Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dmerkurev/Archive

Report date April 4 2010, 04:04 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets

Dmerkurev returned after a two-year break to make an unconstructive edit to George Harrison. Two days later, three newly created accounts combined to make such a mess of the article that it had to be semi-protected. All accounts blocked, but requesting a sweep to find any sleepers. Blueboy96 04:04, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Evidence submitted by Blueboy96

Also add Ucla16--sole edit is a carbon copy of Dmerkurev's edit to the same article. Blueboy96 04:34, 4 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.
 * As he's currently blocked, I will draw your attention to his admission (and reasoning) in his unblock request here ( talk→  BWilkins   ←track ) 10:36, 4 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Comments by other users

Requested by Blueboy96 04:04, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * CheckUser requests

Behavior looks clear. Endorsing to block underlying IPs and if possible find sleepers.  E lockid  ( Talk ) 12:11, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Switching to decline for now as Dmerkurev looks to be cooperating and in the process of discussion, so an IP block is probably no longer necessary. Will be keeping an eye out if the they start resuming the socks.  E lockid  ( Talk ) 03:41, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

All of the socks are blocked. Marking as closed. TN X Man 13:56, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments


 * Conclusions

Evidence submitted by Daedalus969
Compare the following:
 * This edit by a sock
 * This edit by the suspected sock

Given that they are edit warring just as the original master did, I believe this to be a pretty WP:DUCK applicable case. However, I would like to request a sleeper check, as well as finding if a rangeblock is possible. —  Dæ dαlus Contribs 03:24, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * = = .  The link to Dmerkurev can only be a judgment call. John Vandenberg (chat) 07:59, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Daedalus969
I'm getting sick of filing cases on this user. The sock's edits are the same as the master, adding 'included in the r&r hall of fame' to various musical artist articles. Please just do the CU for a rangeblock, and activate one.—  Dæ dαlus Contribs 20:11, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users
Here are some others from a previous SPI; they should either point the finger or not:

These were blocked for obvious socking, but there was no SPI:

This one was never looked into:

 R ad io pa th y  •talk•  00:48, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * I found this sleeper on a previously used IP - now blocked: Hers fold  (t/a/c) 22:22, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * MAP1995 appears to be ❌. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 22:29, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * What about on behavioral evidence? Even if it isn't a sock, it looks like a meatpuppet.—  Dæ  dαlus Contribs 22:34, 6 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I am not sure they are one person. This is just a possibility. I suggest closing this case. Ruslik_ Zero 17:19, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Not quite seeing it, either. T. Canens (talk) 05:28, 19 September 2010 (UTC)