Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dodo19/Archive

Evidence submitted by Atama
In August there was a thread at ANI from Miacek complaining that Dodo19 had been compiling "evidence" against him and was "stalking" him; following his edits around to revert him and otherwise antagonize him. At the time I had seen an undue amount of attention that Dodo19 was giving to Miacek and declared that the stalking claims were at least somewhat justified, but Dodo19 had declared themselves "retired" (see the user page). Dodo19 was still editing, albeit at a lesser volume, but after declaring that they were leaving I decided to let the whole matter drop without taking any action.

Currently, there is a similiar thread at ANI, this time 红卫兵 had opened it. In their they mentioned that this time Miacek was editing despite being marked as "inactive" (seeming like a tit-for-tat accusation from when Dodo19 was accused of editing after declaring themselves retired). Looking into the editor's history, their  made to the encyclopedia was to declare on their talk page, "No bogus warnings!" and "Yes, this means you, Miacek!". This is despite there being no obvious interaction between this editor and Miacek at the time.

When about that edit, 红卫兵  that they had interacted with Miacek as an IP before registering. Comparing their edit histories, I found that 红卫兵 and Dodo19 have both edited Franz W. Seidler, Junge Freiheit, Lower Saxony, States of Germany, Theodor Oberländer, and Zeitgeschichtliche Forschungsstelle Ingolstadt. I also found that 红卫兵 had created their account at on August 25, the same day that Dodo19 made their at the ANI thread.

There were too many similarities to ignore and I was convinced that 红卫兵 and Dodo19 were the same person. I realize that we allow editors to have a clean start with a new account if they want to stop using an old account, but Dodo19 continued to edit after 红卫兵 began editing, and this editor has chosen to edit the same articles and has gotten into the exact same conflicts as before. I'd like this deception to stop. I haven't asked for checkuser assistance, because I think the behavioral evidence is overwhelming, but if anyone else disagrees then perhaps we should have a CU look into it. --  At am a  頭 16:53, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Sorry, not playing. But I can recommend this book. --红卫兵 (talk) 19:46, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Comments by other users
I'd just add to Atama's evidence, that there's still a third 'party' to this case, namely the IPs that were stalking my edits and posting en masse 'warnings' at my talk page. 红卫兵 was obviously behind the 78. range and admitted this/(t), Dodo19 has used the IP 92.225.139.239. This drama actually started back in Dec. 2009, when user(s) from the same two Alice DSL/ Hansenet IP ranges (apparently, one and the same ISP in fact) were POV pushing in a couple of articles (sometimes incl. WP:BLP articles and consequent violations) like (hist.) and stalking another user, who left consequently. Note that the account Dodo19 (very likely the 'owner' of all these IPs) was often also involved in revert warring in the same articles. This seems to be a case of long-term abuse, incl edit warring with multiple socks. The newest figure 红卫兵 was just continuing this campaign with his latest frivolous report launched with the apparent aim of just disturbing me. User:Miacek 19:08, 17 September 2010 (UTC)~

IP to consider, that were either stalking me or simply engaged in edit warring on a daily basis (with the aim of either deceiving the community, pretending a false consensus or just avoiding being blocked, that would inevitably have taken place, had he been behaving like that with one single account all the time):


 * 78.53.32.121 (older one from the 2009 'spree')
 * 92.229.61.33 (older one)
 * 78.53.47.215
 * 78.53.46.192
 * 92.229.60.29
 * 78.53.40.172
 * on August 30 (!), a little coward decided to start tagging my articles while logged out - I won't (though can) address any of those concerns/issues, till the time the campaign of long-term abuse is put an end here.

