Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Catcreekcitycouncil/Archive

31 March 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

The first three accounts are mutually editing the Cat Creek, Montana article, adding some info but also pushing a hoax that there are lions in the town, claming as a source a local book "very credible in our community" of which "only a handful of copies are floating around". Stateofmontana joined in removing the hoax tag at one point as its only edit. , requesting CU for confirmation and sleeper check. The Bushranger One ping only 12:15, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * User:Catcreek reinserted the hoax information into the article despite semiprotection. After looking through things once more I've blocked User:Catcreekcitycouncil, User:Catcreek and User:Timothyjohnson12 as loudly quacking ducks with a side order of disruptive editing (the reinsertion of unreliably sourced/hoax material); it's obvious that either socks or meatpuppetry is afoot. Keeping the CU request up to check if User:Stateofmontana is part of the same farm and to check for additional sleepers. - The Bushranger One ping only 09:28, 1 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

 * , as stated the accounts are very clearly related SPAs, either socks or meats. Checkuser is unlikely to establish anything of importance that we can't already see. This is extremely localised abuse of an article which before this was not active nor high-traffic, so I recommend an admin semis the page for some length of time and leaves it at that. Kind regards, SpitfireTally-ho! 10:34, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, it had been semi'd, but that didn't stop at least one of the accounts from re-hoaxifying it. Fair enough though, thanks for taking a look. :) - The Bushranger One ping only 10:40, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, temporary blindness on my part. I expect that the semi alongside the block of Catcreek should resolve the issue, at least for a fortnight, so I'll close this. If the issue continues following (or during) the protection then please relist or reprotect; I'll also watchlist the page and try and keep an eye out as best I can. Many thanks, SpitfireTally-ho! 10:46, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

After some suspicious edits by some recent accounts, I have checked, and the following are ✅ and indefinitely blocked:



. --MuZemike 11:43, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

11 April 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

He's back...this account apparently having edited elsewhere to get autoconfirmed then hitting the Cat Creek, Montana article again, removing all the article improvements and replacing them with "here be lions"...with an additional statement of there being leopards in southern Arizona, too. Then edit-warring to keep the hoaxing vandalism into the article. Blocked as a WP:GIANTDUCK, this account was created after the previous sockfarm of 31 was blocked, so requesting a CU to mop up likely sleepers and other socks. - The Bushranger One ping only 17:49, 11 April 2012 (UTC) The Bushranger One ping only 17:49, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
 * My sentiments too and if this disruptive behaviour of his were to persist, I'll be nominating him for community banning on ANI soon. -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 00:30, 12 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

 * Obviously that's him, didn't see any other accounts. WilliamH (talk) 21:10, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

21 April 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets

. Already blocked, but given the massive sockfarm this user produced before, I believe a SPI may be advisable. (Note: I've reprotected the article again as well, but the contribution history clearly shows that this user knows how to game the system to get autoconfirmed.) The Bushranger One ping only 09:15, 21 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
✅ plus:



--MuZemike 20:09, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

25 April 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

New user account created and promptly jumps in with the "There are lions in Cat Creek" support group, posting on the talk page, not the article this time though. The quacking is very faint, but given the above, I believe it should be checked. The Bushranger One ping only 06:24, 25 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

 * - I agree that the quacking isn't quite as loud as before, but considering the number of socks turned up on previous runs, I believe that a check is warranted. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 19:00, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Jim odowell is a match to previous accounts. There is another account that turned up, but it only has one edit and differing technical data. I'll leave it for now, but if there's more activity, please re-report.  TN X Man  19:49, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Jim odowell blocked and tagged. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:20, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

26 April 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Obvious and self-confessed WP:DUCK. Blocked, tagged, posted for the record. The Bushranger One ping only 05:30, 26 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
Since this has made it clear that they will persist on WP:OWNership of the article, nobody will be allowed to edit it. As such, Cat Creek, Montana has been full-protected for 1 month. --MuZemike 17:55, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

26 April 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Literally quacking WP:GIANTDUCK. Bagged, tagged, reluctantly suggesting semi-protection of the article talk page to go along with the article fullprotect. The Bushranger One ping only 18:56, 26 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
See notes below. TN X Man 19:51, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

26 April 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

More of the same (lions in Cat Creek, Montana), now expanded to vandalizing Edwin Hanson Webster as well. Thanks! NawlinWiki (talk) 19:18, 26 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
Yup, these are all the same. However, a rangeblock is out -they're using a mobile provider and a school district, not exactly rangeblock friendly targets. TN X Man 19:51, 26 April 2012 (UTC)
 * So...schoolkids, presumably. Not really surprising I suppose. - The Bushranger One ping only 21:33, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

27 April 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Attacking Bushranger over the Cat Creek article. Also added related unsourced content to Big cat. , but requesting for sleepers. Calabe1992 20:14, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Adding the IP due to related vandalism on Bushranger's talk page. Calabe1992 20:17, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * There is also, who edited Big Cat to mention Cat Creek. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:24, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Sweet. Both accounts and IP tagged. Calabe1992 20:29, 27 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

