Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dimitri Lokhonia/Archive

26 March 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Dimitri is the self proclaimed owner of the company Bloomex, who has been trying for 3+ years now. There's rarely (if ever) been any support for him, and he graps for straws. In comes Markamp, who is the only dissenter with a big IDONTLIKEIT type delete !vote in the current AfD, and has never edited any other articles. Markamp had performed the same removals as Dimitri, at a different time from when Dimitri was in the dispute last. They have both also taken about a one year hiatus from their campaign, Dimitri coming back a few weeks ago, now Markamp coming back. Markamp contribs.

Markamp diffs

addition of promotional material (multiple times) by Markamp !vote for delete more promo removal of tags

Dimitri diffs full contribs removal of controversy more removal nom for deletion in which consensus was keep

Checkuser requested solely to check for any "sleepers" (if that's what they're called), and possibly any other accounts that may be making edits that we don't know, and also to confirm that these are the same person and not just meatpuppets. Confirmation would be good because of votestacking in the current AfD, and I'd rather not be the one to block a minority because of suspected sockpuppetry without any proof on the technical side. gwickwire talk editing 14:25, 26 March 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

 * - —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 16:23, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * . Their two edits as of 26th March geolocate to the same city, but there is nothing else to go on. WilliamH (talk) 17:48, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Well, that was convenient. Gwickwire asked me to double check the data to see if I'd missed something. Turns out I hadn't, but in that time, Markamp made this edit, which makes him ✅ as a sock of Dimitri Lokhonia. WilliamH (talk) 22:58, 26 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Blocked both. — G FOLEY   F OUR!  — 00:47, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

27 March 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

First edit was nominating it for deletion, didn't even know correct process, pretty characteristic of Dimitri (who was challenged with the technical aspects of Wikipedia), this account was just used for the first time after Dimitri and his other proven sock were blocked. Requesting another Checkuser to look for sleepers, which are more likely this time than the other, due to the fact that this is yet another account to have data from, and some of his accounts had taken year or more long hiatuses (pretty much definition of sleeper) gwickwire  talk editing 01:46, 27 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Also, probably doesn't mean anything, but the fact that the name has "vps" in it (Tim (a common name) then the letters "vps") may mean something. gwickwire  talk editing 01:49, 27 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Also also, not asking for any public connection on the IP, but a block and sleeper check on it would be appreciated :) gwickwire  talk editing 02:21, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' I found a user with name "gwickwire" in bloomex database. I am not sure if I am allowed to put details of the order here to proof that there is a definate conflict of interest between you and bloomex or should I start a separate investigation? You paranoidly suspect every user being me. I guess other people will talk for themself. Dimitri Lokhonia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.241.165.158 (talk • contribs) 01:56, 27 March 2013 (UTC)


 * Go ahead, put it here, that's most likely violating your company's privacy policy. It's not me though, because I've never even heard of it until earlier this year when you started this whole tiff. I didn't paranoidly suspect, Checkuser PROVED that the other account was the same as you. Give up now while you still have a chance of avoiding an indefinite block. You are making false claims against me now, and that's going to get you blocked much longer. gwickwire  talk editing 02:03, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi, My name is Actually Tim - I attempted to register "tim-s" (s being the first letter of my last name and my full name is contained within my registered email account), which was rejected for being too close to other accounts. The VPS stands for "Virtual Private Servers" a topic I am well known for in the open-source community and I was looking to keep this name to discuss open source developments in this area on Wikipedia. I am just becoming apart of the Wikipedia eco-system and going through articles - I am sure you will be hearing from me more and more as I go through Wikipedia. My IP is static and thus feel free to use this as-per the "sock puppetry documentation" to confirm my legitimate account behavior. I also wanted to note that my IP does not have the first octet of "99" as within the checkuser template, which maybe an attempt to abuse the checkuser system for personal gain.

Please feel free to ask me any questions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timvps (talk • contribs) 12:06, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Technically, but should just be blocked as a duck. No comment on the IP of course. WilliamH (talk) 11:49, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Blocked Timvps as a behaviorally obvious sockpuppet. Dimitri has not edited since his block expired, so closing for now. Someguy1221 (talk) 00:15, 31 March 2013 (UTC)