And many, many more IPs, of course. User:Miacek 19:08, 17 September 2010 (UTC)~

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * Looks ducky, but just in case, I could use a check to confirm. T. Canens (talk) 05:01, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ the following:
 * (note the overlap in editing at Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, and User talk:Miacek)
 * (note the overlap in editing at Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, and User talk:Miacek)
 * (note the overlap in editing at Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact, and User talk:Miacek)

Tiptoety talk 05:18, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * All blocked and tagged. T. Canens (talk) 05:23, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Miacek
This is the long-term sock puppeteer who has been stalking my edits and harassing me since August. His accounts were blocked in the morning after a CU request, he just goes on with IPs, provoking pointless edit wars. Cf Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dodo19/Archive Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 17:15, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users
Thanks for quick action. Unfortunately, I'm afraid he'll just go on with a new IP address. His aim is to provoke edit wars whenever possible by following my edits and picking some of those, e.g. my removal of certain overcategorization. It's no point in trying to argue anything on the respective article talk pages: he'll just ignore my explanation or will choose a new topic. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 17:40, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * Blocked for one week. (Please note, CheckUser was not used in this case). Tiptoety  talk 17:35, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Miacek
It was an impersonator, now blocked. Just for the record (as the case is not closed, it's gaining impetus it seems). Made mechanical reverts of almost all the edits he had previously made with 红卫兵, one of his socks, trying to give the impression that it was in fact ME who was sock puppeteering in order to revert his socks (it's getting crazy, nay?) Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 10:50, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
is ✅ as matching the socks in the Dodo19 archive. No sleepers found. This case would probably need to be merged with the Dodo19 case. TN X Man 11:47, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Moved from /Maicek to /Dodo19. T. Canens (talk) 15:14, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Miacek
Another of the series (the user who keeps harassing me), please block lest it gets too troublesome. I mean all his edits are dubious and unhelpful, like repated disruptive tagging, with an offensive edit summary,  as they generate - as is the long-term abuser's intent - pointless disputes where constructive users would just fix the (micro-)issues. E.g. his removal here is incorrect per the sentence itself. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 17:05, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Also also active as 78.53.47.156. Both the 92.225... and 78.53... ranges are getting notorious as Dodo's. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 17:18, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

As you can see, some of his more recent 'countermeasures' against me (read:intimidation) include attributing other user accounts on Wikipedia to me, including accounts that have stopped editing long time ago, even before I registered in fact (2008) (suspicious enough!). This comes as no surprise given the amount of experiences he has on sock puppeteering himself on one hand and filing frivolous reports on the other. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 18:10, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

If Miacek would have bothered to check, it is Professor Schoeps' expressed wish not to be mentioned in context with the Centre as noted in edit summary. --78.53.47.156 (talk) 17:49, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Weird, what has User:Sander Säde to do with Miacek, User:Constanz and User:Wlasow? --78.53.47.156 (talk) 18:05, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * Case moved from Sockpuppet investigations/92.225.140.61. Tiptoety  talk 19:13, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * IP blocked for a week (CheckUser was not used). Tiptoety  talk 19:13, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Additionally, I have blocked (CheckUser was not used). It may be time for yet another rangeblock.  Tiptoety  talk 19:26, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Miacek
As soon as I started editing today, he pops up too of course, with his first edit changing my talk page post, with an insult directed against a respected conservative author in his edit summary (for Dodo, all who disagree with him are apparently “right wing extremist author[s]” . A range block to foil his today's activities at the very outset would be in order I think. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog  (t) 10:02, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
range looks like it'll be (per 92.225.140.61 & 92.225.81.11) SpitfireTally-ho! 12:19, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * IP blocked per the usual. Right now, I am not feeling comfortable blocking that range, it is far too busy. Tiptoety  talk 14:42, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Miacek
Up to his usual stuff, this time incl. revert(s) of his former sock(s) (it's often difficult to fathom, which of his changes can make some sense at least and which are disimprovements). Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 12:26, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Based on the IPs from the last two reports, we might be able to do 92.225.81.227/22.  E lockid (Alternate)  ( Talk )  19:04, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Might help, might not, but 92.225.81.227/22 blocked 1 week.  E lockid  ( Talk ) 21:46, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Miacek
At the moment actively removing sock puppet notices from his former socks (incl. the ones currently blocked); for confirmation of this being Dodo, cf. equivalent Dodo-type vandalism in German Wikipedia. I've reverted his edits to the IP pages, but if you find the ISP tags he replaced the sock puppetry tags with helpful, I'll re-add those ISP notices (I think the respective IP user talk pages would be the right place for such notices per our guidelines). Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 11:18, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