 * CheckUser turned up another drawer of socks. All are blocked and a larger rangeblock has been put in place. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:23, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

01 May 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Enough said. Both blocked. CU requested based on declaration to continue socking. The Bushranger One ping only 20:41, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: Another just popped-up and was almost instantenously CHECKED & BLOCKED indef by MuZemike. *quack quack* -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 09:47, 2 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: Another just popped-up and was almost instantenously CHECKED & BLOCKED indef by MuZemike. *quack quack* -- Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 09:47, 2 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
No sleepers. Elockid  ( Talk ) 23:44, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

08 July 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

After a period of quisence, this account pops up and once again re-adds the claim of lions in Cat Creek, Montana. . Given the history of this socker I believe a CU for sleepers and other socks might be called for, as there have been some truly massive sockfarms associated with this pattern of abuse in the past. The Bushranger One ping only 18:59, 8 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

 * - Agree with The Bushranger  S ven M anguard   Wha?  20:39, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Looks like we're all clear for now. Elockid  ( Talk ) 03:30, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

10 July 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Yet another 'lions in Cat Creek' account, threatening further socking. Blocked, page protected, maybe CU again as they've explicitly said they already have other accounts. The Bushranger One ping only 21:39, 10 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

 * and the blocked is also a likely sock and might need a longer block.  Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;  21:55, 10 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I think they're just screwing with us. It may be worthwhile semi-protecting those pages for a while just in case. <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:blue">Hers <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:gold">fold  (t/a/c) 04:02, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * It's been semi'd. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  15:09, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

13 July 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

and blocked. Was a sleeper from May that system-gamed today to get autoconfirmed. Sleeper check requested. - The Bushranger One ping only 00:48, 13 July 2012 (UTC) The Bushranger One ping only 00:48, 13 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

 * - Based on deleted contribs, we need a duck stronger than 1.75x Dennis Brown - 2&cent;    &copy;  03:47, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅, but you didn't need me to tell you that. &mdash; Coren (talk) 01:37, 14 July 2012 (UTC)


 * Cat Creek, Montana is now full-protected for 3 months. --MuZemike 01:40, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

03 August 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

.,. Blocked already, requesting sleeper check. Note that the M.O. of this socker is to game the system to get autoconfirmed. Is there any chance of a long-term rangeblock here? The Bushranger One ping only 20:50, 3 August 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

 * - I made the block on this most obvious of socks, but a sleeper check is warranted. Not sure if they fit into a tight enough group for a range block, as it may actually be meatpuppetry rather than sockpuppetry, but worth investigating by CU. Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 21:26, 3 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The technical evidence can't fully connect the dots, but I blocked 5 sleepers as well. The amount of fresh water for these ducks to be is way too big for me to issue a good IP block. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  02:05, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Closing since the whole flock is blocked. Dennis Brown - 2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 02:28, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

04 August 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

More socks already. It might be time to sysop-lock the Cat Creek, Montana talk page for a time... The Bushranger One ping only 03:59, 4 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I'd rather leave it open and let them burn through more socks. Shadowjams (talk) 04:05, 4 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Fair enough. My user page may need to be full-protected soon though if they keep up what they've been doing. - The Bushranger One ping only 04:14, 4 August 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

 * It is if these are Catcreekcitycouncil or not, but as far as I am concerned it is pretty obvious.
 * ✅ as socks of one another:


 * Tiptoety talk 04:04, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:GIANTDUCKs, indeed. - The Bushranger One ping only 04:14, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

04 August 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

At this rate, there will be a global shortage of duck sauce. Blocked, tagged, posted for the record. Once again showing the system-gaming-for-autoconfirmed behavior. The Bushranger One ping only 18:36, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

As they are keen to get attention I blocked User:Areyouguysstupid and added it to this case. MilborneOne (talk) 19:15, 4 August 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

 * Hit another load of socks. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  20:48, 4 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Given that this has escalated to "Give us attention, lulz", perhaps and the sock-tags on the accounts therein should be deleted per WP:DENY? - The Bushranger One ping only 21:08, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

08 December 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

WP:GIANTDUCK. YGBBIC on the Cat Creek, Montana article,, , having used Agoura High School to get autoconfirmed. The other accounts only vandalised Agoura High School making the exact same edits as the first account listed here, ; they appear to be connected to User:Agourahighschool who is a confirmed part of the CCCC sockfarm. Requesting CU for sleepers. The Bushranger One ping only 01:58, 8 December 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

 * - Endorsing for a sleeper check. Reaper Eternal (talk) 02:33, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ (obviously). Add to the list:
 * Bad boy. &mdash; Coren (talk) 03:49, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * tagged and bagged his posse. Closing. Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 03:59, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Bad boy. &mdash; Coren (talk) 03:49, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * tagged and bagged his posse. Closing. Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 03:59, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Bad boy. &mdash; Coren (talk) 03:49, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * tagged and bagged his posse. Closing. Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 03:59, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Bad boy. &mdash; Coren (talk) 03:49, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * tagged and bagged his posse. Closing. Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 03:59, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Bad boy. &mdash; Coren (talk) 03:49, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * tagged and bagged his posse. Closing. Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 03:59, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * tagged and bagged his posse. Closing. Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 03:59, 8 December 2012 (UTC)

