Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Honkshreader/Archive

30 May 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

I could be completely mistaken, but call it a hunch:

All of these accounts were created in the span of 30 minutes and each asked a highly obscure (and in the case of several, fairly inane) question at subpages of WP:Reference desk. There are other similarities in tone and voice. Have never before seen such a cluster of RefDesk requests from brand new accounts over such a short period of time. Especially seeing "QuackingLoudly" as a username (uh, like a duck?), thought someone might want to take at least a quick look in case this (making busy work for RefDesk volunteers) is a known M.O. of a sockmaster.  Dwpaul  Talk   21:25, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Another several:
 * (Is there something new on the Main page calling special attention to RefDesk today?)  Dwpaul  Talk   21:38, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
 * (Is there something new on the Main page calling special attention to RefDesk today?)  Dwpaul  Talk   21:38, 30 May 2014 (UTC)
 * (Is there something new on the Main page calling special attention to RefDesk today?)  Dwpaul  Talk   21:38, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

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

The only evidence this SPI is based off of is the timing of related contributions performed by the accused. The contributions are all of the same type (RefDesk requests) but each is on a different subject. That being said, I think it's clear that one editor is behind all of these accounts. But why RefDesk requests? Meatsgains (talk) 01:24, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Well, User:NawlinWiki has blocked all but two of the alleged socks (but not the alleged master), none of which have performed any other edits (which is actually one of the reasons I think they're a bit strange). I wouldn't have suggested that anyone be blocked because of this SPI until and unless it was confirmed that they were actually related.  However, one possible explanation I thought of was some kind of class/workshop where each student is instructed to pose a question at the RefDesk.  Could explain why a number of the questions seem pretty bogus to me. Would be interesting to see if they all come back to the .edu TLD (but I can't, of course).  Dwpaul   Talk   02:36, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Interesting–that is a good observation. It very well may be a class project... a small class though in a computer lab. The requests/questions seem to share similar formats. Meatsgains (talk) 02:49, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
 * The accounts are all showing up on edit filter 527 as possible sockpuppets, and the block log indicates that they're all the same person.  And if I recall correctly, we have had "reference desk troll" vandalism in the past.  I'm blocking all of these unless/until a checkuser tells me otherwise.  NawlinWiki (talk) 14:42, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I have unblocked all of them in light of the possibility that they are part of a class project. In that case, the damage caused by the accounts remaining blocked for the duration of this investigation far outweighs any damage that could result from abuse of multiple accounts; sort of an "emergency unblock," if you will, until NawlinWiki returns to the discussion. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 14:41, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
 * These, and a bunch more, are ✅ as same person. Off the top of my head, I don't know if there is a master behind these, but it doesn't look like the one refdesk troll I'm familiar with. In any case, this is definitely not some sort of class project. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:09, 31 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Tagged (except for the "bunch more") and closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:31, 31 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for validating my "hunch" -- I would have felt a bit silly otherwise.  Dwpaul  Talk   16:47, 31 May 2014 (UTC)