PS. Please consider this new, cross-wiki account, too: (needs Checkuser!) I'm afraid this is also Dodo19, today with another impersonating account. Namely, in the past some accounts like have edited the page Heinz Nawratil (and the resp. discussion), claiming it's Dr. Nawratil himself, who is concerned with the anonymous POV edits to the article on him. Recently, a user account called Robin_Hood_005 voiced similar concerns in German wiki. There was no reason to doubt the authenticity then. However, this new “RobinHood005” here doesn't feature the typical manners (e.g. mistakes in wikiformating) that Nawratil's authentic accounts had. Instead, this 'new' user made edits that point to Dodo19's socks (e.g. immediate HotCat edits). I'm pretty sure this is Dodo's newest re-incarnation, again impersonation with the aim of discrediting his 'enemies' or just sowing uncertainty (previously he targetted me with similar tricks: ). Please use Checkuser to determine if this account is Dodo's + try to detect other sleepers. If it's not Dodo's sock, then the account is legitimate, but I think this is unlikely. Thanks in advance. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 10:56, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Comment on the possible impersonator account: I initially considered the option of this being another account of Heinz Nawratil himself, but based on what little information I could get, he lives in Munich. Per Occam's razor this leaves us Dodo19, yesterday editing the page on Nawratil in de.wiki, and who's generally using Alice DSL/ Hansenet, that geolocate to Berlin. It might of course be the case that he made the today's 2 edits here and in German wiki from an Internet cafe. In order to reduce collateral damage in the future, I'd suggest blocking Dodo's new IPs for 3-4 days, no more is needed - because if he wishes, he can evade the blocks by getting a new IP assigned from his range anyway. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 17:11, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
The named account is a match to Dodo19. No comment on the IP. TN X Man 13:58, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, after looking over the CU evidence I would mark the named account more as . The IP they are editing from is the same range many of the other Dodo19 socks edit from, and the useragent is the same as some of the other accounts as well. Tiptoety  talk 16:04, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Additionally, I have blocked the IP for one week per WP:DUCK (CheckUser was not used). Tiptoety  talk 16:05, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't really feel the behavioral evidence is strong enough to support a block. If they begin to exhibt similar editing patters, re-open this SPI. For now, I am closing with taken against the named account.  Tiptoety  talk 06:11, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Miacek
obvious sock. Not especially disruptive yet, not useful either. Please send him to a wikibreak, so that he can peacefully regenerate and recharge his batteries. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 12:28, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
IP blocked for 55 hours (no check performed). TN X Man 13:20, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Miacek
Today's sock. At the moment continuing to treat Wikipedia as his playground (adding tags to user talk pages of what seem to be former socks he has used (as per guidelines we add such tags to user pages); he also included an IP that some other persons seem to have used, too. Moreover, the particular IPs are stale and long time since abandoned by Dodo19 himself). Please block the current IP per block evasion. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 16:46, 9 October 2010 (UTC) Miacek and his crime-fighting dog  (t) 16:46, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * IP blocked. (No CU ran). Tiptoety  talk 02:31, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Miacek
