Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Legolas2186/Archive

15 April 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Legolas2186 disappeared after questions were raised regarding his sources. Note his style of writing NoteAlbuqgar78 style of writing Darkness Shines (talk) 23:24, 15 April 2012 (UTC)


 * The "new" user is also adding perfectly formatted references Legolas2186 was editing this article just before he vanished, new user straight into it and again, very similar editing style. Another article Legolas2186 was working on before he vanished which the new user has gone to. Darkness Shines (talk) 08:06, 16 April 2012 (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
While these accounts may be the same (I haven't checked yet), I'm not sure this qualifies as a violation of WP:SOCK. The Legolas account appears to have been abandoned and does not have overlapping editing times with the other account. Can you explain a little more why you think a sock violation is occurring? TN X Man 14:45, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
 * As he has abandoned his old account to avoid community scrutiny due to his falsifying references this is an obvious violation of WP:CLEANSTART especially as he is going back to the same articles which brought him to grief. Also from WP:SOCK Creating new accounts to avoid detection which is what this would be doing if I am correct. Darkness Shines (talk) 15:07, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. After checking, the two accounts appear ❌. TN X Man  17:40, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Cool, I should have guessed there are a lot of Madonna fans Darkness Shines (talk) 17:44, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

19 June 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Edits same articles. Started new account later in 2012 after Legolas2186 was banned. Wikipedia_Signpost/2013-01-28/In_the_media. Regards, Sun Creator(talk) 02:49, 19 June 2013 (UTC)


 * I won't be supplying diffs until required by future sock accounts from this vandal, else he will get to good at modifying how he goes about his activities. is hardly the first hoaxster to fool Wikipedia. But his case shows the urgency with which the encyclopedia needs to modernize and adapt". Regards, Sun Creator(talk) 10:31, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * In that case, please email evidence to me. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 13:31, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Good idea. Regards, Sun Creator(talk) 14:11, 24 June 2013 (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

 * King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 04:15, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Additional evidence not received in over a week. Closing. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 01:14, 3 July 2013 (UTC)

16 February 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Both IndianBio and Legolas2186 (according to each's user page) are relatively young Indian men with a strong interest in pop music, particularly Madonna and Lady Gaga. Both users have worked extensively in both reviewing and writing good articles - again, with a major focus on Madonna and Gaga-related articles. IndianBio registered an account in August 2012, six months after Legolas stopped editing following a large-scale investigation into the verifiability and accuracy of his edits, which ultimately resulted in an indef-block in January 2013.

IndianBio has contributed to many articles Legolas brought to FA/GA status. Most of these are Madonna and Gaga articles, which can be chalked up to common interest in two popular entertainers, but there are also several other overlaps: Septimus Heap, The Secret of the Nagas, Ranveer Singh, Saqib Saleem, The Immortals of Meluha, Glee: The Music, The Power of Madonna, and Sourav Ganguly.

Also telling is this exchange with, where IndianBio praises the work done on The Fame and The Fame Monster (articles Legolas brought to GA), while criticizing Born This Way (which Legolas never brought to GA review).

I am not alone in my concerns. IndianBio drew others' suspicions very early on, being suspected of sockpuppetry by almost immediately after joining, with  mentioning Legolas as a possible puppeteer. IndianBio was also accused of being Legolas by here.

I don't have time to look too much into this aspect, so take it with a grain of salt for now unless I or others can retrieve specific examples/diffs, but writing style / behavior seems very similar. Messages are often short and to the point, and criticism of others' edits can be harsh (whether intentionally or otherwise). Both users are also fond of emoticons. –Chase (talk / contribs) 04:06, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

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

I have been associated with Legolas2186 from the moment I had joined the WikiProject, not once but many times, and its really irritating now. I have no clue what Legolas2186 did and it seems he misinterpreted many many articles on Madonna, however how is that related to me I have no understanding, except that I also edit Madonna articles too. Chasewc, good that you brought it up. Can a moderator please check using checkuser and verify it once and for all? And get it over it? — Indian: BIO  [ ChitChat ] 04:27, 16 February 2015 (UTC)


 * CheckUser has not been requested since Legolas has not edited since 2012; the account is too stale. And requests by accused parties for CheckUser to prove their innocence are typically not honored. –Chase (talk / contribs) 04:31, 16 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Except for being from India and frequently editing popular culture articles (particularly Gaga and Madonna), I personally don't see much in common with the two. It's not like IndianBio has fabricated any references. It should also be noted that an SPI on this matter was previously filed back in June 2013, but no action was taken due to insufficient evidence. Snuggums (talk / edits) 04:34, 16 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Typically not honored is a bad reason then Chase. Then you should be presenting before accusing something you even are not sure of. As Snuggums said above, even the only similarity I see with Legolas2186 is that he had promoted many articles on Madonna and Lady Gaga, and I'm also associated with these articles. And I was not even aware of the old investigation? — Indian: BIO  [ ChitChat ] 04:40, 16 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I can only talk about one point "criticism of others' edits can be harsh". Yes its true, I do write harshly to other editors initially and numerous times I have admitted that its a bad habit I have got, even shouted on my good friend . However, I have admitted my mistake and apologized also. Chasewc you should be aware of this too I believe. — Indian: BIO  [ ChitChat ] 04:52, 16 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I have not been suspicious of IndianBio being a returned (and likely chastened) Legolas2186 until now. Looking at the contributions, I see that the two accounts have used some of the same quirky words and misspellings. The misspelling abyssmal was used by both.[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Legolas2186&diff=prev&oldid=474786369][//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:IndianBio&diff=prev&oldid=622200733] The non-word fluffery was used by both.[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Legolas2186&diff=prev&oldid=418554671][//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:IndianBio&diff=prev&oldid=518110888] Both have pluralized info to infos.[//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Miles_Away_%28Madonna_song%29&diff=prev&oldid=249787201][//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:IndianBio&diff=prev&oldid=539051010] Every SPI case should have a goal. What's the goal here? When Georgewilliamherbert blocked Legolas2186 he wrote that the user could be unblocked "if they return and cooperate with review of those edits", meaning the edits which contained fake quotes and fabricated references. Is the goal here to make IndianBio go through the contributions of Legolas2186? Binksternet (talk) 16:29, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Checkuser will not be of any help here. The accounts are too stale so a comparison cannot be made. Also, a checkuser will not perform a check at a user's request. Please note that unlike ANI, users involved in SPI do no need to be notified. I don't see any conclusive evidence other than general suggestions that they both accounts are involved in popular topics. Chasewc91, I would encourage you to not open a SPI case if "[you] don't have time to look too much into this aspect". The burden of proof is upon the filer to gather and present the evidence. I'm closing this case with no action taken. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 04:56, 16 February 2015 (UTC)