Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Crème3.14159/Archive

01 September 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

This IP has similar editing pattern with this user:


 * At Rahul Gandhi, User:Crème3.14159 (after an edit request by IP (70.76.85.36) was added on the talk) added a section titled "Controversies and criticism" on 14 August which was reverted out and on 19 August the IP added that section (with different content).


 * At Partition of India, the IP on 29 August reverted edit of User:Fowler&fowler who removed a large chunk of content that was largely added by User:Crème3.14159. After that on 31 August an edit war started between User:Crème3.14159 and User:Fowler&fowler for keeping and removing it.

-- S M S   Talk 08:04, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
 * At WP:BLPN the User:Crème3.14159 started a thread and IP supported user's stance.
 * Both have displayed somewhat similar messages on their talk pages: Crème3.14159, 70.76.85.36
 * At WP:ANEW the IP edited Crème3.14159's comments and updated the sign as if it was editing his own comment. Though it was later reverted by the user.


 * Another IP (14.140.207.98) came out of nowhere to continue the edit war at the article Partition of India after the user was reported at WP:ANEW. -- S M S  Talk 12:01, 2 September 2013 (UTC)


 * And another (1.186.1.117) one doing the same revert as 14.140.207.98. -- S M S  Talk 12:47, 2 September 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

 * I've blocked 70.76.85.36 and Creme for a week each for sockpuppetry. The other IPs are unlikely to be this user. Closing Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:54, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

02 September 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Crème3.14159 has been edit warring at the article Partition of India, he is currently at ANEW for it. This is the content he is been warring over. At ANEW he is adamant he did not violate 3RR, but the IPs 14.140.207.98 only edit to this article was to restore the content which creampie was warring over. This is an obvious duck case. I am adding a suspect meatpuppet also in IP 1.186.1.117, Again this IPs only edit was to restore the content creampie was warring over. Darkness Shines (talk) 16:36, 2 September 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

 * Wrong location. Closing per above. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:58, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

03 September 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

After a better source was requested for a specific text at the article Partition of India, User:Crème3.14159 added one that showed that he didn't understand for what content the source is required. Now that Crème3.14159 is blocked, some hours after his/her edit an IP (204.77.14.153) added a source which lacked usefulness the same way as the Crème3.14159's. This at least shows both the IP and the user haven't still understood why is the better source requested, raising concerns of Block Evasion. S M S  Talk 02:55, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Besides what I already have presented there are no intersecting edits between the two. I can just add to the above a little background of the edits at the article Partition of India and a more comprehensive explanation of the above evidence. User:Fowler&fowler removed a large chunk of content from this article that was partially contributed by Crème3.14159, which lead to an edit war between the two, supported by a number of IPs each one restoring the content that Fowler&fowler had removed. So at last instead of removing the content Fowler&fowler tagged some of it, that was promptly replied by Crème3.14159 by addition of a source. The statement that needed a better source: "Before independence, Hindus and Sikhs had formed 20 per cent of the population of the areas now forming Pakistan, presently the percentage has "whittled down to one-and-a half percent".", but the source added by Crème3.14159 only stated the present population and that too a slightly different figure from the text of the article. I removed the source as it failed verification. But some hours later the reported IP added a source while Crème3.14159 was blocked for sockpuppetry. The source again only presented the present population, rather than supporting the complete text.
 * This has been the case with this user that he/she hardly understands what other tell/ask him. At Asaram Bapu he was repeatedly told not to make contentious edits, as it was a BLP, but he never stopped. He was told three times not to edit war or violate 3RR recently yet he did violate it on two articles. And after filing of a report at ANEW, IPs came to continue the edit warring. I know and understand that this is very little evidence. But this is all that lead me to file a report here. -- S M S  Talk 17:11, 3 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Besides you may like to see this. -- S M S  Talk 18:05, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * That is very little evidence to go on. Can you please expand your evidence since the IP and user do have several more edits to comare with? -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  15:56, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Blocked as an open proxy. Legoktm (talk) 20:59, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Closing now. -- DQ on the road   (ʞlɐʇ)  21:31, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