Pushing his falsifications and POV at Zeitgeschichtliche Forschungsstelle Ingolstadt, an article already terribly affected by this “missionary's” job. Isn't it time yet for a IP range block? After all, we should protect normal users from Dodo19 style disturbers. He's still active every day. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 18:10, 12 October 2010 (UTC) Miacek and his crime-fighting dog  (t) 18:10, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * I blocked the IP. I should note that 78.53.32.0/20 is just far too busy with unrelated users to block. We are just going to have to keep playing whack-a-mole. Tiptoety  talk 18:30, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * It's really tedious, as vandal IPs when reported semi-automatically by Twinkle also get blocked very soon, as lots of sysops are watching the Vandalism noticeboards, but violations of sock puppet guidelines, as reported at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations, aren't monitored by that many administrators in the first place so as to ensure a prompt response. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 18:42, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * PS: he is keen on having a fight today: . Perhaps semi for the article? Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 18:47, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * And the next one . Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 19:06, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Miacek
Today's obvious IP sock (again stalking me), after blocking please keep an eye on this for further IPs. Based on editing history/interests (massive military history tag additions to talk pages, category edits) I also suspect (anti-Suvorov POV is also a telltale sign for Dodo's sock puppets both here and on German wiki.) The IPs are urgent, Pankrator not so much. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 15:19, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * appears to have another account but I fail to see any socking taking place using it, so I am not going to list it here, at least not yet. That said, is  . They geolocate to the same area, and edit from similar IP ranges.
 * Additionally, is ✅ to be, and given the editing overlaps at places like German prisoners of war in the Soviet Union, Heinz Nawratil, and Junge Freiheit (and those are only when comparing the account to Dodo19, not his many other socks) I would say they are in fact a sock.
 * No comment with respect to that specific IP, though I have blocked it.
 * - Lastly, I have implemented a rangeblock on 78.53.0.0/16. Hopefully this should help. Tiptoety  talk 17:13, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Re: Pankrator; there are a few differences, but the editing pattern as compared to Dodo19 is fairly consistent (long gap in editing, group of edits around the same date). The technical evidence suggests they are also related, so I've blocked this user indefinitely. Peter Symonds ( talk ) 17:51, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * On that note, seeing as Pankrator is blocked I will note that appears to be a ✅ sock (purely technically speaking) of Pankrator. Like I sated before though, I am failing to see any particular editing overlap. I am going to leave this one unblocked for other administrators to review.  Tiptoety  talk 17:54, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm pretty sure Pankrator was him. However, Sf67 seems unrelated - his topics are way too different ; perhaps accidentally both are just student at the same university in Berlin. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (t) 18:40, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I am going to mark this as closed with taken against  additionally, I have notified him of the results.  Tiptoety  talk 19:10, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Miacek
At first I decided not to report, but as he seems to have picked up stalking my edits again, I'll copy the material from Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations/Dodo19/Archive. Dodo19's newest socks seem to include (massive HotCat edits after similar anonymous edits from earlier Dodo19 ranges 92.225.82.29, 78.53.44.104. Clearly no newbie . Edit summaries like these,  are also (self-)revealing as to the possible encyclopedic value to be expected from this person.

