Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HarveyCarter/Archive/1

Report date July 29 2009, 14:56 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Evidence submitted by TFOWR

HarveyCarter has spawned a range of socks, including JohnRedwood and GranvilleHouston, and IP socks with IPs resolving to Carphone Warehouse. Harvey has a limited set of interests: bisexuality and autism. Recently a whole swathe of articles have been semi-ed, preventing Harvey from socking his belief that famous-movie-star X is/was/might be/could have been bisexual. Harvey now seems to have shifted to autism, particularly the (uncited) belief that Gordon Brown is/may be/was said to be autistic. Given the WP:BLP ramifications of suggesting, without any proof, that the UK's Prime Minister is autistic, Harvey's edits from IP socks have been reverted.

A newly minted user, RobMacLachlan, has now sprung up to support the IP socks - specifically by reinstating an IP sock's edit and announcing said edit on my talk page (the claim that "it is pretty well known that..." is eerily reminiscent of Harvey's edits to Talk:Death of Baby P - most likely oversighted by now. During Harvey's campaign for justice at the Baby P talk page I was surprised at how little I knew about the UK, despite living in the UK, and I am beginning to get that feeling again with respect to the PM (a local MP)...)

I believe that this obviously quacks; should a check-user be required please check against the 92.X.Y.Z IPs who have edited Talk:Gordon Brown recently.

Cheers, TFOWRThis flag once was red 14:56, 29 July 2009 (UTC) Edited: added note re: Baby P. TFOWRThis flag once was red 15:46, 29 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims. I'm not a sockpuppet, I'm just trying to keep a fair debate going. We have all heard that Gordon Brown has autism, why shouldn't his article mention it?

User:HarveyCarter routinely edits the "Later life" section of George III of the United Kingdom e.g.. This user showed up at the page hours after I reverted his last edit. The pattern of edits is obvious. DrKiernan (talk) 06:52, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments by other users
 * I've blocked him indefinitely. DrKiernan (talk) 13:56, 4 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * - Tagged with . NW ( Talk ) 14:38, 4 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Conclusions

Report date August 27 2009, 11:41 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Evidence submitted by DrKiernan

Comparing contributions, HarveyCarter focuses on film actors and royalty, which matches Engleham's interests. For example, these HarveyCarter socks edit both royalty and film actor articles:

Focusing on specific edits, HarveyCarter and Engleham have made identical (or near identical) contributions, for example:

HarveyCarter: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gary_Cooper&diff=243403318&oldid=243396154 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gary_Cooper&diff=287255018&oldid=287241259 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gary_Cooper&diff=287241053&oldid=286780966

Engleham: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gary_Cooper&diff=290092625&oldid=289283889 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gary_Cooper&diff=277183133&oldid=276174561


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

— Jake   Wartenberg  14:24, 27 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Conclusions
 * ❌, according to 2-year old CU data on HarveyCarter. Also unrelated to the most recent blocked sock. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 18:40, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets


Old blocked accounts:

Evidence submitted by DrKiernan
All these accounts show the same pattern of contributions as User:HarveyCarter focusing on the sex lives of movie celebrities and the illnesses and deaths of British monarchs.

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * NuclearWarfare took care of all the users... not sure about the ips.  ceran  thor 17:37, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * It's the new unblocked account, JerryAtkinson, that's the focus of my claim. I've listed the old ones because of this complaint that I'm acting with no evidence that the new account is HarveyCarter. DrKiernan (talk) 17:50, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Alright, I'll ping a more experienced clerk.  ceran  thor 17:51, 6 November 2009 (UTC)


 * to look for sleeper socks. NW ( Talk ) 20:10, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
 * None. Brandon (talk) 21:13, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Conclusions
has blocked JA. I think we'll let the IPs be.  ceran  thor 20:09, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Off2riorob
Usual Carter modus operandi-Politics and controversial little known uncited titilating tit bits about older type film stars IP got blocked and had edited Jack Wild soon as he was blocked the JackwildFan account came along and reverted the edit I had made to revert all of the IP edits to the article. It is a CAarphone 92 account as are all Carter socks and it is quarking loudly. Off2riorob (talk) 21:34, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users

 * I found this edit (to my talk page) interesting - when I last encountered HarveyCarter he had an obsession with Gordon Brown's alleged autism. I don't think I've encountered the idea outside interactions with HarveyCarter, to be honest. Both the IP and the registered account have got my quack-detector beeping... TFOWRThis flag once was red 22:00, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
JackWildFan indefinitely blocked and tagged. The autoblock should nab the IP. –MuZemike 22:22, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

05 June 2010

 * Suspected sockpuppets

User continually hops IPs/new usernames in an attempt to be disruptive at Talk:John Prescott with regards to the subjects nationality. S/he usually uses an IP but from time to time creates a new user name.  raseaC talk to me 18:35, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Evidence submitted by  raseaC talk to me


