Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JohnGotten/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets

 * ( original case name)
 * ( original case name)


 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

177.133.241.249 was blocked on 2 February for disruptive editing. Igornotter appeared several days later with the same POV. Examples:     Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 16:38, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

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

For sure, this is the same IP. Jingiby (talk) 17:50, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - checkusers do not publicly disclose the connection between an IP address and account. Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 18:11, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I guess if you squint hard enough, you could call this block evasion, but basically we encourage people to create accounts, so blocking somebody as a sock because they created an account seems kind of backwards. If Igornotter is making disruptive edits, they can be blocked for that, but I don't see this as socking.  In theory, this case should be renamed before archiving, but perhaps consider just deleting it in lieu of archiving. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:49, 6 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Case moved to the account —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 02:17, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I disagree completely with this close. We encourage people who aren't blocked to create accounts, not the ones blocked for disruption. We block the person behind the IP, not just the IP itself, so evading via an account is not permitted. Igornotter is clearly the same as the IP, and I suspect the IP was already evading a block of . I also have a feeling there is an older master, but I will be indeffing the named account regardless as they are showing the same disruptive, edit-warring and nationalistic behavior. Sro23 (talk) 02:48, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Right back at it Elizium23 (talk) 05:05, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Seems fairly likely this is the same person. Amanuensis Balkanicus (talk) 12:30, 8 February 2021 (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

 * ✅ =  = . Latter now blocked. . - Mailer Diablo 20:46, 8 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Closing. Sro23 (talk) 23:03, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.


 * Previous sockpuppets of JohnGotten include: (blocked on February 7) and (blocked on February 8). Moggein created their account on February 13 2021 at 03:28 and 30 minutes later joined an editing dispute at Dara of Jasenovac . It highlights that Moggein is not a new editor.
 * Their next edits include adding back some edits of Igornotter at Gideon Greif, continuing JohnGotten's edits at List of libraries damaged during World War II. And they've managed their userpages in the same manner as Mariovespucio. Compare: Hello, this is my userpage/this is my talkpage (in Swedish) and This is the userpage/this is the talkpage (in English)
 * Pinging admins familiar with JohnGotten,  Maleschreiber (talk) 15:53, 14 February 2021 (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

 * . Same country, geolocation, range, and common user agent.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   20:05, 14 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Already blocked, but added tag to Moggein, closing. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:28, 14 February 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.


 * Previous sockpuppets of JohnGotten include: (blocked on February 7), (blocked on February 8) and (blocked on February 14). Moggein created their account on February 13 2021 at 03:28 and 30 minutes later joined an editing dispute at Dara of Jasenovac. Вукан Ц was putting forward the same POV and reverts (Вукан, Moggein) at Dara of Jasenovac from February 7 to February 12 and was inactive during Moggein's editing (13 Feb). After Moggein's block, they resurfaced on February 16 at Dara of Jasenovac.
 * And they've managed their userpages in the same manner as Mariovespucio and Moggein. Compare: Hello, this is my userpage/this is my talkpage (in Swedish - MarioVespucio), This is the userpage/this is the talkpage (in English - Moggein) and My homepage/my talkpage - Вукан Ц.
 * Side comment: The account Вукан Ц was created in 2019 and was used almost exclusively as support for a particular POV in !voting for a long time without any editing history. Their first edit was a vote. It highlights that this was probably not a new editor in 2019. The SPI archive may be linked to JohnGotten but there is probably an older account which is the real first account.
 * Pinging:  who handled the last report. Maleschreiber (talk) 18:22, 17 February 2021 (UTC)


 * The account's first edit was a !vote and much of its occasional editing involved RfC/RM until now. I don't think that there is a sufficient number of edits by any of the newer accounts for a good timecard, but Moggein/Igornotter/Vukan plot very close closer to each other. It might just be a similar geolocation. I still think that a CU is justified, but if you don't consider it appropriate for the time being, I'll just have to accept it. If there is no sufficient reason for it, I understand why a CU in terms of privacy issues might not be a good idea.--Maleschreiber (talk) 19:55, 17 February 2021 (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 not seeing enough commonality of behavior to make me suspect socking. The holocaust is a topic that many people are interested in and have strong POV about, so the overlap at Dara of Jasenovac by itself isn't a strong argument.  I also see that Вукан Ц has an interest in other topics (British football, Academy Awards, etc) that the Gotten socks haven't exhibited. -- RoySmith (talk) 19:22, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Also, comparing the timecards of JohnGotten vs Вукан Ц, that's not screaming "sock" to me either. -- RoySmith (talk) 19:26, 17 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, when it comes to ethnic or nationalistic edit warriors and sockpuppetry, things will often get messy. The behavior is bit different here: there is a little bit of interest in non-Serbia topics, the account is much older, the user looks to be an established editor on the Serbian wikipedia, whereas JohnGotten seems to be more interested in the Portuguese wiki. Plus CU has been run recently and never picked up on this account. If new evidence arises, this SPI can always be reopened, but for now I'm closing the case with no action. Sro23 (talk) 00:35, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Pro forma: already CU-confirmed. Drmies (talk) 20:49, 23 February 2021 (UTC)

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

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Usual Serbian national tub thumping.