Given the amount of disruption Dodo19/Quasimodogeniti has been causing in Wikipedias I think we don't need his re-incarnations (it's only now that some of his targeted BIOs in German wiki have been adressed)

His other recent accounts (used mostly in German Wikipedia; here apparently no longer used) included (became active there precisely on 3 Feb. after I had returned to German wiki after months of wikipause; he was blocked for disruption there (“political sock puppet”)),  (cf this alibi edit claiming to be flatmate of other similar accounts; the sleeper suddenly came out of the blue active to oppose me in German wiki concerning a subject he had never touched before, after a year of no edits, and launched Vandalism report against me, when I pointed out that it was a sock puppet). Most probably also that KomBrig referred to with his edit (Štefan_Kovačić claimed to be a Slovene on his German Wiki userpage, but the few 'Slavonic' sounding words he had written there were no Slovenian at all; Dodo is known to speak Czech), also.

All of these accounts I listed now edit articles of Dodo's typical interests, if any of them cause disruption, they definitely should be blocked. Whether we need to run a CU for Furor Teutonicus I can't tell you, but what I can tell, is that we have Dodo19's newest re-incarnations here. Considering the past disruption I would support a block. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 16:28, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

You still don't get it, do you? Actually, you might have gotten the "Real Dodo", because this was me, and that was Furor Teutonicus. Now, either I am the one "stalking" Miacek, or I am Furor Teutonicus. Or for some strange reason I am able to edit under two different IPs at the same time. Frankly, I would expect more forensic expertise from a CU. G'day --92.225.140.171 (talk) 16:53, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, I found another: who is also now blocked.  Tiptoety  talk 21:55, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * ✅ I have additionally blocked the named account. Tiptoety  talk 07:45, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
 * For the record (given the IP comment above), Dodo19 does have a slightly different UA from Furor Teutonicus, but is editing via the same IP range and ISP, and both geolocate to the exact same location. Tiptoety  talk 21:59, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Miacek
After his routine edits to an article I had edited before, (probably just to provoke me or disrupt) has been massively vandalising IP talk pages:. It's pretty sure that most of the Hansenet/Alice DSL IP user pages he now marked as Dodo19 sock puppets here are not his actual socks. Those two user accounts are definitely Dodo's: he has previously claimed old user accounts Proklos (from German Wikipedia) and Constanz (English Wikipedia; left in 2007) to be my forerunners, which I deny, hence his recent user name choice (cf. Maicek). For 'Constnaz' (inappropriate username, too), check. The accounts should be blocked. Recent sock puppets: Sockpuppet_investigations/Dodo19/Archive. (I think we should also mark the current case page as not warranting archiving yet, he's here with new accounts every day.) Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 15:37, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * ✅ and already blocked. Shell  babelfish 15:48, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Constnaz wasn't blocked, so I blocked them and completed the tagging. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 22:07, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

07 April 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

See this: conversation, and the name and edits are nearly identical to User:Erich Mayer Gscshoyru (talk) 13:22, 7 April 2011 (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

 * (checkusered because of the possible connection with Dodo19
 * that ==  (Same area).
 * to be, but it can't be ruled out (there are some inconsistencies).
 * -- Luk  talk 14:10, 7 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Well lets at least get some action in between the two instead of having them both around. The Mass adding in short time w/ Hot Cat has my duck sensor of the scales. -- DQ  (t)   (e)  17:18, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Both accounts blocked. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 03:55, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

12 April 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets

Continued massive additions of unexplained (and pointless) cn tags and similar items (often attacking exactly the same pages as in German wiki, ), coupled with introduction of deliberate factual errors ( - for example, vandalised a link to GKChP (1991 coup!) so it now seemingly refers to 1993 Russian constitutional crisis - patent nonsense. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 18:08, 12 April 2011 (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
A match to. TN X Man 18:17, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Blocked indefinitely. Favonian (talk) 20:23, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

28 April 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets

Dodo19 was known to have an obsession with categories, that he massively introduced, regardless of our guidelines, purpose or conventions. This is almost certain to be his newest re-incarnation. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 17:04, 28 April 2011 (UTC)


 * his todays sock - quite obvious. Just continuing with the yesterday's inappropriate HotCat additions (despite being asked to stop, as they're mostly redundant and that based on other similar categories, subsidiaries should not be included).Miacek and his crime-fighting dog  (woof!) 10:37, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

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

User:Miacek obviously has a problem with my edits and an obsession with Dodo19. --Denis19 (talk) 17:12, 28 April 2011 (UTC)


 * It's obvious - taking a look at your talk page(s)- that it's not only me who's having a problem with you're acts like inappropriate categorizations. Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 17:17, 28 April 2011 (UTC)


 * It's obvious that YOU are not interested in discussing a solution to the problem! Otherwise you would not immediately label my edits as vandalism and call me a troll! --Denis19 (talk) 17:21, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Blocked per WP:DUCK. Favonian (talk) 17:26, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Everyone's blocked. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 01:14, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
 * KTG71 blocked as well. Favonian (talk) 10:44, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
 * In view of the massive number of dubious category additions performed by the two socks, I saw no alternative to a bulk revert of their actions. Favonian (talk) 11:09, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, I agree with you, since as a rule his categorizations are unhelpful, e.g. overcategorization due to overlapping categories. He was previously also known to add categories of some German awards to all the recipients, incl. pages that already contained numerous categories, thus contradicting with the rule that categorization should be based on essential, "defining" features of article subjects, rather than on incidental or subjective features. Also, if he realizes, that his changes will be reverted anyway, the greater the chances that he'll give up, instead of returning with yet another sock with exactly the same kind of behaviour.Miacek and his crime-fighting dog (woof!) 11:24, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Denis19 blocked, marking for close. TN X Man  13:07, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

