Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hum1969/Archive

22 August 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

He has been making many disruptive edits as 911plantisimo before on many Viva Rapid Transit bus route pages, and was called out on it, being banned for 24 hours. After the ban, that account went stale and he created the new account, Vivabusmarkham. At first, the name already implies his likes, but he continued to do the same acts as his previous accounts, with his work being reverted by numerous users. His information is almost always sourced from the Canadian Public Transportation Discussion Board, which is also a wiki page, he even proves that he uses it on his talk page, and uses it as "proof" for other users. Alexhead8835 (talk) 15:12, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Also, a new account "Tobaccofanatic" just opened up right after the original report was made, and the account immediately went onto Viva Purple. The first edit of the user page seemed to be a desperate attempt to throw off other users, writing:

"I love smoking Tobacco and Marijuana!! I live in Cincinnati, Ohio."

These are links to some edit wars that he created:
 * Viva Green
 * Viva Purple
 * Viva Orange
 * Viva Blue

I have also added a new user, "Meleegreatbay." Another obvious sock of Hum1969.

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 indeffed and tagged based on very obvious duck. I looked into the edits of all the accounts deeper than the evidence presented by Alex, and the similarities were striking, both in articles, content, and style. There was an intersection of interest in articles that had nothing to do with public transportation. I thought briefly about requesting a CU for sleepers but decided we'd start here and see if anything happens in the future.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:56, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

10 September 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

This IP requested speedy deletion of this sockpuppet investigation page and the archive page for this investigation. IP also blanked the archive page. IP has only one additional edit, made in August. Safiel (talk) 03:10, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

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

I'm not sure if this is appropriate here, but this user seems to be taking it to a whole new level. This is his YouTube channel, and I don't know this guy in real life. Alexhead8835 (talk) 02:52, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
WHOIS report suggest the IP could be reassigned, and it's been over two weeks since the last disruption. No need for a block, in my opinion. Closing. &mdash;  MusikAnimal talk 02:25, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

03 October 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

He attempted to clear the report and report archive for Hum1969, I have also talked to him on the IP's talk page to make sure it was him, which obviously it was. This is already the fourth time Hum1969 has created new accounts and action. All of his other accounts have also received indefinite bans. Alexhead8835 (talk) 02:41, 3 October 2014 (UTC)

Doopliss1983 is also an obvious sock puppet of Hum1969, as seen from his user contributions, as well as his random comment on this page. Alexhead8835 (talk) 02:05, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

, I'm sorry, but there isn't any other proof that I can provide, other than intersection of article interest, and that single comment. All the other times, article interest was enough to prove him guilty. Alexhead8835 (talk) 22:06, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

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

Hum1969 is just an innocent user and he has retired Wikipedia. --Doopliss1983 (talk) 00:40, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
I need evidence in the way of diffs that show a connection between Doopliss and the master or a confirmed puppet. You have a habit of not providing that evidence. The "innocent user" comment here isn't enough. I need something other than intersection of article interest. You don't need to provide anything further for the IP; it's obvious. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:07, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * . I've blocked the IP for two weeks based on duck. I don't agree that the other socks were blocked based only on intersection of interest (look at the archive and my notes). However, based on the intersection of interest and that one edit here, I am endorsing a CU.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:31, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
 * The following accounts are :
 * All blocked and tagged. PhilKnight (talk) 21:46, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
 * All blocked and tagged. PhilKnight (talk) 21:46, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
 * All blocked and tagged. PhilKnight (talk) 21:46, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
 * All blocked and tagged. PhilKnight (talk) 21:46, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
 * All blocked and tagged. PhilKnight (talk) 21:46, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
 * All blocked and tagged. PhilKnight (talk) 21:46, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
 * All blocked and tagged. PhilKnight (talk) 21:46, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

