Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Leed110/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets

 * ( original case name)

All CU ✅ to each other. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:40, 2 April 2024 (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
All accounts are blocked and tagged. Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:40, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets

 * ( original case name)

All these SPAs have edited nothing but the Takbir article, using the same POV (including on the talk page). Of the lot, "H.B.Johns" has already been indeffed.

The last sock (Airport167) mentioned "cinematic trope" (an expression that the sockmaster used before them). M.Bitton (talk) 20:31, 6 December 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

 * - A rather large number of accounts. Requesting CU to confirm and look for others. I realize the alleged master is stale. Bbb23 (talk) 14:38, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
 * /✅ in various constellations:
 * I'll block the first group. --Blablubbs (talk) 18:16, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Moved case to oldest blocked account. Tagged confirmed accounts. Leaving the stale accounts alone for now, feel free to re-report if they reactivate. Closing. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 19:35, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll block the first group. --Blablubbs (talk) 18:16, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Moved case to oldest blocked account. Tagged confirmed accounts. Leaving the stale accounts alone for now, feel free to re-report if they reactivate. Closing. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 19:35, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll block the first group. --Blablubbs (talk) 18:16, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Moved case to oldest blocked account. Tagged confirmed accounts. Leaving the stale accounts alone for now, feel free to re-report if they reactivate. Closing. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 19:35, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll block the first group. --Blablubbs (talk) 18:16, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Moved case to oldest blocked account. Tagged confirmed accounts. Leaving the stale accounts alone for now, feel free to re-report if they reactivate. Closing. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 19:35, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll block the first group. --Blablubbs (talk) 18:16, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Moved case to oldest blocked account. Tagged confirmed accounts. Leaving the stale accounts alone for now, feel free to re-report if they reactivate. Closing. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 19:35, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll block the first group. --Blablubbs (talk) 18:16, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Moved case to oldest blocked account. Tagged confirmed accounts. Leaving the stale accounts alone for now, feel free to re-report if they reactivate. Closing. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 19:35, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll block the first group. --Blablubbs (talk) 18:16, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Moved case to oldest blocked account. Tagged confirmed accounts. Leaving the stale accounts alone for now, feel free to re-report if they reactivate. Closing. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 19:35, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * I'll block the first group. --Blablubbs (talk) 18:16, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Moved case to oldest blocked account. Tagged confirmed accounts. Leaving the stale accounts alone for now, feel free to re-report if they reactivate. Closing. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 19:35, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets

 * ( original case name)

Another SPA targetting the part of the Takbir article that the sockmaster is obsessed with. Interestingly, this one gives away their familiarity with the article by mentioning the consensus on the talk page. M.Bitton (talk) 23:50, 14 March 2024 (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 CU blocked DublinSunrise5 on March 28 as a confirmed sock of, who is turn has now been tagged as a confirmed sock of Sockpuppet investigations/Leed110. Can a Clerk please review the archives of this report and determine whether a merge is needed to Sockpuppet investigations/Leed110? as an FYI as the CU who ran the Leed110 SPI check. --  Ponyo bons mots 20:56, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
 * It looks pretty likely to me, both behaviourally and technically, and I have merged the cases. Spicy (talk) 23:55, 8 April 2024 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
This one is a bit tricky. A new account displaying good proficiency in Wiki editing right from first edit. Only a minimal overlap with master – I've found only an immediately self-reverted edit at Camel urine but there may be more (like, monitoring/editing Somalia-related articles, e.g. Ajuran Sultanate or Sa'ad Musa). Editing pattern (topic choice) resembles those of and, but a different master entirely possible (, overlapping at Ajuran Sultanate, too, and aligning with the block date & time of its last sock ?). Checkuser requested. — kashmīrī  TALK  20:33, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

@ It might be, although my working hypothesis for Dowrylauds and a few others there is meatpuppetry / off-wiki coordination. — kashmīrī  TALK  21:51, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Comments by other users

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

The said page has seen a large number of socks many has been blocked for now. Dowrylauds which was inactive since 2017 and suddenly became involved in the page is also suspicious but could be a different master. - UtoD 21:19, 23 May 2024 (UTC)


 * I was not notified of this report (I found out via User:Kashmiri's edit history). I have already emailed checkusers at checkuser-en-wp@wikipedia.org about the only other account I have had. Also note about my complaint at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents against User:Kashmiri. I don't see the point of discussing this all over Wikipedia when I have already started a discussion at a noticeboard and even disclosed my prior history (without identifying information). I don't have any connection to Lead110 or any other accounts mentioned here. Goldenarrow9 (talk) 21:34, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Users are not required to notify users of sockpuppet investigations.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) 21:36, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Alright. No issues with that. A courtesy notice would have been nice given we were discussing the exact same thing at ANI (and he had directly asked me about my previous accounts even earlier). I would also request to move this discussion to the ANI thread since it's all related. Goldenarrow9 (talk) 23:02, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I believe they are associated with Sockpuppet investigations/Advocata rather than Leed110 based on their only AfD vote on Articles for deletion/V. N. Srinivasa Rao, which they came across "on some Wikiproject dashboard/list." This appears to be a case of WP:OBSART at most. If the disclosed account emailed to checkuser-en-wp@wikipedia.org is User:Renamed user ExPsittacine, then it's block evasion and not clean start. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 09:32, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
 * My previous disclosed account is not that. My previous account was in good standing and had no blocks or actions against it. Further, I have asked in my last email for them to comment on this post to clear it up. Hopefully, they do that soon. Goldenarrow9 (talk) 09:50, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
 * In the meanwhile, I would really appreciate if you avoid trying to find my real-life identity (WP:OUTING) like kashmiri attempted to do over at ANI. I value my privacy immensely and have not even actively participated in any contentious discussions (apart from a single comment on a Request for move). Goldenarrow9 (talk) 09:54, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
 * My comment isn't anywhere close to discovering your real-life identity unless your name is 'Renamed user ExPsittacine'. If you are going to engage in areas where there were sockpuppets before, then obviously your actions will be scrutinized. Dropping your 2 cents at Articles for deletion/V. N. Srinivasa Rao when you have around 200 edits with no previous AfD votes only increases the suspicion. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 11:45, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
 * does that indicate only experienced editors are allowed to participate in AFDs now? Can you point me to the guideline that says so? Also, my vote was only considering Wikipedia policy. I didn't even comment about the content. This is just you gatekeeping. Goldenarrow9 (talk) 11:50, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Did I, in any way, ask you not to comment on AfDs? No. I said your actions will be scrutinized. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 12:07, 24 May 2024 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * to or, who are the only two accounts I saw behavioural similarities to. The claim of an older account in good standing is believable (2024052310010301) and vague notions of off-wiki coordination or likely incidental overlap is not enough to run more checks, as .  DatGuyTalkContribs 19:36, 24 May 2024 (UTC)