Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cristianofigo/Archive

03 April 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

All accounts have only made edits to one article, Manuel Pinho, and the majority of the edits are somewhat promotional, largely removing negative (but mostly referenced) material.

User:81.193.137.63:. Note: geoip points to same ISP as User:2001:8A0:6A05:2501:2CBC:84A8:A560:F48

User:2001:8A0:6A05:2501:2CBC:84A8:A560:F48: N.B. IP already blocked. , . Other examples can be found in user contribs.

User:Cristianofigo: N.B. User is already blocked. , . Many other removals of same content, usually just by blanking section.

User:2604:2000:F806:8200:4C81:9443:1B12:F296, same can be found repeated.

User:Ginablunt, , ,

User:Usare ,

User:Mysticeyes1

User:Storyteller2016 ,

A general pattern of single-minded promotional editing of a particular style (deleting or rewording controversy especially), all made by accounts that have only edited that article. Additionally, in almost all cases the full bulk of edits for the account are made sequentially and do not overlap with any edits from the others. Especially User:Storyteller2016 only started after User:Mysticeyes1 was warned, who only started after User:Usare was warned. The only account that does not completely fit the sequential nature of the edits is 2001:8A0:6A05:2501:2CBC:84A8:A560:F48, whose edits started immediately after User:Cristianofigo received a final warning and stopped immediately before Cristianofigo started editing again, again implying sockpuppetry. crh23 (talk) 12:24, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

, crh23 (talk) 19:12, 3 April 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

 * - Two accounts are, but these four should be checked: , , , .  Vanjagenije  (talk)  13:35, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
 * The following accounts are ✅ to each other:
 * All blocked. Leaving tagging for a clerk.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:35, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Since nothing is left to do except tagging, and that has not been done for quite some time, I have gone ahead with tagging, and am now closing the case. If there was some good reason why I should have left tagging to wait for a clerk to get round to it, please let me know. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 09:09, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * All blocked. Leaving tagging for a clerk.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:35, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Since nothing is left to do except tagging, and that has not been done for quite some time, I have gone ahead with tagging, and am now closing the case. If there was some good reason why I should have left tagging to wait for a clerk to get round to it, please let me know. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 09:09, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * All blocked. Leaving tagging for a clerk.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:35, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Since nothing is left to do except tagging, and that has not been done for quite some time, I have gone ahead with tagging, and am now closing the case. If there was some good reason why I should have left tagging to wait for a clerk to get round to it, please let me know. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 09:09, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * All blocked. Leaving tagging for a clerk.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:35, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Since nothing is left to do except tagging, and that has not been done for quite some time, I have gone ahead with tagging, and am now closing the case. If there was some good reason why I should have left tagging to wait for a clerk to get round to it, please let me know. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 09:09, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Since nothing is left to do except tagging, and that has not been done for quite some time, I have gone ahead with tagging, and am now closing the case. If there was some good reason why I should have left tagging to wait for a clerk to get round to it, please let me know. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 09:09, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Brand new account, has made one edit to the very same page as the other socks, in a similar style (unexplained removal of controversial content). — crh 23   &thinsp;(Talk) 19:03, 14 November 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
, blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:52, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

All the above listed sockpuppets plus many more that preceded them were freshly created to contribute exclusively to the "Manuel Pinho" Wikipedia page with self-promotional info and to supress critical info that is referenced. The "Manuel Pinho" page was previously subject to an SPI (May 9, 2016 by JamesBWatson) that concluded "Persistent sock puppetry: Continuing over a period of many years." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Cristianofigo/Archive It is evident that it has since resumed with the subject openly using sockpuppet names closely matching each other. Arbitratusrex (talk) 21:49, 29 October 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

 * The following accounts are ✅:
 * All blocked without tags. The rest of the accounts are . I'll let a clerk figure out which is the oldest account, whether they want to bother looking at behavior for the old ones, etc. ~ Rob 13 Talk 03:39, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * - This is almost certainly Cristianofigo. Before I tag, could an admin please move this case to Sockpuppet investigations/Cristianofigo? Sro23 (talk) 22:04, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅. GABgab 01:37, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Tagged and closing. Sro23 (talk) 01:47, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
 * All blocked without tags. The rest of the accounts are . I'll let a clerk figure out which is the oldest account, whether they want to bother looking at behavior for the old ones, etc. ~ Rob 13 Talk 03:39, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * - This is almost certainly Cristianofigo. Before I tag, could an admin please move this case to Sockpuppet investigations/Cristianofigo? Sro23 (talk) 22:04, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅. GABgab 01:37, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Tagged and closing. Sro23 (talk) 01:47, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
 * All blocked without tags. The rest of the accounts are . I'll let a clerk figure out which is the oldest account, whether they want to bother looking at behavior for the old ones, etc. ~ Rob 13 Talk 03:39, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * - This is almost certainly Cristianofigo. Before I tag, could an admin please move this case to Sockpuppet investigations/Cristianofigo? Sro23 (talk) 22:04, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅. GABgab 01:37, 31 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Tagged and closing. Sro23 (talk) 01:47, 31 October 2017 (UTC)