11 January 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

These users both have the same editing style, using no references and creating edit wars, such as. They edit the exact same pages, and have been blanking both this page and the archive for this page. They have already created many other sock puppets that have been blocked. Alexhead8835 (talk) 04:35, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Comments by other users
I concour. Do we want to file an WP:LTA report. We want him also either a topic ban or banned from this project. I recommend Option B via ANI. 135.23.145.164 (talk) 05:23, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Another joins the party using the User:Acerdellrules1961 account. 135.23.145.164 (talk) 16:03, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
. I was about to block Acerdellrules1961 when another admin blocked as VOA (although no one provides diffs, I found an exact match between Acerdellrules1961 and the master on a particular page). I've tagged the user page. I blocked the IP for disruption. That leaves only Trinity98789, and a CU would be helpful at this point.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:39, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Trinity is ✅ as are and . Courcelles 21:23, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
 * For absolute clarity, so is Acerdellrules1961. Courcelles 21:24, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Tags. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:42, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

18 January 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Blocked in almost one week, seems that this user edits and vandalizes this again such as this one and this one as well adding false information. Any questions about banning him altogether? Block evasions must be reverted. 135.23.145.164 (talk) 19:08, 18 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
. I've blocked the most active IP for one month. I've semi-protected Toronto Transit Commission fleet for a week. The named account is clearly disruptive and most probably a sock, but because they haven't yet edited any articles, I'd like confirmation.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:50, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * The named account vandalized this page repeatedly. It escaped my notice because I was busy clerking another case. Another administrator correctly blocked the account. My preference is to still run the CU, but it's up to whoever looks at this.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:12, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
 * OrionVIIHybrid1980 is a ✅ sock. Didn't find anything else of interest at this time. As usual, on the IPs. Elockid   ( Talk ) 02:50, 19 January 2015 (UTC)


 * I've tagged the account. The IPs are highly dynamic and the most recent one has been blocked. I don't think the other IPs need to be blocked right now, especially with the page semi-protected. Mike V • Talk 02:58, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

24 January 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Similar edit interests and edit style of the sock master, who has created numerous socks (as seen in the archive). They are also constantly trying to move the Toronto Transit Commission fleet page to a new one, in order to avoid the semi-protection, which was put in place to stop Hum1969 from continuing his vandalism. ,, and here's him trying to change the links Alexhead8835 (talk) 00:05, 24 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
Indeffed and tagged. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:48, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

13 February 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

This user (User:Hum1969) changes his IPs to edit un-speculative entries for the Toronto Transit Commission fleet and other transit themed articles. A possible ban of this user and IPs will help and a Long term abuse investigation is executed. It should be noted that this user also runs his YouTube account. 135.23.145.164 (talk) 01:41, 13 February 2015 (UTC) 135.23.145.164 (talk) 01:41, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

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

I have added Windows95ftw, he has similar edits to all the other accounts. Also, his username gives it away after this comment Alexhead8835 (talk) 17:54, 13 February 2015 (UTC)

Added (and blocked) OfficerTommyParkeyUTUBETROLLPOLICE. Short but significant career in editing. Favonian (talk) 12:21, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if User:TobakilacionUTTP is involved - his/her only edit to this point was to try and get this page speedy deleted - see history here. Peridon (talk) 15:11, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Have just used my eyes - added to list and blocked him because of the name... Peridon (talk) 15:13, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Added STOP FUCKING BLOCKING HUM1969 which is pretty straightforward. I left a suspected tag on the user-page but expect it of course to be a confirmed sock. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 15:52, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Ho-hum, added OFFICERHUM1969UTTP and semi-protected this SPI as well as its talk page. Favonian (talk) 16:03, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
. I'm requesting a CU for sleepers. I've also blocked the IP who's still active for two weeks.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:12, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I looked, but didn't see any sleepers. They have access to some busy dynamic ranges, so they can create new accounts at will, unfortunately. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:37, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh snap, I was about to say the same as DoRD. Risker (talk) 16:45, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Two for the price of one. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:47, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

17 April 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Created offensive request to delete this SPI at Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations/Hum1969/Archive. Also vandalized this page. Gparyani (talk) 02:56, 17 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

 * Blocked for vandalism.  Acroterion   (talk)   03:01, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * He's vandalizing his talk page (which is actually an attack page, if you read it carefully). Please remove his talk page access. Gparyani (talk) 03:04, 17 April 2015 (UTC)


 * ✅, tagged, revoked. Materialscientist (talk) 03:07, 17 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Closing. Mike V • Talk 03:46, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

