Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dataexpert/Archive

25 June 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

I'm opening this after deleting an article (EsProc) and salting it because it was repeatedly re-created. I looked into the article creator's (Datalover) history due to the article looking rather spammy and noticed that he had other articles that had been deleted for similar reasons. A look into the article history showed that there are other editors that have attempted to create an article for EsProc and several other companies that Datalover has tried to create. Dataexpert seems to be the earliest one of the group, so I'm listing them as sockmaster. I wouldn't really have opened this except that Datalover's entries are pretty recent and I want to see if this is a specific person re-creating this (probably a paid editor) or if it's a series of meatpuppets under a specific IP. I also want to see if there are any other sleeper accounts since this looks to be a series of repeated recreations of spam articles over a long period of time. Other articles created are Beijing Raqsoft and Raqsoft. We can always salt the pages and I've done so for EsProc, although I didn't for the other two pages. I'm just worried about the potential of similar spam accounts and if this is all from one area, I'd like to know that there aren't any other accounts or perhaps get their IP range blocked for pretty blatant spamming, as their habit of coming back under a new name to create article suggests that they'll undoubtedly try to come back and create the entries (or other ones) in some format or another. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   09:49, 25 June 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 salted the other two articles. As all the accounts but Datalover are stale (i.e. haven't edited in 90 days), it is technically impossible for them to be checked. I don't see much to do here except block them as spam-only accounts. Typically a CheckUser-based rangeblock requires far more abuse than this. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 02:08, 26 June 2013 (UTC)