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users

Requested by  raseaC talk to me 18:35, 5 June 2010 (UTC) Well after twenty minutes of figuring this out, I have solved it. First of all, the socks were blocked February 16, way before the suspected sockmaster was created. After figuring out that the original links led to two unregistered users, I was able to figure out that User:HarveyCarter is actually the sockmaster here. Additionally, the behavioral evidence is there to block Gerry so there is no need for a checkuser here. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 05:19, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * CheckUser requests

Moved from Sockpuppet investigations/GerryLongfellow. Tim Song (talk) 14:40, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

Evidence submitted by Yworo
per Rossrs here: "Just to let you know that the anon IP may be User:HarveyCarter who edits under a 92 IP range and comments about sexuality, racism (such as this) and other bad celebrity behaviour. There are a number of talk pages with notes about him as this is something that has happened many times. Examples are Talk:Cary Grant and Talk:John Wayne." Yworo (talk) 15:51, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Compare especially with known sock,. Yworo (talk) 16:27, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users

 * No time to check for old diffs now, but "Not a sock" in the edit summary is one of my WP:DUCK-tests for HarveyCarter. TFOWR 15:53, 16 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Both reported accounts/IPs blocked per WP:DUCK. EyeSerene talk 16:59, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Looks like everything is done. TN X Man 17:32, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

12 January 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 " ~ "''

Edit to what appears to be a frequent target of HarveyCarter, Michael Douglas. Also carries on a discussion on Talk:American Revolutionary War started by IPs in HarveyCarter's known range. This is also related to Administrators' noticeboard which refers to the IPs on the American Revolutionary War article. O Fenian (talk) 20:21, 12 January 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 sock hasn't edited since January 18, so I'm closing for now with no action. Relist if there are further developments. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 20:31, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

22 February 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 " ~ "''

I had quite a bit of experience of this Carter sock at the Gordon Brown article and this seems to be exactly the same attitude and editing to me, its a carphone warehouse 92 ip as well like many of the socks. The Toryhater. account was created just after to support the ip on the article concerned talkpage and could well be him also. note - I also reported this to ANI here but there was no administrative response. I also notified the ip and the named account of this report on their talkpages. Off2riorob (talk) 23:36, 22 February 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

 * - I'm declining because all the possible data to check against is stale. As to the accounts listed here: it's possible that the account and the IP are the same, but checkuser won't connect the two. I don't get what this has to do with HarveyCarter, though; there's no overlap in Toryhater's and HarveyCarter's edits. (I also checked against a potential sockpuppet from a few weeks back, and also no overlap.) Can you provide evidence as to why you think HarveyCarter is the same as these? —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 00:15, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
 * - Its the editing style I had a lot of contact and discussion with HC, and the carphone warehouse 92 account similar to multiple other carphone warehouse 92 accounts that harvey socked from, the overlap is just anti labor party political edits and the tv or movie edits, the account with two edits was created to support the IP on the talkpage two edits solely to support the ip. I won't report any more of these as HC never usually returns to an IP anyways, perhaps its better to report him for revert warring. ThanksOff2riorob (talk) 00:25, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
 * The IP hasn't edited in six days and the account is blocked, so I'm closing. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 17:02, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

02 March 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 " ~ "''

As the editor in question is now using the account again, I would request Sockpuppet investigations/HarveyCarter/Archive be reviewed please. Thank you. O Fenian (talk) 17:29, 2 March 2011 (UTC) O Fenian (talk) 17:29, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Style of writing and articles in common strongly suggest that this is the same editor. However so far has been well behaved.  Should this comeback account be blocked? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:41, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
 * His use of IPs has been problematic though, see the past few months histories of Kevin Barry, Irish War of Independence and Éamon de Valera for edit warring by 92 prefixed IPs, and the associated page protections on the same articles. O Fenian (talk) 12:53, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Certainly possible it is the same person, but due to time elapsed and the fact that the edits are constructive, we'll just assume it's a fresh start for now. NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 22:40, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Now blocked indef on account of disruption per this AE report.  Sandstein   11:01, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

10 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 " ~ "''

The usual concentration of articles on actors and the Suez Crisis article, in particular the addition of "Britain was also opposed to Nasser's proposed aim of annexing the Sudan" compared to the previous sockpuppet's addition to the lead of "Britain and France were also strongly opposed to Nasser's plan to annex the Sudan". O Fenian (talk) 08:09, 10 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

 * Endorsing for a check against . —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 13:42, 10 April 2011 (UTC)
 * -- Luk  talk 08:42, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  14:33, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

12 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 " ~ "''

Carries on editing pattern of controversial and poorly ref'd celeb biographies per blocked sock User:HantersSpade with signature POV editing at Suez Crisis using Carphone Warehouse dynamic IPs RashersTierney (talk) 13:50, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' Probably the best solution is to semi-protect articles he is being disruptive on, including Louis Mountbatten, 1st Earl Mountbatten of Burma‎. O Fenian (talk) 18:57, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I've blocked 92.7.0.0/19 for three days as an attempt to quell this. Let's see if that works. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 22:38, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ - the above, and good call on that rangeblock - A l is o n  ❤ 08:29, 18 April 2011 (UTC)

