Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jigglyfidders/Archive

Evidence submitted by Cs32en
B:
 * Information is not present in the source given as reference.
 * Various edits at List of religious populations, without edit summaries or supporting references.

F:


 * Jigglyfidders account created on 21/9/2009, first edit on 24/1/2010, contributions would be unusual for a legitimate new account.
 * HaireDunya (last contributions on 12/1/2010) may be the precursor account, but checkuser may find other/additional accounts.

Cs32en  Talk to me  14:16, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

i don't have a clue what you are talking about. This is my first wikipedia account and i would appreciate it if i wasn't harrased for no reason. this is NOT a sockpuppetry account,whatever that means. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jigglyfidders (talk • contribs) 14:22, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Requested by  Cs32en   Talk to me  14:16, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Regardless of the fact that I see significant differences in edit summaries and contribution patterns, there really is no policy violation ongoing here if this weren't the user's first account; the right to a clean start is typically honored except for cases like block/ban evasion, etc. The edits do not overlap here, so I do not see a problem. -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 22:59, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Itaqallah
was blocked indefinitely for repeated vandalism and disruption at 05:03, 16 April 2010 (block log), the account was created on the same day, at 11:27, 16 April 2010 (log). As I will specify below, both edit the same low-traffic niche articles with the same editing style. In general, has carried on from where  had left off. Both edit Islam/Baha'i articles, and have a particular interest in population statistics, the latter often resulting in conflicts with other editors.


 * Articles edited
 * Article created by Jiggly, developed by Iwantto after Jiggly's ban.
 * See this diff. Jiggly was active on this page right up until his block, after which Iwantto's account is created on the day of the block and continues to edit the same article, in the same way, some few hours later.
 * Particular attachment to a certain source (World Christian Encyclopedia), introduced and heavily edited by Jiggly, later edited and defended by Iwantto (e.g. )
 * See this diff. Jiggly was active on this page right up until his block, after which Iwantto's account is created on the day of the block and continues to edit the same article, in the same way, some few hours later.
 * Particular attachment to a certain source (World Christian Encyclopedia), introduced and heavily edited by Jiggly, later edited and defended by Iwantto (e.g. )
 * Particular attachment to a certain source (World Christian Encyclopedia), introduced and heavily edited by Jiggly, later edited and defended by Iwantto (e.g. )

Other articles edited by both include:
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 
 * 

A number of other articles have been edited by both as well, but the above were selected because they are low traffic (some quite obscure) and reflect very specific interests.


 * Editing style


 * Frequent edit conflicts, especially over population statistics (e.g. Iwantto:, Jiggly:)
 * Insertion of same content on different articles e.g by Jiggly (which is later developed in subsequent edits), and  by Iwantto. Aside from the content another thing to note is the strange insistence by both that 'Cultural Muslim' is a denomination/sect alongside traditional divisions of Sunni/Shia etc. which is peculiar to say the least.
 * Long series of consecutive edits, with minimal use of edit summaries

Other style similarities such as insertion of poorly sourced material or similar phrases have been left out as they are a bit generic. The evidence provided above showing extremely similar interests/editing habits, in combination with the dates for Jiggly's block and Iwantto's subsequent account creation, suggests evasion of an indef block by.  ITAQALLAH  00:17, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Requested by  ITAQALLAH   00:17, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

– There are subtle differences in editing patterns (aside from the overlap in articles edited, which is a red flag) in which I cannot conclude socking on my own without technical evidence. –MuZemike 05:59, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

. The technical evidence alone suggests that it is possible (bordering on likely) that they are related. However, when taking both the behavioural and technical evidence into account, I find it extremely unlikely that these two accounts are not sockpuppets. --Deskana (talk) 15:43, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. TN X Man  21:57, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

21 December 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

A lot of overlaps between PassaMethod and Jigglyfidders here.
 * 1) Jigglyfidders was blocked for "persistent disruptive editing over cited Islam population statistics" by lowering the percent of Sunnis to 75%, even falsifying it to 70%
 * 2) User:Iwanttoeditthissh (sock of Jigglyfidders) proceeded with the same activity in the same article, citing a very unreliable source. http://terrorism.about.com/od/islampolitics/g/Sunni.htm
 * 3) PassaMethod chose the same activity in the same article, and argues very hard on the matter.
 * 4) Iwanttoeditthissh adds Bahá'í Faith in Australia to the Sydney article, and the above ip (124.168.140.62) which traces to the Sydney area  was used by Jigglyfidders to edit his talk page but the same ip also wrote this to Jigglyfidders at another talk page.Kiftaan (talk) 22:44, 21 December 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 master and any socks are very stale at this point, so there's nothing to run a CU on. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 05:21, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Can you run it on ? He started this and has edited the entire article.--Kiftaan (talk) 14:35, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * PassaMethod never edited that Bahai article, so I'm not sure why you think the two named accounts are connected. CU won't connect an IP to an account. And Smkolins has more than 18000 edits and is in good standing, so running a check solely based on a whim isn't going to happen. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 15:21, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The user who opened this case was blocked as a sock. I'm closing. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 09:32, 26 December 2011 (UTC)