Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Gbgfbgfbgfb/Archive

11 October 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

✅ Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 17:54, 11 October 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

 * All accounts have been confirmed, noting here for historical record and tagging--Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 17:54, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
 * All already blocked and tagged. Legoktm (talk) 21:00, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

15 October 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Posting with User:Shakatoday sig, a known sockpuppet of Gb. Funnyfarmofdoom (talk to me) 21:47, 15 October 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
Account is already blocked. I took care of the sleepers. Elockid( Boo! ) 22:09, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

11 December 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Latest sock round-up Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 21:14, 11 December 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

 * All blocked and tagged.--Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 21:14, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

11 February 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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


 * Same style of edit summary ('nonsense' seems to be a favourite word): Cityinfonorns, Nwbocploumouic - also, note the trend of removing talk page warnings
 * Same areas of interest - user edits Slavic/Balkan topics almost exclusively
 * Tends to undo edits with little to no explanation: Nwbocploumouic, Orejefparkn m.o.p  22:57, 11 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
Cityinfonorns blocked by Jpgordon, Orejefparkn blocked by DrKiernan, Nwbocploumouic blocked for obvious quacking by myself. Submitting this into SPI for the record. m.o.p 22:57, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

15 February 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets
 * original suspected sockmaster, added for completeness after SPI renaming
 * original suspected sockmaster, added for completeness after SPI renaming
 * original suspected sockmaster, added for completeness after SPI renaming


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

Edit-warring on about a picture. Also coordinated edit-warring on :, ,. is already blocked as a sock. Δρ.Κ. λόγος<span style="position:relative;bottom:-2.0ex;left:-5.2ex;*left:-5.5ex">πράξις  05:44, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you Callanecc about Ercrocehalon. I had this guy in the back of my mind but with all this action I forgot to add them. Δρ.Κ. <sup style="position:relative">λόγος<span style="position:relative;bottom:-2.0ex;left:-5.2ex;*left:-5.5ex">πράξις  06:35, 15 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Note: I added blocked because he kept deleting Algeria from the list of top importers on Arms industry. Some of the socks above also deleted Algeria's orders of MiG aircraft. Δρ.Κ. <sup style="position:relative">λόγος<span style="position:relative;bottom:-2.0ex;left:-5.2ex;*left:-5.5ex">πράξις   06:59, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Ditto for
 * Ditto for

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

Jkadavoor Dr.K. Jim1138 Edit-warring on about a picture Not using the article's talk page to mak consensus version

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Who are and  socks of? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:30, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * I just added Ercrocehalon to the list above, it's the oldest account so far, but I'll wait for Jpgordon before I move the page so we know who the master is. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:31, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * User:Gbgfbgfbgfb seems to be the trash bucket for this stuff. I just tagged a few more of them (that I'd previously blocked; I'm kinda lazy about tagging socks of prolific annoyances.) --jpgordon:==( o ) 07:41, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Moved here from Sockpuppet investigations/Fornslsateve per jpgordon's comment. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:35, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * - : For sleeper check and confirmation given that we keep finding more (both blocked and unblocked). since you know this sockpuppeteer perhaps you'd like do look into the Magic 8-Ball? Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:38, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅ and a buncha more which this time I tagged, I did. I've also rangeblocked 41.103.201.9/18 (matching the previous block of 41.109.64.0/18.) --jpgordon:==( o ) 16:15, 15 February 2014 (UTC)
 * All accounts listed above have been tagged and blocked indef, closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:18, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

23 February 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets

Similar behavior to other banned users, main attacting point is the |PZL W-3 Sokół article - prior accounts | IP 41.109.95.35 and User:Eroscramsgfo to name a couple. FOX 52 (talk) 07:12, 24 February 2014 (UTC)


 * ✅, blocked, tagged. Materialscientist (talk) 08:19, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

26 February 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

All targeting Israel Defense Forces, as did the master. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:100;"> Dwpaul  Talk   03:57, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

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


 * Cyberduck icon.png It looks like a duck to me Similar usernames, added exactly the same content. Do you think a CheckUser could check for sleeper accounts? --Mz7 (talk) 04:10, 26 February 2014 (UTC)


 * All 8 socks were blocked as a result of Sockpuppet investigations/Arabmuslim series (which was started, I think, at the same time or just after I opened this case). I still think that (not mentioned there) is the true master even though blocked in 2010, since the targeted article and edits were the same.  <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:100;"> Dwpaul   Talk   05:08, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Since all socks have been blocked, I'm marking this for close, please archive to Gbgfbgfbgfb's SPI archive. --  At am a  頭 20:37, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Except for, which is , these are all ✅ as Sockpuppet investigations/Gbgfbgfbgfb. Also see Sockpuppet investigations/Arabmuslim series. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:15, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

03 June 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Editing history exhibits classic socking behaviour such as making exactly 10 reverts in their user page to get autoconfirmed status, then immediately began editing a semiprotected article (Russian American). Compare with. TDL (talk) 07:42, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