23 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 " ~ "''

Edit to frequent HarveyCarter target Michael Douglas, plus interjecting himself in a dispute involving me at Talk:Derry. O Fenian (talk) 19:44, 23 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

 * My rangeblock last time (92.7.0.0/19) worked well, so I've reblocked it for two weeks. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 22:00, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

02 June 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 " ~ "''

The HarveyCarter sockpuppet has been banned for abusing Wikipedia for years now, at first through a variety of user names (generally identifiable by the lack of space between first and last proper names, as in HarveyCarter). Eventually, he apparently gave up after years of having his edits quickly reverted, but has returned of late, particularly in the article Bruce Cabot. Two or three years ago, his modus operandi shifted, and he began unregistered editing, which is identifiable by a combination of the evidence of the specific edits and his ISP number, which always starts with 92. Also, in recent years, it is typical that he not argue or discuss points, but rather simply resubmit reverted material in endless edit war. At present, he seems to restrict his activity primarily to the above-mentioned Bruce Cabot article. I'm not sure under current guidelines what should be done to eliminate the problem, but protection of Bruce Cabot would be a good move, if someone knows how to accomplish that. Monkeyzpop (talk) 16:12, 2 June 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

 * Bruce Cabot was protected for two weeks by another admin. If you're just looking for protection, try WP:RFP. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 22:27, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

17 December 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Dynamic IP editor has every indication that he is community banned edit warrior HarveyCarter. He is interested in the same sorts of articles and misinterprets sources the same way. He takes a non-neutral slant and skews almost all of his contributions. The range of the IPs he uses is mostly between 91.7.0.0 and 92.7.31.255, with perhaps one or more outside of that range. These are all in the Kent area of south-east England. Here is a list of articles:
 * Harold Macmillan
 * Anthony Eden
 * Suez Crisis
 * Cuban Missile Crisis
 * British Empire
 * Dwight D. Eisenhower
 * Clement Attlee
 * Muammar Gaddafi
 * Gamal Abdel Nasser
 * War of 1812
 * Burning of Washington
 * Anglo-Egyptian treaty of 1936
 * Tony Bennett
 * Braveheart
 * Irish American
 * West Lothian question
 * Scottish independence
 * 2011 Libyan civil war
 * Harold Wilson
 * George V
 * American Revolutionary War

I don't know if it is wiser to set a rangeblock covering almost 8000 IPs or to indef semiprot all of the articles he wants to change. Binksternet (talk) 22:17, 17 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Interestingly, at Talk:American_Revolutionary_War/Archive_8, nearly the exact same question was brought up by IP editor one year ago as was asked again recently here by . A very persistent person is behind this. Binksternet (talk) 23:21, 17 December 2011 (UTC)


 * The editor is at it again today using the IP 92.7.24.28 which I added to the bottom of the list. Binksternet (talk) 16:41, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Comment - Bans are either enforced or they are not. Time to sort this out. RashersTierney (talk) 23:39, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Ugh, what a mess. 92.7.0.0/16 would be the range to block, but it's really big, so there'd be a lot of collateral. I see a bunch of articles have been protected - is that not enough? —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 06:27, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I've blocked the last IP for a week. Going forward, please only list non-stale IPs. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 14:18, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

08 January 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Kevin Barry, American Revolutionary War, War of 1812 and Suez Crisis related articles are all HarveyCarter targets, including agreeing with his previous sock, making similar edits to his previous sock and so on. Mo ainm ~Talk  16:09, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I was thinking the same. RashersTierney (talk) 16:14, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, the combined interest in cinema and actors, and the interest in Brit-related history topics. The very quick reversion of other people's reversions, the pushing of incorrect information. This one quacks like a duck. Binksternet (talk) 16:55, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - As far as I can see, all the data we have on HarveyCarter is stale. Having said that, I'm endorsing to see if any sort of check can be done, given how prolific this socker is. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 16:44, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * In the meantime I've blocked and tagged the account per WP:DUCK. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 18:15, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * -- Luk  talk 21:38, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Alright. Tag updated. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 01:05, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

12 January 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

MuammarGunshot makes the same argument that was made by IP 92.7.x at Talk:Dwight D. Eisenhower regarding Anthony Eden, Harold Macmillan and the Suez Crisis. The sock argues that Eisenhower is guilty of setting Britain up for a fall in the Suez. Reliable sources are misinterpreted, much like previous editing work by HarveyCarter and the 92.7.x socks. Reversion is immediate, much like the sockpuppeter and the socks. This one quacks like a duck. Binksternet (talk) 19:25, 12 January 2012 (UTC) Binksternet (talk) 19:25, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not a troll. Perhaps this HarvyCarter had read the same book I have. Williams details Makins' report at the time which showed Eisenhower agreeing with Macmillan that the main aim was to depose Nasser. (MuammarGunshot (talk) 20:18, 12 January 2012 (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 ✅ matches to each other:
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 20:34, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Socks blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 03:50, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 20:34, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Socks blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 03:50, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