28 January 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

He's baaaaaaaaaaaaaack. And adding the same trolling crap about "Lions in Montana!" to Cat Creek, Montana as always. Polsciguru is from today; the other two are from last month but included here for the record. Blocked per WP:GIANTDUCK; as this vandal has created truly massive sockfarms in the past, requesting CU for sleepers. The Bushranger One ping only 00:55, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Added Accountingguru29... - The Bushranger One ping only 01:05, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * As a note, Agoura High School is the other article these sockvandtrolls constantly hit (and is likely the source of the disruption). - The Bushranger One ping only 01:15, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - significantly concerned about the obvious attempts to evade semiautoprotection by nulledits. Rschen7754 01:11, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I took a shot gun down to the creek and shot the fake cat council. :P (aka cleaned up on the CU end, all sleepers nuked if not already, more proxy blocks made) -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  01:41, 28 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Enjoy your lionskin rug! - The Bushranger One ping only 01:48, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

11 February 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Blocked ducks. Requesting a sleeper check. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:26, 11 February 2013 (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

 * - --  DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  07:37, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Blocked more socks and tor nodes. I'll keep watching this case for the next bit. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  08:06, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Is it possible to get an edit filter for "Lion/s+Cat Creek+Montana"? - The Bushranger One ping only 08:33, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Edit filter requested. - The Bushranger One ping only 08:51, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Closing, since everybody has been blocked. As an aside, there's been an edit filter against him for awhile&mdash;he just evades it. Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:51, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

26 February 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

. Same gaming the system behavior, too. Stronger edit filter needed. Blocked, CU requested for sleepers from this long-term sockvandtroll. The Bushranger One ping only 01:32, 26 February 2013 (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 previous CCCC socks and I found . -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  01:39, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

05 April 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Tripped edit filter. No edits as of now, but I think that will change. --   LuK3      (Talk)   20:58, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

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

Other suspected socks, just going down the recently created username list for lion or cat related usernames:



I think the 2 cats and the tiger are less likely. The sock names seem to follow a pattern of replacing a word in the name of a well-known book with "Lion".

--Tckma (talk) 21:07, 5 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Aren't Sockpuppet Investigations supposed to be accompanied by some kind of evidence of abuse? Aren't checkuser requests required to be accompanied by evidence of i) how the accounts belong to one person ii) how they are being abused iii) why CheckUser is necessary?  Or have these become optional now?  And the Unicorn (talk) 21:38, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Any concerns regarding the behavior of our Checkusers should be directed to the Arbitration Committee. Please note that not all evidence is always presented on the wiki, as not to tip off sockpuppets on how we operate, so you really don't know what evidence is being used to make the determination as to whether or not to run the CU on them. Dennis Brown - 2¢  © Join WER 00:51, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
 * There's also the fact that anything with "lions"+"montana" or "lions"+"cat creek" fits the duck test... - The Bushranger One ping only 02:28, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I'm pretty sure that CatWoman88, Lethargiclion and Tiger 4 are ❌ since they didn't show up with the rest. The account creation throttle stopped Where the Lion Things Are from being created, and the rest were all blocked by me via the CU interface. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:21, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Oh, and these are all WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Catcreekcitycouncil. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:23, 5 April 2013 (UTC)
 * This case was originally located at The Tale of Peter Lion, but has been moved here. Someguy1221 (talk) 00:39, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I've tagged all the blocked/confirmed socks, but I'm not sure about User:Where the Lion Things Are. They aren't blocked, and your comment leaves me wondering if they should be blocked and tagged as well.  I also note that the user above complaining didn't create their account until after DoRD made his CU check and blocks, and how they found this place on their first edit, after the CU blocked all the socks, and, well, it is pretty obvious what I think so I won't labor it further. Holding for CU confirmation. Dennis Brown - 2¢  © Join WER 00:55, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
 * - The user complaining above is part of a different group of socks, and is part of a new case at Sockpuppet investigations/Echigo mole. Someguy1221 (talk) 01:52, 6 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Closing with nothing else to do. Regarding Dennis's concerns about, that account was never actually registered, and so cannot be blocked. Someguy1221 (talk) 01:54, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
 * This may be reaching the point for a WP:LTA page to be created. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:28, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Re-added, which slipped through the cracks when the investigation was moved to Catcreekcitycouncil. Was already blocked, now tagged. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:32, 6 April 2013 (UTC)

12 April 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

User SIMBA DA KING was blocked for vandalism, others with names similar to Sockpuppet investigations/Catcreekcitycouncil/Archive for abusing multiple accounts. IPs need blocking, and a check for other accounts as Simba Katika Crek was registered 3 minutes after SIMBA DA KING and remains unblocked. Peter&#160;James (talk) 23:34, 12 April 2013 (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

