Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dragonron/Archive

16 January 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

There was prior behavioral evidence linking these four accounts at Sockpuppet investigations/Zarbon/Archive, but it was closed without a checkuser being performed. I believe that we need to officially connect these accounts and have checkuser data on them in order to prevent further harassment towards myself and Zarbon from this individual. There are also several IP addresses that he has edited under but why bother listing them here when the privacy policy says you can't confirm anything about them even when it's painfully obvious? I also feel that there may be other accounts in this net of sockpuppets that should be dealt with as well. — Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 04:14, 16 January 2014 (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

 * Accounts have been blocked already, and we don't just go around CUing people. Rschen7754 05:50, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Why have you closed this? I want to have definitive proof that they are all related that way there can be some actual form of prevention when he gets a new range to bother people on and starts registering new accounts to harass people. Why should it matter if they're all blocked when there's a strong possiblity he'll be back?— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 08:24, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

28 January 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets

For reference


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

The puppet master was the subject, along with two other accounts, Special:Contributions/ActionFigureLover and Special:Contributions/Taco-Sauce89, of a sock puppet report relating to User:Zarbon. See Sockpuppet investigations/Zarbon/Archive. The SSI was inconclusive, but the master and the two other accounts were blocked for disruption and trolling. I do not allege any connection to Zarbon here and note the prior SSI just by way of background. In any event, a new user, Karukarutaka, has emerged to make the same kinds of disruptive edits as the prior accounts. For instance, prior socks Special:Contributions/IHeartUM and ActionFigureLover made edits to the Talk page of User:X96lee15; likewise this editor. This editor, like prior socks, complains about User:Ryulong, see contributions by IHeartUM and this editor. Both IHeartUM and this editor have made edits (God knows why) to my Talk page as well. A quick review of the edit summaries of the subject editors also reveals a shared - testiness in tone. It is plainly the same person, evading the prior blocks. Requesting CU for sleepers. JohnInDC (talk) 14:29, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Quite a CU haul there. Per Ryulong's note, I do request that this report be moved to Dragonron's SSI archive in order to keep it all in one place.  Thanks.  JohnInDC (talk) 16:47, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

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

is the sockmaster, and this case should be moved to Sockpuppet investigations/Dragonron.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 14:56, 28 January 2014 (UTC) may also be related, and I am listing him as well.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 15:07, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * FWIW, here are edits to my talk page that may be related to this discussion:, , , , , — X96lee15 (talk) 15:02, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:03, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:03, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:03, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:03, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:03, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:03, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:03, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:03, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:03, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:03, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:03, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:03, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:03, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:03, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:03, 28 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Note: I've moved this report here from Sockpuppet investigations/IHeartUM. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:55, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Alright, I think they're all blocked and tagged now. Closing case. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:04, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * The Stewards appear to be aware of this guy though. Perhaps we can leave things open until we can get more information from meta?— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 17:09, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I'll send this on to the stewards so that they are aware of the extent of the socking and so that they can take action as they see fit. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:15, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * noted that Miami Bleach was globally locked in a message left on Nick's talk page in response to the troll trying to get me blocked again.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 17:17, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I found this.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 17:28, 28 January 2014 (UTC)
 * I've locked all those accounts globally, it seems to be related to some check I did on en.quote some time ago. - Barras talk 18:01, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

02 February 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Brand new account whos first edit was to list me at WP:AN3 and I'm currently the favored target of this banned user who previously went by User:Wiki-star — Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 20:04, 2 February 2014 (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 Beautyfrisco for being an obvious block evasion. Legoktm (talk) 20:07, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Technically and geographically ❌, and their IP doesn't appear to be an open proxy. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:25, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Whilst Beautyfrisco is unrelated they don't look like a new user so I think they should stay blocked. Nothing more to do so closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:10, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

15 February 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

The first action by was to revert edits I had made, followed by attempting to send an article I had recently edited to AFD (a malformed debate was posted at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Tommy Oliver). This was followed up by edits by who began to revert me reverting the actions of the first IP. The two IPs are obviously related to each other, and this one's knowledge of Wikipedia shows that they are being operated by someone who knows how things work. Because of my recent history with Wiki-star/Dragonron, I have listed them here and I'm also requesting checkuser to see if there is some sort of technical evidence linking these new mobile IPs to the previous socks (the IPs geolocate to the exact center of the USA so they likely do not corroborate with the sockmaster's actual location, which based on previous IPs was southern Florida). I also note the range they are on was blocked in the past and was involved with the nonsense at and its first AFD. — Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 07:37, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Third IP added based on further edits.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 08:59, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