23 January 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Same old routine, Suez Crisis related edits to Anthony Eden and Dwight D. Eisenhower, same as the last sock detailed at Sockpuppet investigations/HarveyCarter/Archive. IP is currently active, otherwise I wouldn't have bothered creating a case. 2 lines of K 303  10:58, 23 January 2012 (UTC)


 * IP blocked, can probably be archived without action. 2 lines of K  303  11:02, 23 January 2012 (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

 * IP already blocked. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  11:07, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

03 February 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Typical HarveyCarter editing areas, edits to Harold Macmillan relating to the Suez Crisis, Guy Mollet relating to Suez again, more Suez with Gamal Abdel Nasser, Churchill's actions regarding Ireland during World War II were a frequent target on the Éamon de Valera article, he's migrated the same style to Irish neutrality during World War II with this account Mo ainm  ~Talk  19:24, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Was on the point of opening an SPI on same grounds when I found this CU'd already. Can we close this down please? RashersTierney (talk) 22:01, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks mighty duckish to me. Binksternet (talk) 00:01, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
A match to. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 19:34, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 01:02, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

12 April 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Edit warring to HarveyCarter's version on Paul Gascoigne. 2 lines of K 303  21:48, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * The edit warring in favor of HarveyCarter's version is very suspicious. HarveyCarter, as usual, has been active at the Paul Gascoigne biography as the dynamic IP editor 92.7.xxx. Binksternet (talk) 22:17, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
The following are ✅ matches to each other and matches to previous HarveyCarter socks:
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 13:33, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:51, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 13:33, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:51, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

31 May 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Edits very similar to this edit by previous HarveyCarter IP sock. 2 lines of K 303  20:56, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

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

Yes, the above-linked diff shows the infamous 92.7.x HarveyCarter sockpuppet putting forward the same text and reference. Also, sockpuppet AdrianCole did the exact same thing before he was blocked. If I were an administrator I would block the suspected user for DUCK-like similarity. Binksternet (talk) 21:40, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * /. As such they have been blocked. Tiptoety  talk 01:54, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Well, that was efficnent.   S ven M anguard   Wha?  02:16, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

17 July 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

In the limited number of edits are ons to two well-known HarveyCarter articles, Suez Crisis and Bruce Jones (actor), which is certainly an unusual combination. Then there's this edit which is repeating the substance of this edit a couple of days earlier by an IP in HarveyCarter's usual range. Similarly in the history of Brad Renfro there's numerous HarveyCarteresque IPs editing the "Substance abuse and criminal record" section, just like CuthbertClifford is doing. 2 lines of K 303  17:35, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Was on the point of initiating an SPI when I found one already open. This banned user doesn't seem to get the message. RashersTierney (talk) 17:41, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
— Berean Hunter   (talk)  18:35, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * related to . . Tiptoety  talk 18:07, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Tagged and closing.

27 July 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Usual target of the "‎Substance abuse and criminal record" section of the Brad Renfro article, plus repeating edits of previous IP sock at Operation Musketeer (1956), if anyone wants a quick quacking duck. Ongoing disruption, hopefully this can be dealt with swiftly? 2 lines of K 303  15:03, 27 July 2012 (UTC)  2 lines of K  303  15:03, 27 July 2012 (UTC)


 * The fact that South Africa publicly supported the opertion needs to remain in the article. (92.10.140.17 (talk) 15:05, 27 July 2012 (UTC))


 * You're banned, go away. 2 lines of K  303  15:06, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Can this not be closed with a "IP already blocked, no action needed" response please. Apparently some joker thinks that even a glaringly obvious sock isn't a sock until all the forms have been filled in, probably in triplicate. Obviously there's no need to actually block the IP since he's already moved onto a new one, but looks like we'll need some confirmation that it is a sock (like 99.99% of us didn't know that already....) to satisfy everyone. 2 lines of K 303  15:46, 28 July 2012 (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

 * 1 month block at this IP. Dennis Brown - 2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 19:59, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

10 August 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

The IP 92.7.24.144 falls in the usual range of HarveyCarter IP socks, from 92.7.0.x to 92.7.241.x. HarveyCarter is always returning to the Harold Macmillan biography to put something in about conspiracy, illegality, buggery, deception, betrayal, collusion and failure. Whether the material is cited or not it is always too far out of balance with mainstream thought. The recent edits by 92.7.24.144 are about Macmillan conspiring to assassinate, the same sort of undue emphasis on the bad without discussing the context. Binksternet (talk) 20:23, 10 August 2012 (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

 * This IP is probably HarveyCarter, but since there have been no edits since being blocked for a day for edit warring, there's nothing left to do here. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:40, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