19 April 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Duck. See edits to this page.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 01:11, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

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

Made personal attacks to me and User:Acroterion, and also abused talk page after block just like previous sock. Gparyani (talk) 05:33, 19 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Special:Contributions/174.88.29.42 just blocked for vandalism, likely related as well. § FreeRangeFrog croak 04:37, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * is based on technical and behavioral evidence to  and . However, I'd like a more experienced checkuser to review my results.  ran the last CU.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:56, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
 * As I recall, technical data were inconclusive - otherwise I'd do something (block, tag, etc.). Look at behavioral evidence. Materialscientist (talk) 22:02, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I've tagged the account as a sock. The account is issuing the same personal attacks towards the same individuals as well as trying to delete this SPI, just like past socks. Mike V • Talk 01:36, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

18 June 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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


 * The user seems to want all the records of this SPI deleted. If that's not evidence enogh that the user either is a sockpuppet or a meatpuppet, I don't know. [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&diff=prev&oldid=667488412 diff ] (t) Josve05a  (c) 13:41, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Used the same delete template as another sock [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_page_protection&diff=prev&oldid=667488412 diff1] [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism&diff=prev&oldid=667488644 diff2]
 * Keeps writing in ALL CAPS wanting to delete all these SPIs [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Hum1969&diff=prev&oldid=656844223 diff]

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' This comment moved from a duplicate SPI filed one minute after this one. Sam Walton (talk) 13:51, 18 June 2015 (UTC) Recent series of edits to WP:RFPP, WP:AIV linking to this sockpuppeter Wildthing61476 (talk) 13:42, 18 June 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Blocked by GB fan per NOTHERE. Sam Walton (talk) 14:14, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅, tagged. Materialscientist (talk) 21:44, 18 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Closing. Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 14:47, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

05 August 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Just wanted to note this for the record. &mdash;George8211 / T 20:05, 5 August 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 and tagged. Closing the case.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  21:19, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

16 December 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

See user's contributions - changing tag in previously blocked users for socking to. Evidence looks like sockpuppet activity to me. The list of accounts in this user's contribs should be the oldest, but I apologize if it isn't.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   20:16, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Update: Looking in-depth with each contribution made by the suspected sockpuppet, it looks like the possible sockmaster may be Hum1969.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   20:20, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' Having blocked Liudant_Pham_Strikes_Back for the disruptive editing, he's posted an unblock request admitting he is Hum1969. Nthep (talk) 20:30, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Case merged to Sockpuppet investigations/Hum1969. The sock is already blocked, so closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  21:46, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

26 June 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.


 * Editor interaction utility

Procedural report for tracking purposes only. Dmbs223 created Highway 401/410/403 Interchange -- another article related to Transportation in Toronto -- then attempted to repeatedly to blank/tag for speedy deletion Articles for deletion/Highway 401/410/403 Interchange. After being initially blocked for disruptive editing, admitted in the unblock request that he was Hum1969.. This sock has now been blocked indefinitely. However Highway 401/410/403 Interchange has not been speedy deleted yet under WP:G5 since other editors appear to have made substantial edits. Zzyzx11 (talk) 19:32, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Reopened and added another one. Asking for CU because this guy seems to like creating accounts, so there are probably some sleepers. –Fredddie™ 23:17, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Marking procedural report for close. Zzyzx11 (talk) 19:32, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

First edit for each was a rant  on the AFD for an article created by a recent sock. Second or early edit for each was to the identical vandalization of the sockpuppetry notice on a recent sock's page .. 9691muH already blocked as vandalism-only but added for evidence since self admitted to being a sock of Hum1969 and behaviour is very similar to the new sock. Meters (talk) 21:50, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

And NemoLord666 has now self-admitted to being a sock of Hum1969 while creating a bogus complaint about editors who wave interacted with him. Previous accounts have made similarly unfounded accusations against experienced editors. Meters (talk) 22:01, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * User:NemoLord666 quacks for days. –Fredddie™ 22:00, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
 * All two accounts have been blocked. SA 13 Bro (talk) 22:47, 1 July 2016 (UTC)