 * - Yeah. Check for sleepers too. —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 00:41, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I blocked 4 additional sleepers and 2 were done. --  DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  01:25, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Tagged and closing. Rschen7754 05:15, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

16 April 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

More ducks. Another range needs to be blocked. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:09, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

More silly Cat Creek, Montana nonsense. Grayfell (talk) 06:54, 16 April 2013 (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

 * - obvious same LTA pattern. Rschen7754 07:24, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log/DeltaQuad&dir=prev&offset=20130414100943&limit=14&type=&user=DeltaQuad dealt with it] as best as I could, but it's whack-a-mole at this point. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  08:12, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Closing then. Rschen7754 08:18, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

07 December 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Same pattern as before using long-term sleepers. Both blocked and tagged, please check for more.  Acroterion   (talk)   03:31, 7 December 2013 (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

 * - Continued adding crap about Cat Creek, and lions, and tigers, oh my. Rschen7754 03:34, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Flushed sleeper accounts using Bible verses referencing lions as names. Reaper Eternal (talk) 03:52, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Closing Rschen7754 03:53, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

07 December 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

quack quack. See edits EvergreenFir (talk) 04:05, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
 * And another.  Acroterion   (talk)   04:16, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' With these and the other recent accounts, the number of IPs used should be enough, when combined with information from WHOIS links on the IP's pages, for a range block (or several, but affecting fewer IPs than those blocking Mangoeater1000). Protection isn't working, as the vandalism has just been moved to other articles. Peter&#160;James (talk) 15:06, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The majority of these accounts are using a busy mobile range, so a rangeblock isn't going to be feasible for now. For what it's worth, I didn't see any sleepers. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:34, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
 * All listed accounts blocked indef, closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:10, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

05 May 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Just when you thought we might be rid of this, the "Cat Creek lion vandal" returns. , with the slightly more sophiscated twist of using bogus sources (bogus in the sense the source, which is itself "good", does not support their position at all). Already bagged and tagged, but requesting a CU due to this sockvandtroll's habit of creating massive sockfarms. The Bushranger One ping only 00:22, 5 May 2014 (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

 * - Sleeper check. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 21:55, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
 * The associated accounts are:, , , , and , all of which are blocked.--<b style="color:Navy;">Jezebel's</b> Ponyo <sup style="color:Navy;">bons mots  22:45, 7 May 2014 (UTC)

08 May 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Quack Quack. See edits. Check for sleepers? EvergreenFir (talk) 03:40, 8 May 2014 (UTC)



And another duck. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 05:47, 8 May 2014 (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

 * Blocked. Sleeper check? - The Bushranger One ping only 05:18, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Both accounts above are ✅ plus:
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:53, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 15:27, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:53, 8 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 15:27, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

12 May 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

. Blocked. Tagged. Requesting CU for sleeper check. The Bushranger One ping only 22:26, 12 May 2014 (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

 * Unfortunately, there is no point in running a sleeper check. He is using mobile ranges and can get a new IP and create accounts at will. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 22:49, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, these accounts (and we can add now) were created in April of last year. Apparently they're still burning through unused sleepers that were created way back then... - The Bushranger One ping only 23:45, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
 * My apologies - I've looked at half a dozen accounts over the last several days and haven't turned up any sleepers. Until just now. I blocked two more accounts that were created today. Thanks. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 00:04, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

15 May 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Sock attack tonight. First sock establishes who. Others revert after blocks. Blocking continues. Rangeblock possible? The Bushranger One ping only 05:17, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' You may want to check the following:



The naming pattern is similar. CBWeather, Talk, Seal meat for supper? 05:48, 15 May 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Above accts extremely . Rangeblock would be... difficult. I would have rangeblocked at the time but it seems to have slowed/halted? NativeForeigner Talk 11:17, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the look. It seems that for now they've gone quiet, but who knows when they'll turn up like a bad penny. - The Bushranger One ping only 21:02, 18 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Now all tagged, closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:01, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

20 May 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

They're baaaaack. And steadily getting more malicious. Basically a self-confession in addition to impersonation. The Bushranger One ping only 03:16, 20 May 2014 (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

 * ✅, of course, along with a few more that I blocked. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 23:22, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Closing. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 00:46, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

13 June 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

more of the usual. Grayfell (talk) 07:14, 13 June 2014 (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 seen and dealt with - blocked, tagged, contributions reverted and revdeleted. For the sake of completeness, I've done the same with equally obvious sockpuppets User:King Derp and User:Macroeconomic Theory Guru. I'd recommend a CU for sleepers, given this vandal's prior habits, so endorsing accordingly. Yunshui <sup style="font-size:90%">雲 <sub style="font-size:90%">水 07:40, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I found the following sleeper:
 * PhilKnight (talk) 08:23, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks Phil - blocked and tagged. Guess this can be closed and archived now. Yunshui <sup style="font-size:90%">雲 <sub style="font-size:90%">水 08:40, 13 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks Phil - blocked and tagged. Guess this can be closed and archived now. Yunshui <sup style="font-size:90%">雲 <sub style="font-size:90%">水 08:40, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