19 June 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

HarveyCarter is a banned user known for disruptive editing on the articles of film stars. He was banned in 2007 and has had a number of sockpuppets blocked since then. I noticed a post about him at Talk:Cary Grant. Based on this post and recent disruptive editing patterns of User:Jojhutton on Cary Grant and Talk:Cary Grant (edit warring, personal attacks), plus a tight intersection between the two on six articles and one talk page, I have come to suspect that User:Jojhutton is another sockpuppet of HarveyCarter. Yworo (talk) 03:00, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I cannot see any connection between British HarveyCarter and Californian Jojhutton who has a long editing history, a very detailed user page, and a photo of himself. Binksternet (talk) 03:22, 19 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Was HC British? I wasn't involved in his banning and his user page has been replaced by his sockpuppet history, so I had no way of knowing that. If true, then indeed JH is probably not a sock, since he is clearly interested in pushing American rather than British interests. I noticed an intersection of calling other editors liars and accusing them of slander mentioned on the HC talk page, but of course this is very common and just one of many possible editing similarities and differences. Yworo (talk) 03:38, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - Rschen7754 09:19, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Closing as unlikely. Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; © &#124; WER  13:41, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

24 June 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Banned user HarveyCarter often uses IPs in the range 92.7.xx, so the two recent IPs edit warring at the Muammar Gaddafi article here and here show every appearance of being HarveyCarter. The new editor WallyBecker appeared suddenly to make this edit as his first contribution, a continuation of the IP's edit war, which in itself is a restoration of 92.7.21.215's contribution from February. In their edit summaries, the IPs and WallyBecker have denied being socks: "I'm not a banned editor and I can prove it." "I'm not a sock". "I'm no sock." Previous HarveyCarter socks have also denied being socks, so this is typical behavior: Binksternet (talk) 14:28, 24 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Note: WallyBecker has been blocked indefinitely for personal attacks. I would still like to see this SPI and CU carried forward because, using the results, we can base future HarveyCarter SPIs on this one. Binksternet (talk) 18:32, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Agree with the above synopsis. There is no doubt that HarveyCarter has been persistently circumventing their ban using 92.7.xxx IP socks, and also registered accounts. RashersTierney (talk) 15:16, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
 * For a more comprehensive (though almost certainly incomplete) list if 92.7.xxx socks,see User:RashersTierney/Sandbox - Proxy Socks. While ostensibly banned,this editor is busier than most prolific editors in good standing. We either stop this editor effectively or stop the pretense that their ban is being enforced. RashersTierney (talk) 21:53, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I requested indef semi here, which resulted in 1 week semi - hardly an adequate deterrent for such a persistent sock master. RashersTierney (talk) 13:53, 26 June 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Reporting the IPs is all but useless here since it is a smart phone and the IPs can rotate by the minute. Semi-protection is the best solution for the affected articles, via WP:RFPP with the rationale "persistent sock puppetry" and a pointer to the archive here.  As for the named accounts, let me peek. Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; © &#124;  WER  13:37, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 * There is only one edit from a month ago. I don't see enough evidence that would convince a CheckUser that a check is warranted at this time.  No prejudice against raising the issue at a later date if more evidence surfaces.  Closing. Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124; © &#124;  WER  13:44, 26 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Extended to 3 months. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 02:49, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

18 July 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Checkuser request; see Edward Furlong. Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:38, 18 July 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

 * The following accounts are all ✅:
 * There is also a large amount of logged-out editing going on. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:42, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * . ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:53, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I've reviewed these accounts, and they look like they are indeed all operated by the same person, so I have blocked most of them (some were already blocked for various other reasons). Closing. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:06, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * There is also a large amount of logged-out editing going on. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:42, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * . ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:53, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I've reviewed these accounts, and they look like they are indeed all operated by the same person, so I have blocked most of them (some were already blocked for various other reasons). Closing. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:06, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * There is also a large amount of logged-out editing going on. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:42, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * . ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:53, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I've reviewed these accounts, and they look like they are indeed all operated by the same person, so I have blocked most of them (some were already blocked for various other reasons). Closing. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:06, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * There is also a large amount of logged-out editing going on. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:42, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * . ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:53, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I've reviewed these accounts, and they look like they are indeed all operated by the same person, so I have blocked most of them (some were already blocked for various other reasons). Closing. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:06, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * There is also a large amount of logged-out editing going on. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:42, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * . ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:53, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I've reviewed these accounts, and they look like they are indeed all operated by the same person, so I have blocked most of them (some were already blocked for various other reasons). Closing. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:06, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * There is also a large amount of logged-out editing going on. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:42, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * . ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:53, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I've reviewed these accounts, and they look like they are indeed all operated by the same person, so I have blocked most of them (some were already blocked for various other reasons). Closing. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:06, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * There is also a large amount of logged-out editing going on. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:42, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * . ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:53, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I've reviewed these accounts, and they look like they are indeed all operated by the same person, so I have blocked most of them (some were already blocked for various other reasons). Closing. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:06, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * . ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:53, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I've reviewed these accounts, and they look like they are indeed all operated by the same person, so I have blocked most of them (some were already blocked for various other reasons). Closing. Reaper Eternal (talk) 16:06, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

