to comment, but his recent contribution on Australia seems to confirm the link. μηδείς (talk) 20:32, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

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


 * This is a repeated, long-term problem. Unequivocally identifying all existing and dormant socks (given the user uses many IP's, and, as shown above, edits via IP (123) while rewriting his edits to impersonate socks (nineguy)--leaving no trail on the registered sock's complicit behavior) will help remove a lot of potential disruption.  This guy has been a problem for longer than I have had my account.  As noted, the IP 60 case was never followed up, and his block ends in September.


 * I request that a check user follow through, and call on and  to reiterate their request for a check user. μηδείς (talk) 04:57, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - to compare Nineguy with previously confirmed socks.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:44, 21 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Checkuser should see if account can be linked to other Bowei Huang 2 accounts, but based purely on behavioral evidence, I will be blocking both the IP and the account as clearly the same as the currently blocked IP. We definitely have enough behavioral evidence to link both the 123. account and the Nineguy account to the 60. account.  I still think a CU should be run to look for connections to Bowei and/or sleepers.  But blocks will be happening presently.  -- Jayron 32 21:06, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
 * If is prepared to block based on behavior, I see no need to run a CU.--Bbb23 (talk) 04:38, 23 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  10:19, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

28 October 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets

(see also User:60.241.116.90)


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

absolutely stereotypical behaviour; creates and then blanks user pages, immediately starts bringing up questions about random political ideology / random demographic issues / random country at the ref desks, see Communism and Communalism and Economy of Cuba. Just blocked weeks ago, and typically has a bevvy of other socks in the ready, see previous investigations.

Note the similarity to these previous edits by User:Nineguy:
 * Is Cuba a poor country? If so, then why does it have a high life expectancy and a high literacy rate?
 * Cuba is a poor country so why does it have a high life expectancy and a high literacy rate?

Pinging previously involved users or recent editors who've interacted with Sedont: ,, μηδείς (talk) 03:13, 28 October 2015 (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

 * Comparing Sedont's editing with that of Bowei Huang 2 and known sockpuppets, there is no doubt about it at all: editing similar topics in similar ways, similar questions at the humanities reference desk, etc etc, so I have blocked Sedont. I have also re-blocked the IP address 60.241.116.90, which has again been used for block evasion, following the expiry of the previous block. IN view of the fact that this editor has a history of using more than one sockpuppet at a time (and on this occasion he/she is known to have been using at least one sock account and at least one IP address) it may be worth a CheckUser in case of more sockpuppets, so I am leaving the CU request open for a clerk or CU to assess, even though it is not needed to deal with the account which is the subject of this report. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 08:42, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
 * I have added the IP to the above complaint. μηδείς (talk) 15:03, 28 October 2015 (UTC)


 * I don't see any basis for running a sleepers check, so I'm closing this. No sleepers were ever found in this case, as I can see, so there is no reason to expect them now.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:22, 28 October 2015 (UTC)

16 November 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

A user who asks repetitive questions for lots of data about sociological issues, and whose main contribution in the main space is pedantic redirects on geography topics. We've been here before. AlexTiefling (talk) 03:27, 16 November 2015 (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

 * - Compare Joniput with previous socks ( is not stale, maybe there are other, I don't know).  Vanjagenije  (talk)  10:15, 16 November 2015 (UTC)  Vanjagenije   (talk)  10:15, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * The following accounts are ✅:
 * Blocks, tags, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:08, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Blocks, tags, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:08, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Blocks, tags, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:08, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Blocks, tags, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:08, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Blocks, tags, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:08, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Blocks, tags, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:08, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Blocks, tags, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:08, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

