Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Carmena Seoul/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Persistently adding nearly identical content, without sources, to identical types of pages (namely, bios of US first and second ladies, as well as an occasional revision to a North Korea–related page, especially Ri Sol-ju. Fits pattern of permanently blocked user Carmena Seoul, who was also operating at SLOTUSFLOTUS, which was also blocked as a sock. Seems to be operating out of the Chattanooga, TN area. See comments in ANI post here. Compare this diff by .195 with this one by Pyeongyanga. Compare this diff by SLOTUSFLOTUS with this one by .195. Green News Verified has not made any identical edits to the other socks, but the account has an identical area of interest and has edited some of the same pages as the others. Wallnot (talk) 16:27, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

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

Consistent elements across these users: - changing the first sentence of the lead to an ungrammatical and/or convoluted version - inserting uncited statements (especially in infobox image captions) - changing leads to incorrect MOS:JOBTITLE capitalization - not using edit summaries, or using trivial or deceptively benign edit summaries - re-doing those edits after multiple reversions (WP:OWN) and multiple explanations of those reversions (in edit summaries and on talk page) This last one is the main problem, I think. - Special-T (talk) 18:41, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - the master is stale, but please compare the 3 named accounts and check for others, as they've used multiple accounts concurrently in the past (see Drmies' comments here). I'm pretty convinced the IP, SLOTUSFLOTUS, and Green News Verified are all Carmena Seoul socks (see the latter's userpage for evidence); Pyeonyanga probably is too based on the edit history here, but they seem to be using Korean edit summaries to throw people off the trail, so CU confirmation would be useful. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 06:48, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
 * ✅ Plus the following accounts, though master is :
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 16:24, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 16:24, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 16:24, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 16:24, 27 December 2021 (UTC)


 * the named users, one month for the IP. Closing. --Blablubbs (talk) 17:13, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

New account created within hours of other socks being banned (and IP blocked for a month) making similar edits to similar pages (relatives of U.S. presidents). The edits aren't vandalism per se, but the consistent pattern is to add something that makes the article less good and then continue undoing multiple reversions. It was uncited info and bad grammar/spelling before, now it's replacing pics with less useful ones (old or redundant) and adding clutter. Special:diff/1062518716 Special:diff/1062349777 Special-T (talk) 15:49, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

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

Thanks to Special-T for reopening. Carmena Seoul has varied pattern of edits between accounts and after past accounts were banned, so I don’t think slightly different style of edits means that this is not a sock. Same focus on presidential relatives + other behavioral patterns Special T points to suggest that this is another Carmena Seoul sock. Thanks, Wallnot (talk) 15:55, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Fits the pattern. I encountered this user for a while when they were Carmena_Seoul, this description "edits aren't vandalism per se, but the consistent pattern is to add something that makes the article less good and then continue undoing multiple reversions" sums it up pretty well. They tend to latch onto a type of edit (capitalizing when it should be lowercase etc) and then engage in edits wars across multiple articles. They have complete disdain for working with other users who disagree with them, are incapable of having a consensus discussion, indeed see themselves as some sort of supreme leader with ultimate power, which is probably why they are attracted to bios of powerful people and merrily create as many socks as they want, they are above the law. This might be what motivates them, to flaunt Wikipedia rules and get away with it. It has been the motivation of other long-term socks. The edits themselves almost secondary in importance. -- Green  C  18:01, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Trialpears - I might have missed something, but I don't see that this user has removed captions that the previous socks created. A large percentage of this user's edits have been to replace infobox pictures (and change captions accordingly). - Special-T (talk) 14:41, 31 December 2021 (UTC)