03 May 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Same edits as last puppet User:Justin Tamerlane Karl 334   ☞ TALK to ME ☜  20:01, 3 May 2011 (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 are the same:
 * Blocked, tagged, etc. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  20:20, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, etc. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  20:20, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, etc. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  20:20, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, etc. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  20:20, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, etc. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  20:20, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, etc. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  20:20, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

I've blocked Not much room for doubt. Favonian (talk) 20:31, 3 May 2011 (UTC)
 * - Can I get another alarm for those accounts that like to sleep in. And can we put our foot down with a IP block? -- DQ  (t)   (e)  02:51, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

The following accounts appear to match the technical data from Hiram Ulysses Grant and Hermann Balk, but will need to be checked for a behavioural link. Do not block any of the following accounts without a behavioural link confirmed. I have made one range block. I doubt its effectiveness, but it may serve as an inconvenience for the sockpuppeteer. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 09:31, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
 * User compare indicates that none of the above accounts have edited common pages with either Hiram Ulysses Grant or Hermann Balk. Regards, <b style="color:green;">MacMed</b><sup style="color:red;">talk <sub style="color:black;">stalk 21:25, 7 May 2011 (UTC)


 * 2 of the accounts do not have any edits, but the rest should be blocked per behavoiral connections. -- DQ  (t)   (e)  20:05, 9 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Per DQ I've blocked and tagged everyone except Molle and Dadizaki. MacMed: just because there's no overlap in articles doesn't mean they're not the same; all of their edits are within the same genre. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 01:21, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

30 October 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Typical Dodo style edits to his honey pots like Talk:Heinz Nawratil and, as usual, stalking and mechanically reverting my edits or instigating edit wars in articles I'm currently working on. For his previous IPs/activities, cf. the archive, e.g. here. Temporarily semiying the articles affected might help. Estlandia (dialogue) 08:34, 30 October 2011 (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 IPs have gone quiet, so I'm closing for now with no action taken. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 13:43, 5 November 2011 (UTC)

22 March 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

User:Dog Whipper showed up here at the end of February. His first edit displayed a knowledge of wikipedia policy shorthand: not incriminating in and of itself, but an indicator that the user already knows how things work around here from prior experience. Also of note in that edit is what he removed: a source by German mineralogist and right-extremist de:Helmut Schröcke—Dodo19 displayed some strongly anti-right-wing tendencies while he edited. He then dove into editing Viktor Suvorov (a controversial revisionist Russian military historian), one of Dodo19's old favourites to edit. Another interesting early edited page is Majakowskiring, a street in Berlin. Dodo19 is himself German and lives or lived in the capital, further evidenced by his socks User:Friedrich S. Hain (Friedrichshain) and User:Charlotte N. Burg (Charlottenburg). None of this is particularly incriminating, but keep reading....

Recently and more tellingly, Dog Whipper has been creating articles relating to obscure Estonian and Estonian-related crime of spurious notability (Le gang des Estoniens, Budget airline bandits, Baltic Organized Crime Hub) and editing more well-known articles of the same topic (Crime in Estonia, EstDomains). Dodo19's personal feud with Estonian editor User:Estlandia (formerly known as Miacek) should be well-known to anyone familiar with his editing here.