John based naming convention for socks, ,

Article overlaps

Alexander I of Yugoslavia []

[]

Interest in Croatian flags

Flags [] []

Here as other sock adding the Nikola Tesla museum image to the Serbia articles

[]

[] Pipsally (talk) 16:46, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

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

Additionally John L. Booth is now editing a favourite article of another JohnGottensock, - Serbophilia Edit -

Also this IP - {179.177.163.242} is restoring John L. Booth edits, while simulatneously fiddling with a talk page of an IP {179.177.163.249} which is clearly linked to JohnGotten and has been blocked by twice recently. 

{177.133.241.249} has clear overlaps with John L. Booth, editting Serbophilia, Greece–Serbia relations‎ and showing a specific interest in changing the Albanian names of Serbian Orthodox church buildings in kosovo

John L. Booth -

{177.133.241.249} -, , Pipsally (talk) 06:11, 4 March 2021 (UTC)


 * It is likely that this is John Gotten. you have to request for a CU. Pinging admins familiar with JG  .--Maleschreiber (talk) 18:49, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Do I? How does one do that?Pipsally (talk) 18:51, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
 * You have to use CUrequest as a parameter, see Template:SPI case status.--Maleschreiber (talk) 19:02, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

I agree with and. It is most definitely them. And their agenda is quite clear. See here where they hyper-focus on Croatisation of Italians and Slovenes being exiled from Croatia failing to mention it was Italian occupational forces that persecuted Slovenes AND Croats. Odd thing to leave out, and then here where they make quite revolting attacks and backwards claims. One would be hatd pressed to find one positive edit in their history. Bit ironic but at least the puppet unmasked themselves. This person will just keep making accounts taking advantage of the limited admins we have on here. Now the puppet appears to be editing as much as possible before the inevitable end. Looks like what will come crashing down for all to see is this type of behavior on Wikipedia which has gotten worst the past two years in aggressive pov warriors that see the platform as a battlefield against “enemies”. OyMosby (talk) 04:23, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Update: This is unacceptable Perhaps who has dealt with this sort of Wikipedia for a while now can share some insight? OyMosby (talk) 05:34, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for handling it. I'll do the cleanup beat me to it. Good job. --Maleschreiber (talk) 19:51, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * . I don't think CU is necessary as this one seems obvious enough. Closing. Also, does anyone want to clean up the sock's contributions? Sro23 (talk) 18:52, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

So Booth is a CU match with Rafa (and I'm only halfway through), and Venize is Rafa. Fun fact: Venize is a match with User:JamesSandy64. I'm going to see about some range blocks. , FYI. Drmies (talk) 23:36, 6 May 2021 (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 two blocked ones. RafałAlfeo isn't blocked, I assume that was unintentional?  --Blablubbs&#124;talk 10:42, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Sorry, yeah, Blablubbs, now done. Drmies (talk) 12:14, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Also tagged, closing. --Blablubbs&#124;talk 12:40, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Already CU blocked. Ping for. Drmies (talk) 12:18, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you! I didn't know I was editing an archive page, sorry for that. --Vacant0 (talk) 12:19, 19 May 2021 (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

 * , closing. --Blablubbs&#124;talk 12:20, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Closing as intended. Bbb23 (talk) 13:24, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Similar edits that JohnGotten has made in the past, it also has the same location as the first IP from February. JohnGotten has previously left similar comments on my talk page a couple of times already so I'm sure that they're sockpuppeting again. Requesting CU to check this. (talk page comment diff) Vacant0 (talk) 19:39, 7 June 2021 (UTC)

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

Also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/177.17.85.93, another Brazilian IP making the usual Serb nationalist edits, restoring those of the reported sock IP above. - This sock was blocked by this morning but has returned this afternoon as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/191.248.41.215

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - checkusers do not publicly link IP addresses to accounts per policy. Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 19:25, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
 * IP edits too old. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 23:46, 20 June 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

restoring edits by blocked socks 9 (both named and IP). There are loads of similar edits, adding Cyrillic names, and changing the order to Serbian Cyrillic comes first.-


 * Balkan Emperor - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Donja_Klezna&diff=1030744513&oldid=1020493700
 * 70.31.32.198 - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Donja_Klezna&diff=1019806865&oldid=1013739778
 * - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Donja_Klezna&diff=1013305099&oldid=1011916121

Same interest in UNESCO heritage sites in Kosovo -


 * Balkan Emperor https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kosovo&diff=prev&oldid=1030309592
 * The Slavic serf - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gra%C4%8Danica_Monastery&diff=1011498238&oldid=1010171717
 * - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Medieval_Monuments_in_Kosovo&diff=1010093587&oldid=1009981910

Interest in emphasising Serbian ethnicity in sports players


 * Balkan Emperor - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nikola_Vu%C4%8Devi%C4%87&diff=1029142583&oldid=1024811653
 * The Slavic Serf - https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nikola_Vu%C4%8Devi%C4%87&diff=1012660590&oldid=1009157746 Pipsally (talk) 06:35, 28 June 2021 (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

 * They appear to be ❌ as far as checkuser evidence goes...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   15:50, 3 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Blocked as a sock of The Slavic Serf. Closing. Sro23 (talk) 22:47, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Gamed autoconfirmed through sandbox edits, then immediately added a sock tag at, reverted an edit of theirs "per WP:DENY", and filed an SPI to the archive for Orchomen (the casepage being ECP'd). Looking at the history of, I infer that to be Gotten, who edit-warred there as John L. Booth. El_C and Sro23 have since made a block apiece there and El_C has semi'd it, although neither noted a master. But the edit summary style is consistent with Special:Contributions/JamesSandy64, with capital-ar "Rv" (although no longer a dot), userpage blanking, and fighting other sox in the archives.