 * @Special-T I was referring to this where Frank Andrew changed "Official portrait" to "Ford In" when in this edit a blocked sock made an edit to the caption where it was "Official portrait" and a similar case on Rosalynn Carter where Frank Andrew added different captions then previous socks. It's nothing major and perhaps a poor argument, but I stand by with that checkuser probably is beneficial here. --Trialpears (talk) 23:59, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Trialpears - Thanks, I didn't catch that one. - Special-T (talk) 15:45, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - The behavioral evidence for Frank Andrew Chasar is quite strong with them performing the same type of edits to the same types of articles. but there is enough uncertainty for me to feel checkuser would be beneficial. The new account has removed captions previous socks have added and this account was created before the blocks and checkuser of the other accounts (which means it would be somewhat likely for the account to be caught with checkuser then if related). Checkuser may also uncover more sleepers. --Trialpears (talk) 14:28, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
 * - per above. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 20:48, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
 * - -- RoySmith (talk) 02:40, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
 * CU data says Frank Andrew Chasar is ❌ to any of the non-stale socks in the archive. -- RoySmith (talk) 02:44, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
 * My inclination is to, given the checkuser evidence, assume good faith and give a talk page note about why the edits are being reverted, edit waring and discussing with other editors before reinstating. As it stands I feel it's not certain these accounts are the same person and the current account has not been sufficiently warned that the behaviour is mildly disruptive. I would like a second opinion on this though. --Trialpears (talk) 13:26, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
 * @Trialpears my 2O is that your analysis is spot-on from a policy perspective. The worst that could happen is we're wrong and these accounts continue to be disruptive.  We can deal with that well enough if and when it happens. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:13, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks ! I have now dropped a line on their talk page, which I intend on monitoring. Closing case. --Trialpears (talk) 21:27, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets

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

IP block expired and immediately picked up with the same pattern of edits (also on other wikis). Griffinofwales (talk) Simple English Wikipedia - Come and join! 23:14, 12 February 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

 * Well it seems extremely unlikely that this IP would have been assigned to some stranger who happens to have the exact same obsession with first and second ladies of the United States (even embodied in past sock name SLOTUSFLOTUS; see SLOTUS + FLOTUS), with a side interest in Polo G . : . Thank you.  --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she/they) 00:21, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅ I went with 3 months. Girth Summit  (blether)  15:46, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Looks like everything's done here, closing. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:54, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets

 * ( original case name)




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

Recent edits contradicting MOS:JOBTITLES (same as Carmena Seoul) immediately after ip was banned as a sockpuppet. Special:Diff/1071697502 Special-T (talk) 23:39, 13 February 2022 (UTC)

Also, name is almost the same as confirmed sockpuppet User:Alice Tittleton - Special-T (talk) 00:08, 14 February 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

 * - please histmerge to WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Carmena Seoul. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 23:49, 13 February 2022 (UTC)
 * ✅. Sir Sputnik (talk) 02:28, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I can't connect this all the way back to Carmena, but is ✅ to several of the proven socks in the archive, along with
 * And too  -- RoySmith (talk) 04:02, 14 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Blocking and tagging as proven. -- RoySmith (talk) 04:06, 14 February 2022 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets

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

Reinstating https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Alta_Tittle Alta Tittle]'s edits in. And the username is like the sock they are reinstating. Pika voom Talk 15:01, 16 February 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

 * ✅ to basically all of the accounts in the archive, excluding the master who is stale. Didn't see any other unblocked accounts. Blocked, tagged as proven, closing.  Girth Summit  (blether)  19:45, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
More block-evading Chattanooga, TN, area IPs with a highly similar pattern of edits to all previously banned socks: editing articles of American first ladies as well as the North Korean first lady, with a particular aversion to MOS:CAPS. Compare this diff of the IP's with this and this of Carmena Seoul. See also this diff from an apparently dormant IP that was never caught in previous SPIs. CheckUser necessary to verify connection to previous socks.
 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * IP edits old. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 13:04, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
Most recent diff (from TODAY): edit warring on Jackie Kennedy’s page. Compare this diff of the IP's with this and this of Carmena Seoul. CheckUser necessary to verify connection to previous socks. Like previous socks of Carmena Seoul, this one is from the Chattanooga, TN area and has a fixation on US and Korean first ladies and MOS:JOBTITLES. Wallnot (talk) 22:16, 21 May 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