04 September 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Both "new" accounts created today, I believe Creampie is the master due to the crossover between two articles the master was editwarring on, Partition of India & Asaram Bapu. The reason I believe these two are socks are these very socky edits. ‎CopSuscept first edit to Partition of India added content and a shitload of tags, no noob would tag an article in that manner. The suspect sock then self reverted and not long after suspect number two turns up and its first edit was to restore the first suspect socks edit. I am requesting CU as if there are two then it is likely there will be a few sleepers. Darkness Shines (talk) 19:32, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Also, Creampie was utterly obsessed with treatment of minorities during partition, both of these suspects have also edited that section in the article. Darkness Shines (talk) 19:39, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Further, Creampies last account, Pee pie was warned about adding fact tags, which of course is in the CopSuscept edit to the partition article. Darkness Shines (talk) 19:44, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Further, Pee Pie left a very sarcastic message on the page of another user, CopSuscept first edit was to create a redirect, and we know from his usernames he has a sense of humour. Also note the header on that section, and then this edit summary from CopSuscept Darkness Shines (talk) 20:15, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

CopSuscept is currently blocked for violating 3RR at State-sponsored terrorism this was the edit in question, IP 117.198.35.137 just came along and restored his edits. Darkness Shines (talk) 18:16, 6 September 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

 * - Shamsher and Cop were just recently registered and leaped into edit wars in Creampie's topic area. They are clearly not new editors, evidenced by their references to NPOV. Likely sockpuppets, and worthwhile to check to both confirm and look for other accounts. Someguy1221 (talk) 22:24, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Previous IPs warring in this area have been using open proxies, so that might come up in the CU. Someguy1221 (talk) 22:27, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Both users definitely ✅ to the master. NativeForeigner Talk 22:32, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Blocking the two socks indefinitely. Master's block is reset and extended to two weeks. But given how new he is, and how quick he was to start socking, I have a feeling this may rise to indef pretty quickly. Someguy1221 (talk) 01:57, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

29 September 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

New sock partially restoring edits of previous confirmed socks. Requesting CU for sleepers as the last two or three CU runs on this user has brought to surface an army of socks. S M S  Talk 21:37, 29 September 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

 * NativeForeigner Talk 16:24, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Tagged and blocked indef. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:44, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

01 October 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Restored previous sock's edit (partially) at Partition of India. S M S  Talk 02:14, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

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


 * Just want to note here that previously he/she has used meats (and proxy). -- S M S  Talk 02:57, 1 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Sent an email to functionaries. -- S M S  Talk 22:12, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Technically ❌. Probably coincidental, although that one edit was a huge red flag. NativeForeigner Talk 02:34, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Closing. Perhaps innocent? -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 00:40, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Innocent my arse, Bookishness just gave SMS an AE notification, this is not a new editor at all. Darkness Shines (talk) 07:02, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Apologies, I knew they weren't new but I misread the results. NativeForeigner Talk 15:18, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm getting a match. As such, I've blocked the account both on behavioral and technical evidence. Elockid( Boo! ) 12:41, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * The accounts geolocate to a fairly similar location, so I concur they appear to be a match. PhilKnight (talk) 15:12, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
 * As am I. It is indeed, apologies to Darkness Shines and Smsarmad, I was convinced by the evidence as well but managed to overthink and mess up the check. It's my fault, sorry. NativeForeigner Talk 15:18, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

11 October 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Similar to an earlier attempt of impersonation:. Requesting CU for sleepers. S M S  Talk 04:03, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Creme has been creating impersonating accounts of users who have reported his socks before .i.e. User:Smsarmad and User:Darkness Shines as can be seen in the archive of this case. He created and  recently both of which were blocked by Elockid as sock puppets. And there is no further evidence as this sock never edited. -- S M S   Talk 11:27, 11 October 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

 * - Rschen7754 10:20, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
 * - though I am unsure that this will turn anything up. Rschen7754 01:41, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Proxies blocked, nothing related though. NativeForeigner Talk 10:21, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Nothing that we can do, unfortunately. Rschen7754 10:27, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Changed tags on two puppets. Will now archive.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:20, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

14 November 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Same edit types as creampie, Darkness Shines (talk) 15:37, 14 November 2013 (UTC)

Adding Ct205, first edit to article was to rv F&f, restoring content from a previous sock, adding Tg384 for the same reasons, both of these accopunts have but two edits, all reverts of the same content. Darkness Shines (talk) 15:40, 14 November 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

 * I checked and, and they are ❌ to  and his socks. I need more evidence to check the other account. Reaper Eternal (talk) 03:00, 17 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Two (already blocked) suspected socks found to be unrelated, and no behavioral evidence to indicate that the third is involved. Closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:19, 17 November 2013 (UTC)