I have added to the list above as he has suddenly appeared after 5 months of no activity to recreate the AFD. It is clear it is a sleeper of the Survivor AFD trolls from last year that were either or .— Ryūlóng  ( 琉竜 ) 04:53, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

Can the ranges he is operating on be blocked as they have been in the past? He is actively vandalizing.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 03:36, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

New registered account discovered.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 20:27, 17 February 2014 (UTC)

I've added to the list as his only edit was to pile onto the thread another IP sock made about me. If memory serves, BuickCenturyDriver/Don't Feed the Zords comes from Brooklyn.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 05:00, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Are the rest /?— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 14:40, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Before this is closed, showed up.— Ryūlóng  ( 琉竜 ) 19:53, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Having seen this issue developing, I have to suggest that Ryulong's behaviour in unilaterally declaring the IPs as a sock and reverting an AfD nomination without any attempt at explanation looks questionable. That Ryulong has finally got around to starting a SPI after comments from uninvolved editors (see User_talk:Ryulong) doesn't justify the initial presumption of bad faith, in my opinion. AndyTheGrump (talk) 08:40, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * And incidentally, since when has " know[ing] how things work" been evidence of sockpuppetry? Not that a malformed AfD, raising a behavioural issue at DRN etc seem to indicate extensive 'knowledge'... AndyTheGrump (talk) 08:46, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I started this before you began blowing up my user talk. I was only wary of beginning this because I know that IP addresses are rarely if ever checkusered because of the privacy policy and I don't think that this will be answered at all anyway. And pre-existing knowledge of aspects of Wikipedia's bureaucracy is enough for my suspicions. Just because things aren't 100% does not mean that it's questionable actions, considering this range of IPs has been the source of abuse in the past.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 08:54, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * No, "pre-existing knowledge of aspects of Wikipedia's bureaucracy" isn't evidence of sockpuppetry. It is evidence that an IP has edited Wikipedia before. Which, as far as I'm aware, is permitted. AndyTheGrump (talk) 09:11, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * That may be, but using it in concert to try to get another user in trouble for discovering you is problematic.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 09:12, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * It's definitely block evasion but based on the edits to Articles for deletion/Francesca Hogi it could be User:Don't Feed the Zords, User:BuickCenturyDriver, or User:AtlanticDeep. I'm just about to rangeblock. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:12, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Noting that those edits were a year ago, but worth keeping in mind. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:45, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Placed on hold for now depending on if they come back after the rangeblock, if they do we can work out what to do next. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:39, 15 February 2014 (UTC)


 * - AS92813 is evading the IP rangeblock so I could block for that, however I just noticed the edit to Articles for deletion/Russell Hantz (4th nomination). The initiator of that AFD User:N92413 (note similar username) was blocked as a sock, see Sockpuppet investigations/Zoozle102/Archive. Both Zoozle102 and N92413 turned their user and user talk pages into blue links using a single letter and AS92813 did the same. SO given that would a CU please have a look what's going on. Primarily who's related to who, are we dealing with a long term sock master (as I suggested above, and I think one of them did/does this) and a sleeper check. Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:45, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅: is Dragonron.
 * The rest are not. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:37, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * The confirmed sock is blocked and tagged, closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:58, 18 February 2014 (UTC)
 * belongs with the Presbitow/AS92813 group. I saw them earlier, but their recent edits seal the deal. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:11, 18 February 2014 (UTC)

21 May 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Both IPs appeared to blindly revert edits I had made on anime/manga related articles, and only to my edits, which was an MO of the original sockpuppetry related to this whole mess. . Can we get rangeblocks in place before he deletes my ANI thread again or disrupts this page? It's pretty obvious but it's better to have the documentation that this is Dragonron aka again. — Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 23:51, 21 May 2014 (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

 * Both IPs are already blocked. Closing - no action necessary. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:04, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

22 May 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Only edits are to blindly revert various edits I make across the project. We need to identify any sockpuppets created ASAP. — Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 20:22, 22 May 2014 (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 blocked the account based on behavior, but a check of the range turns up no additional accounts at this time. Note that the account is on a range previously used by this master. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:33, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Archiving. AGK  [•] 23:50, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

27 May 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

All blindly reverted either myself or Zarbon. Also impersonating another (banned) user in order to get them deeper into trouble. Accounts all currently blocked but more may be hiding.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 14:19, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Diff from most recently confirmed sock. Diffs from this set:, , , , .— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 22:10, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

The "Tranquility" usernames are meant to mimic, currently suspected(?) of being a sockpuppet of CensoredScribe.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 05:42, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