 * CU It's a behavioural match and geolocates to the same place as previous IP socks, so  - please block the IP for two weeks (anon-only, account creation blocked). Thanks, Spicy (talk) 22:51, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
 * , closing. --Blablubbs (talk) 08:21, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
More Carmena Seoul socks showing their characteristic pattern of making small edits to the lead paragraphs of first and second ladies' pages, edit warring to reinstate those changes, and declining to use edit summaries/discuss on talk. I note that Carmena Seoul has historically varied the substance of their edits—sometimes adding or removing images, sometimes changing image captions, sometimes editing short descriptions, often editing the article lede. So some of the evidence below does not show exactly parallel changes. But what is consistent is the focus on first and second ladies of the United States, and again, the edit warring behavior and inability to discuss changes.




 * made this tweak to the lede of Lady Bird Johnson. Compare Carmena Seoul, as well as confirmed sock making small changes to the lede and image captions of the same article.


 * Here, Kyleung05 made a small change to the lede of Judy Agnew that creates a MOS:JOBTITLES violation. Note that there's not a lot of edit activity on this article, and the last changes made were from June, when a Chattanooga, TN-area (i.e., Carmena Seoul's base) IP edit-warred over the lede.


 * Also compare this Kyleung05 tweak to the short description of Betty Ford to a Chattanooga-area IP's tweak.




 * Edit to Rosalynn Carter, known Carmena Seoul haunt.


 * Edit to Pat Nixon, also a favorite of Carmena Seoul. Wallnot (talk) 23:48, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Comments by other users

 * Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comment: Based on my cursory observations, I would urge the clerk to consider similarities in the editing behavior and topic interests of Carmena and Kyleung05.
 * 1) Both users make disruptive "copyedits" to the pages of U.S. presidents and U.S. senators. The most common subject area appears to be first spouses. Some of Kyleung05's most recent edits are to Lady Bird Johnson, Nancy Reagan, Pat Nixon, and Laura Bush.
 * 2) Both editors use similar grammar (often in violation of MOS:JOBTITLE, leading me to believe that they may not be a native English speaker (see here and here) Based on names they've used, it appears that the have a strong interest in or connection to Asia. Past Carmena socks include names like "Pyeongyanga", so it is not a stretch to assume they have some connection to Korea.
 * 3) Both editors also have an interest in pages connected to the Kennedy family. Some of Carmena's final edits before their block include to Caroline Kennedy, Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, and Ri Sol-ju. Both editors also have a habit of messing with short descriptions, including on the same pages in nearly indistinguishable edits. For example, Carmena made this edit in September 2021, while Kyleung05 made this edit today. Novemberjazz 00:52, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment Carmena is the Spanish version of Carmen which is a Hebrew female name meaning 'fruitful land'. But looking at the other names they seem random words sometimes made-up: "Frank Andrew Chasar", "Alice Tittle", "Virginia Wilmington Middleburg", "The Publix Times". A couple have Korean-sounding names. The English seems off sometimes but could be Appalachia since we know they are Chattanooga. Anyway I think made-up names of random words, or Korean names, combined with overlap of articles with prior socks, and similar edit patterns, is pretty good evidence, in particular when they don't contest the sock which is unusual for someone to remain silent during a sock accusation unless they don't care. --  Green  C  02:04, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - -- RoySmith (talk) 23:55, 16 August 2022 (UTC)
 * is .  is a shakey .  . -- RoySmith (talk) 00:19, 17 August 2022 (UTC)
 * - please indef Moonlight Boulevard based on the CU results and behaviour. I am not convinced that Kyleung05 is a sock. Unlike Carmena Seoul they are interested in a number of topics besides first ladies and politciians, such as Toronto-related articles, cartoons, etc. They never use edit summaries, while known socks often do so. They've edited from the iOS app, which the accounts associated with Carmena Seoul have never done (the socks have used the Android app... would be kinda weird for someone to use both an iPhone and an Android). They also predate the master account by about two years and have never shown up in any of the previous checks on this case. I understand the suspicions, but I think the evidence points towards their not being a sock. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 01:41, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * --Blablubbs (talk) 14:44, 15 September 2022 (UTC)