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

I agree. Please see also edits on where the new sock started edit-warring, reverting  the picture of the jet exactly as blocked sock Fornslsateve did. Δρ.Κ. <sup style="position:relative">λόγος<span style="position:relative;bottom:-2.0ex;left:-5.2ex;*left:-5.5ex">πράξις 08:01, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * There are a number of socks here:


 * All blocked.--<b style="color:Navy;">Jezebel's</b> Ponyo <sup style="color:Navy;">bons mots 20:31, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Closing. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 18:36, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

24 November 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

The two new socks Yazebi and Cyclopsox have appeared over the past few days edit-warring incessantly over the image of Sukhoi 100 Superjet. The other three are stale and blocked socks but are added here as control to compare their edit-warring behaviour on exactly the same article and for exactly the same reason: relentless, LTA edit-warring trying to remove the featured picture of Sukhoi 100 and replace it with another, lower quality picture. . Dr.   K.  06:11, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Evidence
 * Blocked sock Trspioreberm edit-warring a new pictute of Sukhoi 100, ditto
 * Blocked sock Fornslsateve edit-warring a new pictute of Sukhoi 100.
 * Blocked sock Cfatsorrnp edit-warring a new pictute of Sukhoi 100.
 * Fresh sock Yazebi edit-warring a new pictute of Sukhoi 100 and calling me a "sock", Fresh sock Yazebi edit-warring a new pictute of Sukhoi 100 and ditto.
 * Cf. sock IP calling me a sock in February 2014, Cf. sock IP calling me a sock in February 2014, Cf. sock IP calling Jim1138 a sock in February 2014.
 * Fresh sock Cyclopsox edit-warring a new pictute of Sukhoi 100, ditto and ditto.
 * Fresh sock Yazebi supporting fresh sock Cyclopsox on the talkpage of the article.
 * More similarities
 * All socks share an interest on Islam-related topics, African-related articles and aviation, including airforces of African countries and aircraft manufacturers, especially Russian.
 * Edit-warring like there is no tomorrow.
 * Brand new sock added after CU check
 * Sock already blocked by but added here for the record.

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

 * ✅ =, but everything else is  for a long time and CU can't be of any help here. - Mailer Diablo 07:41, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
 * All blocked, closing the case.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  18:09, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

26 November 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

As soon as recent socks,   and    were blocked, these brand-new accounts take up the edit-warring on. Rest of edits follow similar locus as the other socks. . Dr.   K.  16:26, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Sock account creation stats
 * 35deyu4642 was created 11:02 am on 22 November 2015. Negeryi was created 10:51 am on the same day. Blocked sock Yazebi was created 10:08 am 22 November 2015 and Cyclopsox at 02:32 am on 23 November 2015.
 * Concluding remarks
 * Thank you for the impressive CU results and analysis . I'll keep an eye on Debasish Dey and will inform you if anything comes up. Dr.   K.  23:23, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Question
 * Hi Bbb23. In lieu of bothering you on your talkpage, why some of the socks were blocked without tags? Thank you. Dr.   K.  18:18, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

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

New Sock


Just registered today, same edit warring behaviour. WCM email 12:59, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * . I've blocked the two listed accounts to stem the disruption, but there's more going on here, so I won't post my findings until later.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:20, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
 * The following accounts are ✅ to and other previously blocked socks:
 * Blocked without tags.
 * The following accounts are technically ✅ to each other and to the accounts above:
 * LondonTurk is already indefinitely blocked. Debasish Dey is not. In addition, Debasish Dey is significantly older than Gbgfbgfbgfb. Before taking any action, there needs to be a behavioral analysis. My sense of the editing by the recently blocked socks is they are all vandals and edit warriors, but they don't necessarily attack the same articles. LondonTurk was blocked for edit-warring and for personal attacks. Debasish Dey's edits will have to be scrutinized more carefully, and there are far more of them. They were blocked once in 2014 for edit-warring and harassment. They haven't edited since October 30, 2015, which is part of what limits my ability to say they are confirmed to the other accounts.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:56, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Since Debasish Dey is confirmed to LondonTurk, shouldn't he be indeffed regardless of behavioral analysis?  Vanjagenije  (talk)  15:05, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Good thing this is on my watchlist because your ping didn't work, unless due to god knows what it's "delayed". When I make comments like these, it means that I'm not convinced that the technical evidence is enough to block and therefore prefer that a behavioral analysis accompany it before deciding. That doesn't mean the technical evidence should be dismissed, but both kinds of evidence are needed.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:30, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
 * We're just going to have to leave things as is. I'm going to break a rule by closing and archiving this in preparation for a merge from Sockpuppet investigations/KdimaJdiiid. Closing now.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:57, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * The following accounts are technically ✅ to each other and to the accounts above:
 * LondonTurk is already indefinitely blocked. Debasish Dey is not. In addition, Debasish Dey is significantly older than Gbgfbgfbgfb. Before taking any action, there needs to be a behavioral analysis. My sense of the editing by the recently blocked socks is they are all vandals and edit warriors, but they don't necessarily attack the same articles. LondonTurk was blocked for edit-warring and for personal attacks. Debasish Dey's edits will have to be scrutinized more carefully, and there are far more of them. They were blocked once in 2014 for edit-warring and harassment. They haven't edited since October 30, 2015, which is part of what limits my ability to say they are confirmed to the other accounts.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:56, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Since Debasish Dey is confirmed to LondonTurk, shouldn't he be indeffed regardless of behavioral analysis?  Vanjagenije  (talk)  15:05, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Good thing this is on my watchlist because your ping didn't work, unless due to god knows what it's "delayed". When I make comments like these, it means that I'm not convinced that the technical evidence is enough to block and therefore prefer that a behavioral analysis accompany it before deciding. That doesn't mean the technical evidence should be dismissed, but both kinds of evidence are needed.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:30, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
 * We're just going to have to leave things as is. I'm going to break a rule by closing and archiving this in preparation for a merge from Sockpuppet investigations/KdimaJdiiid. Closing now.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:57, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Good thing this is on my watchlist because your ping didn't work, unless due to god knows what it's "delayed". When I make comments like these, it means that I'm not convinced that the technical evidence is enough to block and therefore prefer that a behavioral analysis accompany it before deciding. That doesn't mean the technical evidence should be dismissed, but both kinds of evidence are needed.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:30, 29 November 2015 (UTC)
 * We're just going to have to leave things as is. I'm going to break a rule by closing and archiving this in preparation for a merge from Sockpuppet investigations/KdimaJdiiid. Closing now.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:57, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