Also including Hunberct69, blocked by Sro23, who's clearly the same person as this. While I'm sure these two are sox of someone, I'd like CU (might have to be against log data) to be sure that it's Gotten and to rekindle the trail. -- Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she/they) 04:27, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
 * See also Sockpuppet investigations/Orchomen. --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she/they) 04:44, 24 October 2021 (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 case is being reviewed by Tamzin as part of their training as a clerk. Please allow them to process the entire case without interference. You may pose any questions or concerns either on their talk page or on this page.'''
 * . Also, didn't get successful ping notifications for El_C and Sro23, so trying again. If y'all did get pinged the first time, sorry. --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she/they) 04:30, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Confirmed (meaning extremely likely) to both each other and JohnGotten. -- zzuuzz (talk) 06:22, 24 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks, zzuuzz. Tagged. Also belatedly tagging the master as 3X-banned since 8 February. --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she/they) 07:27, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Possibly a slew of new puppet accounts and IPs. A wide IP ban may be needed as this is a nonstop occurrence and abuse. An IP address pointed this out on my talk page. See []. The IP is likely a sock of .He does editing with 177- 179 ip ranges these are some [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [], [].OyMosby (talk) 14:01, 12 November 2021 (UTC) OyMosby (talk) 14:01, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

The IP has now begun making disgusting personal attacks. OyMosby (talk) 17:59, 12 November 2021 (UTC)


 * many thanks. Seems they moved on. Will re-open if they surgace again. Much appreciated! OyMosby (talk) 03:21, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Comments by other users
Greeting. I suspected it was JohnGotten and informed the other editor. And maybe it is, because according to this, User: 177.98.150.152 is also from Brazil and has very similar edits as the others [], and he was placed as a sockpuppets of JohnGotten https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Suspected_Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_JohnGotten. 89.172.78.224 (talk) 16:36, 12 November 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
I've removed the master from the list. Obviously, the CU should be declined.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:56, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
 * - checkusers do not publicly link IP addresses to accounts. As such a CU in this report is not needed, so declining CU request. Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 15:01, 12 November 2021 (UTC)
 * - for training -- RoySmith (talk) 17:04, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
 * No rangeblock is able to cover both IP addresses and there's been no further edits from either /16 IP range since the block of 177.17.84.155. Closing with no further action at this time., please don't hesitate to re-open this if they return. --Jack Frost (talk) 01:27, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Per and.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  01:14, 28 December 2021 (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

 * - Please, compare Parsifal20 to confirmed socks and .  Vanjagenije   (talk)  01:17, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
 * The following accounts are ✅ to one another
 * it is that all the accounts are operated by JohnGotten  Salvio 13:51, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I found a few other behavioral clues that tied at least some of the confirmed group to Hunberct69, so blocking and dual-tagging these as all confirmed to ΝικόλαοΚαλλιρρόη and suspected to JohnGotten. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:42, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
 * it is that all the accounts are operated by JohnGotten  Salvio 13:51, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I found a few other behavioral clues that tied at least some of the confirmed group to Hunberct69, so blocking and dual-tagging these as all confirmed to ΝικόλαοΚαλλιρρόη and suspected to JohnGotten. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:42, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
 * it is that all the accounts are operated by JohnGotten  Salvio 13:51, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I found a few other behavioral clues that tied at least some of the confirmed group to Hunberct69, so blocking and dual-tagging these as all confirmed to ΝικόλαοΚαλλιρρόη and suspected to JohnGotten. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:42, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
 * it is that all the accounts are operated by JohnGotten  Salvio 13:51, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I found a few other behavioral clues that tied at least some of the confirmed group to Hunberct69, so blocking and dual-tagging these as all confirmed to ΝικόλαοΚαλλιρρόη and suspected to JohnGotten. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:42, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
The same ip has been vandalizing wikipedia for many years and after being blocked it returns again from other IPs. It's about this ip [], and here he was blocked first for three months, then for a year, and came back again only from another IP [] these are his edits a year ago [] They are the same ip from the same place [] in Brazil probably the same person which vandalizes wikipedia for years. This is an archive of the Sockpuppet JohnGotten investigation. I hope you can solve the problem. Thank you.89.172.83.150 (talk) 10:00, 20 August 2023 (UTC) 89.172.83.150 (talk) 10:00, 20 August 2023 (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 one week, closing. Bbb23 (talk) 15:09, 20 August 2023 (UTC)