09 July 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

quack quack  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please 06:03, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

duck  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please 06:04, 9 July 2014 (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

 * - Given there is a history of sleepers. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:33, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
 * These two are highly, . ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:37, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:38, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

09 January 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

After self-reverting null edits to get auto-confirmed, the editor added the same lion hoax as the other socks did. I would give diffs from them, but they all seem to have been suppressed. Requesting checkuser because, based on the SPI, they have a history of sleepers. Apparition11 Complaints/ Mistakes 15:47, 9 January 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

 * They are to CCCC. --  DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  16:27, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
 * They are to CCCC. --  DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  16:27, 9 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Just found a new one, User:January 9th Ave, created yesterday. Please run that one for sleepers also. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 17:22, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
 * ,, , and  are ✅ from January 9th Ave. Feel free to tag all as Cccc. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:51, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
 * All tagged, closing. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 21:56, 9 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Don't close this just yet - there's another bunch (sigh): User:Doinhoodratstuff User:Rapidlydoinghoodratstuff, User:Dontmessaroundslowly, and User:Bikingrapidly, from December 9. That's four, so I'm sure there are two more I've missed. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 03:34, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
 * And User:Chinesetourists. Should be one more. NawlinWiki (talk) 03:46, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
 * <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 03:42, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅, , , , , . -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  04:30, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Ok, hopefully we can close this for now. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 04:47, 10 January 2015 (UTC)

16 April 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

cat creek article + lions = duck

user has history of multiple socks/sleepers. This account was made in January 2015. First edit was today.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 06:16, 16 April 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

 * - Sleepers check needed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  09:17, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
 * CU data is, but there weren't any other accounts. Blocked per roar. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:29, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I also reinstated the page protection that expired a few days ago. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:42, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Closing. Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:31, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

27 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Big cat related edit on Cat Creek, Montana talk page. . Duck quacking. Surprisingly inactive the past year... sleeper check?  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 04:13, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Adding Linusthelion as duck  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 20:45, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I noticed that some of the confirmed socks below have names and exhibit trolling behavior that are very similar to the Sheds_thus_guys_argh_g_ugh_b sock cluster. It's uncanny, even.
 * First, for the Nazi/trolling names on this SPI:
 * Compare these to some of the Sheds socks:
 * And now, for trolling:
 * This SPI's socks:
 * 
 * The Sheds socks (selected sample, as there is a lot of it):
 * .
 * And now, for trolling:
 * This SPI's socks:
 * 
 * The Sheds socks (selected sample, as there is a lot of it):
 * .
 * 
 * The Sheds socks (selected sample, as there is a lot of it):
 * .

There is a clear MO here: The vandal chooses a bunch of users, and continually pops up to troll them. For example, calling themself, they kept on harassing. This troll bothered Acroterion, and Sheds created for more harassment. Trolling here also involves Favonian and Bongwarrior, just as it did in the Sheds case. I think we can conclusively say that the reason Catcreekcitycouncil was out for so long was because they were busy trolling as Sheds... or they just happen to choose the same trolling targets and usernames. What do you think? GABHello! 00:58, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * blocked, per obvious. Sleeper/IP check endorsed.  Acroterion   (talk)   16:38, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The following accounts are ✅ to each other:
 * <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 00:01, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 00:01, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 00:01, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 00:01, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 00:01, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 00:01, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 00:01, 28 February 2016 (UTC)
 * <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 00:01, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

28 March 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

The usual stuff about lions in Montana. Fortunately only at a ref desk for the moment. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 13:45, 28 March 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
ICaughtALion then went on a WP:* vandalism spree, then I went on a blocking spree. DMacks (talk) 16:23, 28 March 2016 (UTC) per CU findings, please merge this into Sockpuppet investigations/ItsLassieTime. TDL (talk) 00:16, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Already blocked. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  22:52, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * This is not CCCC. ItsLassieTime has been imitating CCCC, David Beals, Link Smurf, and probably more. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 23:01, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
 * We should not merge the whole Catcreekcitycouncil case into ItsLassieTime page, they are two different cases. DoRD said that ICaughtALion is a sock of ItsLassieTime, not that the two cases are the same. What we can do is to copy-paste this finding to WP:Sockpuppet investigations/ItsLassieTime, but you don't need an admin, you can do it yourself, although I don't think it is necessary.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  00:57, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Agreed that the whole case shouldn't be merged, just the current report so that it's archived to the correct master. You've previously suggested that a hist-merge should be used rather than a copy-paste, hence why I requested admin involvement.  TDL (talk) 01:16, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, but that was exactly opposite situation. In that case, the whole WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Kempler page with all of its history needed to be merged into WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Relpmek. Those two cases were completely merged, and that is when history-merge is preferred.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  11:03, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

11 May 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

DUCK  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 05:24, 11 May 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