27 November 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets
 * - added for the record after CU close
 * - added for the record after CU close
 * - added for the record after CU close


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

Two more socks from the sockfarm continuing the edit-warring disruption at Sukhoi superjet 100 Dr.   K.  14:56, 27 November 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

 * Already blocked. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:46, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

30 November 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Since yesterday this lot have been repeatedly recreating articles about a fake musician, including Bëłka Jūįčÿ, GIVE UP, GIVE UP belka, Bëłkã Jūįčÿ, Bëłkã Jūįčÿ Øffïçiâl, Bëłkã rapper, GIVE UP song, Bëłkã Jūįčÿ Offïçiâl, Belka ju, Bëłkã Juįčÿ. They're obvious and there's no real need to check if they're socks, and they're all blocked (and those titles salted), but I wonder if there is any possibility of a range block by a checkuser - I know you can't reveal IP addresses, but perhaps someone could do it without revealing the range blocked? Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:27, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Whenever I block a new one, they have taken to flooding their talk page with article content and lots of photos of the subject, as well as an unblock request. I will block new ones with no talk page access. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:29, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

And they're attacking my user and talk pages now. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:37, 30 November 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

 * Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 17:28, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

30 November 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

User:HJsgn is an obvious sock, but I report them for further investigation because they created a user page for another sock, at User:Yrtiffïçiâl, containing the text "Holy Jewish state of the Germanic Nation" (now deleted). That sounds familiar from other recent vandalism I've seen, so can anyone connect the dots? Checkuser against previous vandals who did that kind of thing, if you can remember who they are? Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC) It might be coincidence, but just after User:HJsgn is blocked and their "Holy Jewish state of the Germanic Nation" comment is deleted, User:HisGN shows up as a sock of User:Holy islamic state of the Germanic Nation and is quickly blocked. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 20:56, 30 November 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

 * The following accounts are ✅ to KdimaJdiiid and ❌ to, Holy islamic state of the Germanic Nation's master:
 * However, things got a bit more complicated as there are accounts at Sockpuppet investigations/Gbgfbgfbgfb, which I recently confirmed to each other (that master is ) and are ✅ from the accounts here. For that reason, I'm putting this on hold until I decide how best to proceed with the two SPIs.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
 * All of the accounts previously confirmed to KdimaJdiiid are ✅ to ., who is already blocked, is also ✅. We need to start tagging these accounts. (or another clerk), if the new version of the sock template is live, we can use the new parameter that allows us to indicate that these accounts were blocked based on checkuser evidence but aren't confirmed to the master. I'll only be available for consultation for basically today. Although I might be on-wiki for a short time tomorrow morning, I will be gone for at least two weeks after that.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:18, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Since Yazebi and others are already tagged as confirmed socks of the master, I would tag those new socks the same way. Otherwise, if we start using that new template parameter, we would need to also go back and re-tag older socks, which I think is vasting of time. I would only use that new parameter for brand new cases where socks are confirmed to each other, but not to the master. I would not use it for cases like this when there are already some older socks that are not confirmed to the master, but are tagged as confirmed to the master.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:51, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * That sounds fine, thanks very much.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:54, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Tagged and closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:58, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Since Yazebi and others are already tagged as confirmed socks of the master, I would tag those new socks the same way. Otherwise, if we start using that new template parameter, we would need to also go back and re-tag older socks, which I think is vasting of time. I would only use that new parameter for brand new cases where socks are confirmed to each other, but not to the master. I would not use it for cases like this when there are already some older socks that are not confirmed to the master, but are tagged as confirmed to the master.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:51, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * That sounds fine, thanks very much.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:54, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Tagged and closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:58, 1 December 2015 (UTC)