14 February 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Banned editor HarveyCarter has long been interested in the Irish War of Independence, including his anonymous participation on the talk page nine months ago using IP 92.7.1.205, one of many IPs he used at that time in the group 92.7.xxx. Recently, he started using IPs in the range 92.11.xxx, including the article and the talk page of the Irish War of Independence. With his repeated postings of highly POV material, the talk page atmosphere had become so poisonous to its regulars that veteran editor finally said "I'm just going to deny recognition to this person." As a response to this renewed activity by a banned editor, I put a bunch of hatnotes on discussions started by the 92.11.xx accounts.. Shortly afterward, the account name PaulO'Grady1234 was registered, and two minutes later the first edit by this new user was to revert my hatnotes, with the edit summary, "Please do NOT ruin the talk pages of articles." This sequence of registering and the choice of first edit is highly suspicious of HarveyCarter responding aggressively, as per usual, to anyone who frustrates his attempt to insert his POV. Binksternet (talk) 20:17, 14 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

 * Account blocked and tagged as a duck. I've left the IPs unblocked as they're stale. Closing now. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:42, 16 February 2014 (UTC)

18 February 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

HarveyCarter has long been interested in articles about UK prime ministers, film topics, and England made to look bad. Articles within all of these areas were visited by XavierKnightley in his first two days of editing. XavierKnightley's very first edit was to the Blitz talk page, saying England bombed Germany first. That same concept was confirmed sock MrFalala's first edit to the Blitz talk page. In April 2013, HarveyCarter showed his interest in the Blitz by making these two edits anonymously, using 92.7.xx as was his usual pattern in 2013. As you can see the 92.7 edit was the same concept, that the Blitz resulted from RAF bombing of Germany in March 1940. (Note that HarveyCarter's usual 92.7 address range changed to 92.11 in late 2013.) I am including unconfirmed but suspected and blocked sock PaulO'Grady1234 because his editing history is recent enough to possibly link him to XavierKnightley. I am looking for Checkuser because HarveyCarter goes through periods of using IPs for months, then a period of multiple socks. We should look for sleepers. Binksternet (talk) 22:32, 18 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

 * - Endorsing check on XavierKnightley per behavioral evidence above. Mark Arsten (talk) 06:22, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * As usual, there is a large amount of logged-out editing going on as well. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:00, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * All confirmed accounts tagged and blocked indef, closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:44, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * As usual, there is a large amount of logged-out editing going on as well. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:00, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * All confirmed accounts tagged and blocked indef, closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:44, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * As usual, there is a large amount of logged-out editing going on as well. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:00, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * All confirmed accounts tagged and blocked indef, closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:44, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * As usual, there is a large amount of logged-out editing going on as well. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:00, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * All confirmed accounts tagged and blocked indef, closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:44, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * As usual, there is a large amount of logged-out editing going on as well. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:00, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * All confirmed accounts tagged and blocked indef, closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:44, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * As usual, there is a large amount of logged-out editing going on as well. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:00, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * All confirmed accounts tagged and blocked indef, closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:44, 20 February 2014 (UTC)
 * All confirmed accounts tagged and blocked indef, closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:44, 20 February 2014 (UTC)

24 February 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

HarveyCarter often edits from IPs 92.11.xx, but recently was caught with a raft of sock accounts. Directly after these socks were blocked, the account DannySvens was registered. One of its first few edits was to add a piped link to Larne gun-running to the article Partition of Ireland, this following [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Partition_of_Ireland&diff=prev&oldid=596362318 my removal of the piped link to Larne] because of the previous confirmed HarveyCarter sock JimMacCarver [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Partition_of_Ireland&diff=591749518&oldid=589939039 adding the same piped link] a month before.


 * Checkuser is requested because HarveyCarter often creates a bunch of socks at one time. Binksternet (talk) 23:09, 24 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
Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  12:17, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅, no sleepers this time. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:17, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. DrKiernan (talk) 17:54, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Standard procedure is to tag the user page rather than talk, though. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:59, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