 * Account already blocked. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 10:38, 11 May 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Duck roaring  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) 06:26, 7 February 2017 (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

 * All blocked. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 18:36, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Another batch



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

Quack Grayfell (talk) 22:45, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

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


 * Adding Build the Wall. In case you need any evidence, see the edit summary of this diff.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) 23:24, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Came to request a sleeper check. Have blocked Bush Boy Gonna Get Ya and Build the Wall already. Both registered back in November, then used repeated self-reverting to gain auto-confirmed today. -- ferret (talk) 23:32, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Added another one from the log, it hasn't edited yet . Home Lander (talk) 20:24, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * It has now. Home Lander (talk) 20:25, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Another from the log, might be connected. Home Lander (talk) 20:40, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Added a new one but hasn't edited yet. Chrissymad  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  20:28, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Adding User:Grabmypussy, see contributions. Home Lander (talk) 05:32, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
 * 2 more as well. Home Lander (talk) 05:43, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

2 more from a spree at Big cat. Home Lander (talk) 16:26, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
 * More showing up now. Home Lander (talk) 03:43, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - For sleepers. I also request that the reviewing CU consider whether to merge the Sheds thus guys argh g ugh b case into this one, as per this. In addition, assessed that the two groups were "pretty " to be the same. Thank you very much,  GABgab 14:45, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Added a DUCK. GABgab 20:08, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * And another. GABgab 20:13, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * And another... this diff is another good piece of evidence that the two cases are linked. GABgab 20:17, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Its whack a mole for now. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 22:44, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. Please report these socks to AIV for a faster response. Closing. GABgab 23:37, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

WP:DUCK-  Sro23 (talk) 02:51, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

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

Mister Bison Buddy has been blocked. Requesting CU to check for sleepers. I also asked for ECP on the page, since many socks were making enough edits to become autoconfirmed then editing the page. MereTechnicality  ⚙  14:25, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Is it time to open a case at LTA? MereTechnicality  ⚙  17:39, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

I asked for an edit filter to log whenever "lion" is added to the article. MereTechnicality  ⚙  19:28, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
I blocked an obvious sock that was not already blocked. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:34, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
 * - I've never found CU to be particularly useful with in this case, and since the accounts are blocked, I'm closing it. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 23:23, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Just the usual. MereTechnicality   ⚙  05:09, 28 February 2017 (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, already tagged though I would have declined. Case closed. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:01, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Account solely created for reverting reverts. Jc86035 (talk) <span style="display:inline-block;margin-bottom:-0.3em;vertical-align:-0.4em;line-height:1.2em;font-size:80%;text-align:left">Use &#123;&#123;re&#124;Jc86035&#125;&#125; to reply to me 07:15, 2 March 2017 (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. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 10:55, 2 March 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Sro23 (talk) 08:41, 7 March 2017 (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

 * Blocked without tags. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 11:48, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Clerk filing for CheckUser request. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 20:22, 7 March 2017 (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

 * - first sock in this list claims multiple sleepers at the ready. Please see if any connections can be made. Further socks in this farm should not be tagged. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 20:27, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ - nine sleepers blocked, well 8 blocked, plus one weird one -- Versa geek  21:32, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Looks like we're good - although Miata Boy Robertson doesn't seem to exist. I presume that's the "weird" one. GABgab 21:52, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

31 March 2017

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

It's impressive that they've all somehow managed to become extended confirmed. <b style="color:#ACA3BF">Stikkyy</b> (talk) (contributions) 04:33, 31 March 2017 (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

 * All blocked, closing. GABgab 14:05, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

I'd like to avoid giving too much information away but this appears to be another attempt like to rapidly get to 500 edits (in order to vandalize protected pages/talks, of course) See deleted sandbox + current sandbox "testing" ;). User page similarity as well. Will provide more info and specific diffs if necessary but not trying to give it all away ;)  CHRISSY MAD  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  16:53, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

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


 * Hello! Recently I received a notice stating that my account is a sock and has been posted here in conjunction with this other one. However, I can attest that this account is not a sockpuppet of any other and I would like contest this misunderstanding with a CheckUser request if necessary. Please message me about any further findings you may have. Geojournal (talk) 17:02, 2 April 2017 (UTC)


 * See comments at help desk: Help desk. They suggest that this user has edited Wikipedia before. RileyBugz <sup style="color:#D7000B;">Yell at me  &#124; <sub style="color:#D7000B;">Edits  18:47, 2 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Sorry to be rude, but the section is for "accused parties"... As far as I'm concerned, RileyBugz is not an accused party. Correct me otherwise. And yes please see his link. I should repeat though it may be less time consuming if you get a Clerk or CheckUser involved, but that's not yet up to me to decide.  Geo ''' talk 19:18, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 * You are wrong. Any editor can use this section, including the accused party. -- ferret (talk) 19:19, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm relatively new... sorry about that. However, I'd like to mention the link to the help desk comments is clearly outing and as such a form of harassment. The link links to a section with personal details, see above.  Geo ''' talk 19:23, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