03 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Bowei Huang 2 is back for the umpteenth time again creating many redirects for random stuff often related to environmentalism or social-economics issues [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wealthy_nation&oldid=700861338] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Poverty_in_Norway&oldid=700863555] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=African_American_poverty&oldid=701996249]. Many of these new redirects seem would be harmless were they not coming from a sock but are typical behaviour. And what isn't so okay is them turning existing disamibiguation pages into redirects [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Socialist_democracy&diff=prev&oldid=700864362] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Disparity&diff=prev&oldid=702066974] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Greedy&diff=prev&oldid=702066759] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Needy&diff=prev&oldid=702066918] without discussion. They're also deleting sourced stuff in articles again, I guess because they don't like it [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Intergenerational_equity&diff=prev&oldid=702068564], also unsourced stuff [ [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Excuse&diff=prev&oldid=702998587]. They then modify comments left by others in the RD archives and ask weird questions about religion and environmentalism [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Miscellaneous&diff=prev&oldid=703071801] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Science&diff=prev&oldid=703072046]. P.S. I didn't provide any examples of similar previous behaviour since it looks to be in the archives. (There's also a bunch of socks without SPIs.) I requested a checkuser because sleepers are sometimes caught although many of Bowei Huang's socks are consecutive not concurrent so don't care that much if one isn't run. Nil Einne (talk) 11:37, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Probably should add the comment they modified in the RD archives was a reply to a question asked by Bowei Huang 2. Nil Einne (talk) 11:47, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

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

I thought that witlessly naive question about climate change looked familiar. AlexTiefling (talk) 12:56, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * -- Jayron 32 13:25, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Nothing left to do here. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 14:29, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Immediately after 203.220.30.241's block for block evasion expired, it returned to disruptive redirect editing:  etc. Very static IP. Sro23 (talk) 02:40, 24 September 2016 (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

 * Already blocked. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  09:43, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

This user has recreated several redirects that were initially created by Bowei Huang 2 or one of their socks (for example, Late Industrial Revolution and Cool season). Appears to be a duck. The Dinkton account has already blocked by ; I'm taking to SPI so that Dinkton's numerous problematic redirects may be deleted per CSD G5. – Lord Bolingbroke (talk) 00:55, 21 December 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

 * Page creations deleted. Closing case. Sro23 (talk) 01:31, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Mass redirects; other users have warned this user before. See  Mr Xaero   ☎️ 23:53, 13 March 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

 * Ugh, I was already handling this, and now there's more bureaucracy. Well, since we're here, someone should probably try to untangle this case.  It looks like this should be merged to Sockpuppet investigations/Bowei Huang 2.  I blocked both the above accounts as socks of  because Ponyo tagged  as a sock of him.  However, I just realized that Dinkton is tagged as a sock of Bowei Huang 2.  All mentioned seem to specialize in disruptive redirects.  If what I said makes sense, please merge.  For what it's worth, like I already said at ANI, Lepintin and Alarjar are confirmed to each other. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 00:20, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Moved, retagged. Nothing more to do. Closing. Cabayi (talk) 22:03, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets

 * 1) Edit by Lepintin (CU blocked), edit by Linjonbang on Marital sex.
 * 2) Edit by Nelingong, edit by Linjonbang on Serial monogamy.
 * 3) Special:Contribs/Linjonbang, Special:Contribs/Nelingong, Special:Contribs/Lepintin (+ others in this SPI's archive): excessive changes of redirects, cut/paste moves and an adamant refusal to explain or discuss changes (blocking admin's rationale for blocking Lepintin's sock Dinkton)
 * Everyone created a blank user page, user talk page, sandbox before starting the disruptive editing spree.
 * 1) Usernames (to some extent): Dinkton, Lipintin, Nelingong, Linjonbang &#8212;CX Zoom[he/him] (let's talk • {C•X}) 09:07, 17 June 2022 (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

 * Both accounts now indeffed, closing. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 10:04, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
 * For the record is ✅ to . Dreamy <i style="color:#d00">Jazz</i> talk to me &#124; my contributions 11:50, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
First 2 edits are nearly identical in type to previous socks and. Other edits are similar copy/paste swaps. P HANTOM T ECH (talk) 07:32, 9 July 2022 (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

 * Looks like the same person; CU can't confirm, but puts them in the same location. Already blocked for disruption, but tagging as suspected, closing.  Girth Summit <sub style="font-family:Segoe print;color:blue;"> (blether)  15:43, 11 July 2022 (UTC)