27 February 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

ConorO'Malley has made only one edit, yet that single edit identifies him as a HarveyCarter sock. The one edit is [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Irish_War_of_Independence&diff=597385485&oldid=597147753 the addition of Frederick Shaw] as commander of British forces during the Irish War of Independence. Earlier, on 2 January 2013, IP 92.11.194.71 performed [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Irish_War_of_Independence&diff=588854545&oldid=586962224 the same exact addition], which was later [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Irish_War_of_Independence&diff=595723934&oldid=595721566 reverted by]. You can see at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Irish_War_of_Independence&offset=&limit=500&action=history editing history of the article] that the HarveyCarter sock IPs 92.11.xx have had a longterm interest in the topic. Going back to July 2013 and earlier the HarveyCarter IPs can be seen as 92.7.xx. In May 2013 confirmed sock MrFalala [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Irish_War_of_Independence&diff=552597543&oldid=552502038 edited the article] several times, warring to restore his preferred version. All of this demonstrates that HarveyCarter is intensely interested in this topic. I always ask for checkuser with regard to HarveyCarter socks because he has frequently registered multiple accounts. Binksternet (talk) 16:27, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Comments by other users
The suspect has been informed on his talk page of this investigation; the account is currently tagged as suspected sock. — This lousy T-shirt — (talk) 15:57, 28 February 2014 (UTC) ''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * ✅, no obvious sleepers. T. Canens (talk) 18:30, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. Closing now. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:09, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

09 March 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Kenfidle's very first edit was a reversion of my reversion of IP 92.11.196.33 change removing Germany. Note that HarveyCarter's recent IPs are in the range 92.11.xx. A year ago, they were in the range 92.7.xx which is why you can see this very similar change attempted by 92.7.4.47 but reverted twice by veteran editor. I always ask for checkuser when dealing with HarveyCarter because he has been known to create many sleeper accounts. Binksternet (talk) 00:05, 9 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Adding BobAndrewsonWayne. Same exact behavior. Binksternet (talk) 09:39, 9 March 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
for sleepers. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  12:57, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Named users are ✅ plus . ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:12, 12 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:06, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

10 April 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

I'm rushed right now... I'll show the evidence in a few hours when I get the chance. Binksternet (talk) 22:41, 10 April 2014 (UTC) Binksternet (talk) 22:41, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, here's the evidence: HarveyCarter often shows up as 92.11.xxx IPs, and he also tends to make sockpuppets whenever he gets frustrated with his IP edits being reverted. At the Irish War of Independence, he's been active for years. A month ago, confirmed sock ConorO'Malley added some disputed text. Two days ago, PadraigO'Reilly changed some controversial text. The Anthony Eden biography is another frequent target of HarveyCarter: confirmed sock ArkelSimon added some disputed text a year ago, while GrenlinGibbons added some text three days ago. Binksternet (talk) 04:05, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * At the Treasure Island (1972 film) article, I saw that IP 92.11.199.157 had made an odd addition, putting a minor actor as the "star" of the film. I reverted that, then I examined the history of the article and reverted more of the contributions of 92.11.xx, saying in my edit summary, "delete addition by HarveyCarter sock". Not very long afterward, RichieRenfield reverted my change as his very first edit to Wikipedia, one minute after the account was created. RichieRenfield's edit summary was "This was already mentioned here before the editor changed the phrasing." Such an edit and summary are highly suspicious, showing an editor who is already familiar with the article and with Wikipedia. It also shows HarveyCarter's idiosyncratic style of quick edit warring reversions. Binksternet (talk) 08:06, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * In exactly the same manner at the Operation Sea Lion article, I saw that IP 92.11.200.76 made a generalization change which should have stayed specific. I reverted it and then TalispinMarcahnt, in his first-ever edit to Wikipedia, reverted my reversion of the 92.11 IP. The pattern is this: an edit is made by some IP 92.11.xxx, I revert it, then an account is created and the new account's first edit is to revert back to the IP 92.11 version. Binksternet (talk) 08:14, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * As is usual in HarveyCarter cases, I am requesting checkuser to discover any sleeper accounts. Many of the past CUs have found sleepers. Binksternet (talk) 08:17, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Added GuntherHenderson per DisillusionedBitterAndKnackered. HarveyCarter has long been interested in deflecting blame for the Blitz away from the Germans and on the English, saying that England bombed first, so Germany bombing was righteous. Here, HarveyCarter as IP 92.7 adds something about English bombing, in April 2013. After being reverted, sockpuppet MrFalala jumped in and restored the disputed text. GuntherHenderson's first edit was the same notion previously expressed by 92.7 IP, that England bombed first. Binksternet (talk) 16:57, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Adding CliveMorrisey whose first-ever edit was a reversion of my reversion of 92.11.194.81, a typical HarveyCarter reaction from a typical HarveyCarter IP. Binksternet (talk) 16:00, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

