Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/IPV2/Archive

26 May 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

These four accounts and one IP all made similar edits to the Hamid Arabnia article: diff for IPV2 diff for RIP MJ diff for Fake ones diff for Veracity jane diff for 94.163.30.175, their edits also match very closely the reported techniques and goals of the off-wiki internet stalker described in this newspaper article, and in some cases they link to the stalker's web sites. Note also that 94.163.30.175's edits interleave with Veracity jane's. There are several other single-purpose editors of the article but they don't seem to match as well and some of those other ones may be Arabnia himself. In any case given the sparse edits over a long time frame and highly focused target I don't think checkuser is going to be very helpful, but it would be a good idea to get this group established as a set of sockpuppets so new ones matching the same pattern can be blocked more quickly. We might also consider indefinite semiprotection for the Arabnia article based on this abuse. (I'm not linking this SPI from the article talk because I don't see any point in leading the stalker here.) David Eppstein (talk) 06:17, 26 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Adding Olamaolama, a new account (began editing after I opened this SPI) with only a small number of edits to Arabnia and to somewhat-related topics. Olamaolama's edits to Carlos Becker Westphall appear to be in good faith, but their edits to Hamid Arabnia consist primarily of adding links to two of the internet harassment web sites. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:22, 31 May 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 most recently any of these accounts has edited was July 2014, almost a year ago. Why are you filing this? Semi-protection makes no sense, either. This looks like a preemptive report, not something we would normally evaluate or block. Unless you persuade me otherwise, I will close this with no action.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:49, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Basically, I expect the socks to come back and do the same thing (this is part of a many-years-long off-wiki pattern of harassment) and when it does I want the incident to be treated as part of an ongoing pattern of sockpuppetry and harrassment rather than just another content dispute by a spa on a blp. In fact, another new account, Olamaolama, active after I began this SPI, may fit the pattern, as this account recently edited the Arabnia article primarily to add links to the attack sites maintained by the harasser. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:56, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * This is highly unusual. However, I suggest you add the new user to the list above and provide evidence against them. At best, you'd end up with one block of the new user.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:20, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Insufficient evidence to take action against Olamaolama and no reason to take any action against the other accounts. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:47, 5 June 2015 (UTC)