On a hunch, I worked through Dodo19 and his various socks and ran a Stalker test comparing them to Dog Whipper. Here are the results. Because DW has very few edits here (and, I believe, because the sockmaster has gotten wiser over time), only 7 pages were found in common between DW and the others, but they only add more substance to this case:


 * User talk:Estlandia: Admittedly, Estlandia edited DW's user talk first. However, Estlandia has been responsible for rooting out the majority of Dodo19's socks. The fact that he suspected something "off" about this account says something, I feel.
 * Viktor Suvorov has been discussed already.
 * German prisoners of war in the Soviet Union was edited by both Dodo19 and the User:RobinHood005 sock. Perhaps not an obscure article to edit, but indicative of Dodo19's keen interest in German military history: an area in which DW is also very active.
 * Joachim Gauck and Wolfgang Schäuble are articles on German politicians: an area in which Dodo19 was and DW is very active.
 * Category:Estonian War of Independence is even more interesting: a recently-registered editor already going into category-editing? And in an area in which Dodo19 was involved in editing (see e.g., Dodo19-Miacek/Estlandia feud)? Something ain't right here....
 * 1st Foot Guards (German Empire) is by far the most incriminating page of commonality found. With a size of 1,161 bytes and a grand total of 9 edits to it, it is about as obscure as you can get. But even more telling is the fact that it was created by—wait for it—User:Pankrator, one of Dodo19's more prolific socks.

So, we have this: early editing patterns loosely connectable to the sockmaster, contentious activity (possible baiting?) in a topic area of past conflict, editing in near-identical political/historical topic areas, and a number of pages in common that do not seem coincidental. Something is not kosher about this account. Do I hear waterfowl in the distance, or am I hallucinating? Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 21:02, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

DW has also created Category:Organized crime groups in Estonia and has made the following category or categorisation edits: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 (over 20% of his edits). Dodo19 was highly active in category and categorisation editing (see also his HotCat-filled user contributions).

Another small but interesting scrap of evidence is the similarity of user talk habits between DW and Dodo19. Both use "--" to begin their signatures Dodo19 Pankrator (sock) Dog Whipper. Both sometimes use closing lines of addressment (e.g., "thanks", "regards) Dodo19 Dog Whipper. Both will use "Hi" to begin a new post on another user's talk page Dodo19 Dog Whipper. Now, will admit that since DW has not been around for long, he has a minuscule and "statistically insignificant" number of such edits. I also fully acknowledge that none of the described habits are extraordinarily unique. This evidence should not be considered authoritative, definitive, or anywhere near critical to my report. Just more things to consider.... Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 00:16, 23 March 2012 (UTC)


 * @Tnxman: I had feared that would be the case, which is why I spent the better part of an afternoon compiling the veritable essay above. I requested checkuser in the event that it was still usable to get a confirmation, but I don't regard it as vital; I think that the behavioural evidence presented by myself and Estlandia's addendum should be more than sufficient to make a decision here unless this Dog Whipper character has a helluva good excuse for his suspicious antics (which I doubt). Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 15:31, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * @Estlandia: Good point about the username; I hadn't even thought of that. The recent IP-socking you demonstrate would seem to indicate that Dodo19 is still lurking around actively and has not given up his vendettas here. Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 15:35, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

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

It is very likely to be Dodo19 who apparently has by now switched from hatred against me to general anti-Estonian sentiment (even the nickname 'Dog whipper' is telling: I used to call myself 'Miacek and his crime-fighting dog' previously). Dodo19's more recent IP socks include 85.178.251.17 (stalking my edits at Copei) and 78.53.37.183. Doing lots of category edits was a telltale sign of many previous Dodo socks (cf 'Furor Teutonicus'. Estlandia (dialogue) 09:13, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Unfortunately, all of the accounts in the archive are. Behavior will need to be the deciding factor. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 13:43, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Perhaps the account could be checked against the two IPs I pointed out above? Both IPs belong to Alice DSL/Hansenet range well known to be Dodo19's plus the behavioral evidence confirms it was him. Estlandia (dialogue) 18:16, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * (I don't think checkuser works for IPs per WM privacy policy) Lothar von Richthofen (talk) 19:42, 23 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Blocked and tagged. --MuZemike 18:19, 25 March 2012 (UTC)