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

Please see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/GuntherHenderson which bears some resemblance also. DBaK (talk) 13:59, 12 April 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Noemiafelisbin did not show up in my check, and since I see no evidence for that account, I did not check it. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:56, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Socks blocked indef and tagged them. I've also blocked the /20 range, the range is registered as a /12 so the smaller block may or may not work, but there isn't much anon editing from the range so let's see if it helps. Closing now. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:49, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Noemiafelisbin did not show up in my check, and since I see no evidence for that account, I did not check it. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:56, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Socks blocked indef and tagged them. I've also blocked the /20 range, the range is registered as a /12 so the smaller block may or may not work, but there isn't much anon editing from the range so let's see if it helps. Closing now. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:49, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Noemiafelisbin did not show up in my check, and since I see no evidence for that account, I did not check it. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:56, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Socks blocked indef and tagged them. I've also blocked the /20 range, the range is registered as a /12 so the smaller block may or may not work, but there isn't much anon editing from the range so let's see if it helps. Closing now. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:49, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Noemiafelisbin did not show up in my check, and since I see no evidence for that account, I did not check it. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:56, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Socks blocked indef and tagged them. I've also blocked the /20 range, the range is registered as a /12 so the smaller block may or may not work, but there isn't much anon editing from the range so let's see if it helps. Closing now. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:49, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Noemiafelisbin did not show up in my check, and since I see no evidence for that account, I did not check it. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:56, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Socks blocked indef and tagged them. I've also blocked the /20 range, the range is registered as a /12 so the smaller block may or may not work, but there isn't much anon editing from the range so let's see if it helps. Closing now. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 08:49, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

16 June 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Checkuser is requested because HarveyCarter has often been found to have sleeper accounts in past investigations. HarveyCarter often adds controversial information about a person's illness and death, and he adds controversial information that makes the UK look bad. He is especially interested in UK prime ministers, and in Ireland–UK issues.

MohammedBashir1 follows the HarveyCarter interests and style, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Suez_Crisis&diff=prev&oldid=612763854 jumping into the Suez Crisis talk page] with his first edit, a page which was visited many times 2011 and 2012 by HarveyCarter socks starting with 92.7.xx such as 92.7.5.181 and 92.7.17.75. After pursuing the Suez Crisis for a bit, MohammedBashir1 moved to [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anthony_Eden&diff=prev&oldid=612778308 the Anthony Eden biography], which has long been a target of HarveyCarter, for instance confirmed sock GrenlinGibbons.[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anthony_Eden&diff=603172304&oldid=602871636] MohammedBashir1 also displays the prompt tendency toward reverting which is HarveyCarter's style.[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Erich_von_Manstein&diff=prev&oldid=612887342][//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Suez_Crisis&diff=prev&oldid=612893495][//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anthony_Eden&diff=prev&oldid=612893599] After I [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:MohammedBashir1&oldid=612892085 notified MohammedBashir1 that he was suspected as a sock], the account DeanJagger was created. DeanJagger jumped directly into the Suez Crisis discussion, the same conversation started by MohammedBashir1,[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Suez_Crisis&diff=prev&oldid=613171102] and he also quickly reverted.[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Suez_Crisis&diff=prev&oldid=613171199] The IPs are all typical of HarveyCarter activity in the last year, IPs in the range 92.11.xxx, as reported in previous investigations. They are listed here for reference. Special:Contributions/92.11.200.192 has been active at the Irish Civil War article,[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Irish_Civil_War&diff=prev&oldid=608958932] a past target of HarveyCarter, and is prone to quickly revert.[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Irish_Civil_War&diff=prev&oldid=608975505][//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Irish_Civil_War&diff=prev&oldid=608979676][//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Irish_Civil_War&diff=prev&oldid=608985712] The only contribution by 92.11.195.16 was a reversion on the Aneurin Bevan bio.[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Aneurin_Bevan&diff=prev&oldid=610224259] Binksternet (talk) 19:21, 16 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

 * Range reblocked. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:26, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  01:34, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Range reblocked. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:26, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  01:34, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Range reblocked. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:26, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  01:34, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Range reblocked. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:26, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  01:34, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  01:34, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

15 December 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

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 as ✅ socks. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:30, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

06 February 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Three different users have all been very determined to remove a specific, referenced quotation from the article on Ernest Bevin since yesterday (Feb 5th) - and all three have used similar wording/rationales for removing it. Here are the diffs:

Diff1 Diff2 Diff3 Diff4 Diff5

The paragraph has been in the lede for at least 2 years without anyone having a problem with it, it seems very suspicious to me that three different IPs/users all decided to take issue with it at the same time, citing the same/similar rationales in their edit summaries. That suggests to me that one person is using multiple accounts to get around the three-revert rule, but (I guess?) a checkuser might be required to confirm that - not sure what the standard of evidence is here. Thanks! Fyddlestix (talk) 15:40, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Update with new information: I thought it might also be important to note that both Morboso and GeorgeJeffrys are participating in a debate about this on the article's talk page, sometimes posting quite soon after each other and using very similar language/arguments:

Example 1 (GeorgeJeffreys)

Example 2 (Morboso)

Example 3 (GeorgeJeffreys)

Example 4 (Morboso)

Note the shared insistence that Bullock must be biased because he was a labor supporter, and that Britain "was not a world power" after WWII.

Morboso is also backing up GeorgeJeffreys in an unrelated debate on the talk page of Falklands War:

Diff1, Diff2, Diff3

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
Checkuser comments: Significant nest of socks here:

All accounts blocked and IP blocked for a week. Risker (talk) 18:47, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
 * All accounts tagged. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 02:33, 15 February 2015 (UTC)