CHRISSY MAD ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  19:25, 3 April 2017 (UTC) Nevermind  CHRISSY MAD  ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  19:27, 3 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Userpage comparison:


 * Geojournal
 * Morocco the Casa
 * No Ticky No Washy
 * Personally, I don't think that and  are related. An unhealthy obsession with their own userpage isn't an attribute limited solely to creek socks. <b style="color:#ACA3BF">Stikkyy</b> (talk) (contributions) 22:53, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

So I also find this user to be suspicious. The large amounts of cosmetic edits to their own userspace in general isn't usual for new users, possibly an attempt at WP:GAME? I say possibly because I don't think the user is even autoconfirmed yet. It is a new account, and CCCC normally uses older sleeper accounts that have become auto/extended confirmed right before going on a vandalism spree. That's not what happened here (at least not yet). do you understand our suspicions why you don't seem like you're new here? If you don't mind me asking, is this your first account, and if not, could you please disclose previous accounts? Sro23 (talk) 00:40, 4 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Yes, looking at the user pages of the others you posted and the similar processions, I see where confusion arises. No, I am actually not exactly a new user here. See Help desk. Unfortunately, at that point I did not think I would be returning to Wikipedia and so did not bother with the previous account. After quite the long while, it sparked an interest in me again, especially when meeting other Wikipedians outside of the internet-based Foundation.  Geo ''' talk 11:05, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

I don't think this discussion is necessary. If Geojournal is trying to game ECP, then we will find out if they cross the threshold and start vandalizing, and they will be blocked. If they aren't, then we can all move on and pretend this never happened because it's basically accusing them of sockpuppetry solely because they edited their user pages a lot. Jc86035 (talk) <span style="display:inline-block;margin-bottom:-0.3em;vertical-align:-0.4em;line-height:1.2em;font-size:80%;text-align:left">Use &#123;&#123;re&#124;Jc86035&#125;&#125; to reply to me 11:39, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * while I think I see what sees, it doesn't connect this user to this case, and I'm not blocking someone for being "somebody's sockpuppet"; we don't do that. Can you be more specific? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:40, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm closing this with no action. I take the concern about rapid test edits and similar user pages as valid and in good faith, but I'm concerned about SPI being used as a bludgeon to club the newbie here when there hasn't been any disruption. I'm going to echo 's comment from the help desk: that the longer we draw this out with nothing bad having happened, the closer it gets to plain old harassment. What said is right: it's fine to wait and see while the user hasn't actually done anything, and WP:AGF is still a policy.
 * it is not necessary for you to disclose your prior account(s) as long as they are not blocked, but if you would like to you can do so by putting a note on your user page. A userbox you might use for this purpose is at Template:User previous account, with instructions there on how to use it. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:16, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

1. Yet another username containing "library", compare User:La Brea Library Branch. 2. Registered in early November but only started editing now, same as the last batch of socks (User:La Brea Library Branch, User:Morocco the Casa, User:American Airlines Flyer, etc). 3. I don't actually believe Geojournal to be a CCCC sockpuppet. What most likely happened is that CCCC has been keeping up with this SPI's going on's and decided to troll the user here. I also don't think that it's a coinicedence the word "roar" is on their userpage. Sro23 (talk) 18:24, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Also worth noting that these were created during hte same time this last spate of CCCC socks were:

23:09, 6 November 2016 User account The Lion Sleeps Tonight (talk | contribs) was created - B 23:10, 6 November 2016 User account The Lion Slept Yesterday (talk | contribs) was created 23:10, 6 November 2016 User account The Lion Sleeps Tomorrow (talk | contribs) was created 23:12, 6 November 2016 User account The Lion May Sleep Never (talk | contribs) was created 23:14, 6 November 2016 User account LA Public Library 5512 (talk | contribs) was created - currently active 23:15, 6 November 2016 User account La Brea Library Branch (talk | contribs) was created - B 23:16, 6 November 2016 User account No Ticky No Washy (talk | contribs) was created - B 23:18, 6 November 2016 User account Air France Flyer (talk | contribs) was created - B 23:19, 6 November 2016 User account American Airlines Flyer (talk | contribs) was created - B 23:19, 6 November 2016 User account Morocco the Casa (talk | contribs) was created - B

There was also: 23:16, 6 November 2016 User account Sierra Leon Public Library (talk | contribs) was created but it doesn't seem to match the LA library theme. None are active currently besides the current one reported (anything with a B is blocked) but as we've seen they create them well in advance of vandalism. My apologies (and I will be posting this on Geojournal's talk) for erroneously filing that report on GJ. CHRISSY MAD ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  18:40, 5 April 2017 (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

 * Blocked. Please do not tag socks in this case. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:04, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

See edit filter log. Appears to be another attempt at trolling Geojournal who was originally suspected of being a sock but found not to be one. Compare also to User:Geojournal1-User:Geojournal5. Sro23 (talk) 17:54, 9 April 2017 (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