Added IP that was previously used to disrupt by Wiki-star/Dragonron and added something to this page that seems to have been purged.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 17:54, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

New account and IP added, apparently after the block on 166.147.96.0/19 expired.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 18:33, 10 June 2014 (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

 * - King of  &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 21:06, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Could you also say who they are trying to impersonate, and show how? King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 23:26, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * - Sleeper check. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 07:49, 29 May 2014 (UTC)


 * ,, and  are ✅ when compared to the technical data of blocked sock .  is stale but fits the behavioural pattern.  has put a range block in place and everything is blocked. I'm not sure if there's anything more to be done here?--Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots  19:25, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Closing. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 19:48, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

05 December 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Account was created today and the accounts edit history overlaps with blocked user. Account names seem to reference each other, and based on them there may be a third account, but I cannot find any link.

List of identical edits:
 * Im back my frend!
 * Its me, remember?
 * Im back my frend!
 * Its me, remember?
 * Im back my frend!
 * Its me, remember?
 * Im back my frend!
 * Its me, remember?
 * Its me, remember?
 * Im back my frend!
 * Its me, remember?
 * Its me, remember?

— Strongjam (talk) 17:43, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

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

This needs to be moved to Sockpuppet investigations/Dragonron as that's the sockmaster.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 18:10, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Or, the name deleted in this edit and Ryulong edited the user page a few months back (but this might of course be only to throw us off the track.) Sjö (talk) 18:20, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Wiki-star and Dragonron are the same person. We just have more of a previous case under "Dragonron" than "Wiki-star".— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 18:27, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * ✅ as, .-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 22:55, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * All accounts blocked and tagged. Mike V  •  Talk  23:01, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

06 December 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Both IPs (on the same ISP) have blanket reverted edits I've made across the project as Dragonron socks have done. ,, , — Ryūlóng  ( 琉竜 ) 21:05, 6 December 2014 (UTC)

Are these proxies or what? Also I'm fairly certain that it passes the duck test now considering the same reverts were made by the registered account below. I've only kept these cases separate because I know check user won't say anything about this set of IPs.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 11:43, 7 December 2014 (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 31.168.172.0/24 range was blocked by Rschen for a week. However, I looked and it appears that the range is operating on open proxies. I've upped the block to a year. Mike V  •  Talk  00:07, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

07 December 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

WP:DUCK, sleeper check and IP block needed. — Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 04:16, 7 December 2014 (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

 * Sleeper check. Mike V  •  Talk  23:23, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I don't see any sleepers. Blocking the IP won't make a difference, they have a number of dynamic IPs available.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 23:53, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for checking. Mike V  •  Talk  00:07, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

10 December 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

WP:DUCK edits overlap with previous users with similar naming pattern. Strongjam (talk) 16:22, 10 December 2014 (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 and tagged.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 16:49, 10 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Quick post-archival note that I also User:I agree with u! without filing an SPI and without a CU check, per WP:DUCK, despite it being unused for a few days. ☺ ·   Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  17:08, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

12 December 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

I'm filing a new report because the earlier once needs to be archived under Torga

Obvious same topic and naming scheme as socks blocked 2 days ago (see archive) ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  17:11, 12 December 2014 (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

 * Already per painfully obvious username and edits. ☺ ·   Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  17:14, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅, no sleepers. I'm not sure if checkuser is needed in these recent cases as he's just cycling through to a new IP, not creating sleepers; we're in whack-a-mole territory.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 17:21, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Yea, you're probably right. Sorry for the bother, I'll just file future socks as "already blocktagged" and case closed. ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  17:28, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
 * As long as the socks are blocked and tagged you don't need to file a report here for each DUCK block (unless additional CU or admin action is needed). It'll save you the trouble. -- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 18:01, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

18 December 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Name matches prior sockpuppet names, MO is to blanket revert all of my edits. — Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 00:18, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