 * Blocked. Admins: this user wastes enough of our time already. Once a sock is discovered just block and move on, they don't need the extra visibility of having all their socks tagged. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:41, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Per WP:DUCK, same trolling of the same user. Sro23 (talk) 09:47, 13 April 2017 (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

 * Blocked; closing. Favonian (talk) 10:02, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Already blocked and Cat Creek, Montana fully protected, but requesting CU to see if there are any sleepers. —MRD2014 📞 contribs 12:16, 13 April 2017 (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

 * - nah, they waste enough of our time already. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:23, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

The edit quacks for itself. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 22:43, 13 April 2017 (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
by - Mifter (talk) 04:34, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * We're long past the point of tagging these clowns. Closing. GABgab 16:48, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

See below. — Berean Hunter   (talk)  11:40, 8 February 2018 (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


— Berean Hunter   (talk)  11:45, 8 February 2018 (UTC) — Berean Hunter   (talk)  15:31, 8 February 2018 (UTC) — Berean Hunter   (talk)  02:03, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Because Genghizzle is ✅ to the bunch above, this suggests that the accounts in 's block log for 16:08, December 20, 2017 should also be related but I didn't CU those. I connected these to the master via the Elf tandem account which had been associated by.
 * There are a number of trolls using the same mobile networks, so unless there is some behavioral evidence linking these to CCCC, I'd assume that they're someone else. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:42, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I recall Elf tandem, and I'm fairly confident about that relationship. Behaviourally, see for example or  (compare ). I would note however that this is a vandal that User:Wikinger commonly impersonates these days. -- zzuuzz (talk) 13:54, 8 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Take a look at the additional info that I've posted on the CU Wiki. This may help and I singled out a couple of anon edits also.
 * Judging by username similarities, this case is clearly linked with the sockfarm. Regards, GABgab 21:50, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Whoever it is, in my opinion, isn't important - "block, revert, ignore". ​—DoRD (talk)​ 01:30, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * If questioned later about a lengthy hardblock on a certain range that shall remain nameless, I should be able to show that it was justified even though the accounts above would have gone stale. Without some form of documentation - and I didn't block most of those accounts so it wouldn't come from my block log - I would be hard-pressed to round up those accounts to show the extent of damage. I intend to increase block length time if they reappear on the same range after the block expires. GAB, I agree with your assessment that this casename would be correct.
 * No intent to change anything, really - I just wanted it in there for the record. GABgab 02:34, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * I agree with DoRD, does it really matter who it is, shouldn't WP:DENY apply regardless? My concern is there are trolls out there who get a kick out of socktags and long or overly complicated SPI cases that give them attention. Sro23 (talk) 18:04, 10 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Closing. if you need more documentation to back up your rangeblock I think you would have to pursue that through the private wiki anyway, so this doesn't need to be left open. If someone questions the block publicly, just say "secret CheckUser sauce"; I think you wouldn't be allowed to publicly connect the range to a case anyway. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:26, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Multiple socks being created, requesting CU and perhaps a rangeblock to shut them down. See history of Prince of Wales for some other recents. Thanks. Home Lander (talk) 19:35, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

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

Alright, thanks Zzuuzz. Numerous below accounts are not blocked. Home Lander (talk) 21:49, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
The relation between each other and Catcreekcitycouncil is not entirely clear. Behaviourally, PoopyDiaper69 is possible, but it's also possibly Wikinger. Impeachtrump69 is possibly unrelated but is confirmed to a number of vandalsocks: -- zzuuzz (talk) 21:42, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:39, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * In my opinion it's enough that they're blocked, this is as much of all of our time as I'm interested in wasting on this. As far as I can tell,, they are all blocked. Closing. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 23:34, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Yep, looks like we're done now. Thanks. Home Lander (talk) 23:40, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

basic lion stuff, check for sleepers Vernzz (talk) 21:43, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

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

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Repeated vandalism adding identical text to Livonia, Michigan, Wayne County, Michigan, and other geographically-related articles. Alex Cohn (let's chat!) 23:37, 7 October 2018 (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

 * - I think there's a reasonable chance this has already been checked, but if it hasn't, please do so to identify sleepers. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:01, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ that all listed accounts belong to the same person. No sleepers uncovered and . All blocked, a few of them are globally locked as well. - Mailer Diablo 11:49, 11 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Closing. Sir Sputnik (talk) 14:55, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

This guy's back again, apparently he's aware that his usual targets are semi'd and so is leaving accounts idle for several months before making a bunch of edits in quick succession to autoconfirm. Probably would be a good idea to check for sleepers. Nathan2055talk - contribs 06:50, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

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


 * Since it's clear that this LTA is aware of how to WP:GAME the system and is operating a potentially large number of autoconfirmed socks, would it not be good to check for any sleepers, especially since previous SPIs have tended to uncover several as of yet unused ones each time? --Nathan2055talk - contribs 06:49, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
A check is unnecessary. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:35, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
 * I haven't checked this person in a long time, but they tend to skip on proxies. So checks won't help for how obvious they make their edits. Archiving. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:10, 21 October 2018 (UTC)