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

I wanted a sleeper check and if I report this to AIV (because where else am I going to get help) they're going to tell me that it's not for sockpuppets and tell me to come here so what then Mike V?— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 01:36, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Even if the behavior is apparent (at least in my eyes) then it still gets shunted over here because it's a sockpuppet issue. Also, it'd be nice to check for sleepers.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 01:59, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Per Ponyo's comment, I don't think any checks are necessary. It's best to RBI since the user keeps hopping IPs and doesn't seem to stick with one for too long. Mike V  •  Talk  01:31, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
 * if the behavior is readily apparent, I don't think you should have an issue at AIV. If it's more complex, then it would be best to bring it here. Mike V  •  Talk  01:56, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
 * If you want a CU, I'd leave a request on Ponyo's talk page. Given the prior comments I can't really endorse a check in good faith. Mike V  •  Talk  02:07, 18 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Not a clerk, but I'm inclined to agree with Mike—a check is unlikely to tell us anything we don't already know. Not sure I'd have outright declined it, but I wouldn't have endorsed it had it been within my gift. You shouldn't have an issue at AIV as long as you make it clear that the behaviour is disruptive, otherwise admins are quite right to defer to SPI when they're unsure. This page is on my watchlist, so do report here as well, and feel free to drop a note on my talk page—plenty of admins watch it, so even if I'm not about you've got a decent chance of a response.  HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  13:47, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

01 January 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

I haven't had a run in with this editor before. Today I came across a vandalism edit by Cawmen Ridah on an article I watch. I checked their use page and they created it today. They put up a fake "this account is a sock puppet of Dragonron and has been blocked indefinitely" info box, when the block for this account does not seem to exist in the logs. The edit summary in the history for the user page lists it as "i can already predick the future." Based on that I was honestly curious enough that this user is in fact a sockpuppet and not even taking the effort to hide it anymore.

While I haven't had run-ins, I've seen mention of Dragonron several times on Wikipedia during my own encounters with who seems to be a frequent target of harassment from this sockpuppeteer. This is reinforced by several of his edits being targetted at recent contributions of Ryulong.

I'm gonna be honest I don't know much at all about the Super Sentai/Power Rangers topic area that this guy is involved in with so much of his edits, so I can't honestly tell what is vandalism with a lot of it. I know this most certainly was. Weedwacker (talk) 23:56, 1 January 2015 (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

 * Yep, that's him or someone doing an astoundingly good impression of him. Blocked, and he very kindly tagged himself. A CU isn't likely to be of much use, but I'll leave the request to a CU or clerk. HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  00:17, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't think a check is of much use either. It's best to block and tag the accounts as they appear. Mike V • Talk 00:55, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

06 January 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Impostor account of and admission is based on this edit summary. He has been making similar edits that are likely in nature to Zarbonholio before its indefinite block. However, based on this edit, it is most likely used by because in that edit, they tagged the globally locked  as a fake sockpuppet. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 19:07, 6 January 2015 (UTC)

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

Upon further inspection, this probably should have been noted at Sockpuppet investigations/Tintor3. However, the behavior does make it out to be another sockpuppet. If they are all confirmed to be one and the same, tag the latter as the puppetmaster. RoaringFlamer41

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I've moved the case here per Yunshui's findings. Everything's set for now so I'm closing the case. Mike V • Talk 00:27, 8 January 2015 (UTC)

30 January 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  03:05, 30 January 2015 (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

 * Split off from Sockpuppet investigations/Miszatomic.
 * ,, , &  have been "untagged" as Miszatomic socks, and split off to this SPI per 's assertion that Dragonron's the master (which is understood to have been determined using Steward-CU). It is noted that Miszatomic logged in (on ENWQ) into these socks using a compromised password to "investigate" since ENWQ had no local CUs, and thus "autocreated" the accounts on EnWiki by navigating to this project, which led to the initial CU results linking these socks to Miszatomic, since the "account creation" log entry matched his CU data; however, a local CU check comparing Miszatomic to the latest confirmed Dragonron sock  confirmed they are completely ❌.  ☺ ·   Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  03:06, 30 January 2015 (UTC)
 * ,,  and locked globally.
 * & do not exist on EnWiki and have been added to this report for informative purposes. No blocks or tags possible. ☺ ·   Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  03:08, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

03 April 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

User has been adding unnecessary tags to articles that are similar to the sockmaster. Also, the username is most likely the same as the puppet master (DragonsRondo). Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 16:58, 3 April 2015 (UTC)

Here's some more differences of Im here my frend:,. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 00:55, 4 April 2015 (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

 * In this instance, CU results are completely useless, so we'll have to rely on the behavioral evidence. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:26, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
 * , please provide diffs of a) Dragonron or confirmed socks, b) DragonsRondo, and c) Im here my frend, to illustrate similarities in editing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  22:21, 3 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Both are obvious socks, based on the names and editing patterns. I wasn't absolutely convinced, but the emergence of "Im here my frend" clinches it for me. I've indef'd both per WP:DUCK. Closing. HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  17:06, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

06 April 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Here's the differences of Ok, do u remember?: (more of me! more of me!)--Infinite0694 (talk) 08:07, 6 April 2015 (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

 * . HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  21:03, 7 April 2015 (UTC)