Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Leicesterdedlock/Archive

28 May 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Newer accounts


 * Older accounts (2014 and prior)


 * IPs (recent)


 * Negative SPAs


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

I'll warn everyone: this is going to be a fairly extensive SPI. I came across the article for Menotti Lerro a week or so ago when some of his books came up at AfD. The article was fairly promotional so I eventually decided to clean it up tonight. Despite the puffery and overcites, the guy does appear to be notable. However I also noticed that there were a lot of SPAs editing the account. Some of them are like Leicesterdedlock in that they're stale and can't be checked for anything other than similar edit patterns. There are some active ones, including some SPAs that came onto the article's talk page and some of the AfDs to argue for or against deletion. It's enough to where I think that there is some socking or meating going on in one way or another. Many of the SPAs have been busy creating multiple articles for books about Lerro, which is what initially drew my attention.

Some of them, like Dios6666 and Goruinus, were there to say negative things about the author. I don't know that they're the same as the ones creating the articles and adding puffery, but they did appear at roughly the same time as many of the SPAs. The one thing they all have in common is that their edits are predominantly or solely limited to Lerro or to people affiliated with him. After posting the list I'll try to mark the older socks as such, as well as mark the vandals/negative SPAs as well. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  09:52, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I feel sort of bad about the lump of names here. The older ones have similar edit patterns (adding promotional content, similar unusable sources), but I know that they can't be checked like the newer ones can. Mostly what I want is to have the recent accounts checked to see if they're linked to one another, but I figured that I should list the others to show that this has been a pretty ongoing issue with the article. If you guys want to just focus on the most recent accounts for the sake of brevity then I completely understand. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  09:57, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Here are the diffs between the SPAs that were negatively editing the article or endorsed deletion: (I'm going to break these up into parts since there are so many of them.)
 * Negative accounts
 * Dios6666 blanked all but the very top portion of Raccontarsi in versi. La poesia autobiografica in Inghilterra e in Spagna (1950-1980) with this edit, a move that was similar to ones made by Goruinus and Lifevita. In this edit Lifevita blanks out all but the very top portion of the article for Menotti Lerro and in this edit blanks out almost all but the top portion of the article for The Poetry of Menotti Lerro. Denimmouse is older, but they also blanked the article for Lerro back in 2011 and were vocal on the talk page about it getting deleted.
 * There was also an account that I forgot to link into this. Recently the account User:Devbasdev signed up to vote delete on all of the AfDs. I think that I'd not added them because they hadn't vandalized the articles, which is something that all of the other vandals shared. Of course there's no rule that someone new can't vote on an AfD, but I do find it interesting that they signed up around the same time that some of the others have and have a clear agenda to delete the articles.

The positive ones aren't identical in their edits, but they do have one thing in common: their edits are almost or entirely oriented on Lerro.
 * Positive accounts (recent)
 * Sellysellyheart started editing on May 2, with this edit to Ceppi incerti, an article that was created by Rainermaria27 the day before. Since starting they've created several articles on some of Lerro's books, Gli anni di Cristo, Nel nome del padre, Entropia del cuore, I Dieci Comandamenti, Il Diario di Mary e altri Racconti and Profumi d'Estate. Of these articles, several were edited by Falsfersws, Prettycatss, and Rainermaria27. I also note that Selly also commented at Articles for deletion/Gli anni di Cristo, where they posted that they were a huge fan of Lerro and heaped praise upon him.
 * Prettycatss has stated on their talk page that there are three of them editing these pages, that they're students, and that they are friends using the same computers. However the issue with this is that there are far more than three accounts editing and creating pages. Based just on the most recent count there are at least six accounts that are/were actively editing. In any case, Prettycatss also created pages, Aforismi e pensieri. Cinquecento gocce dal mio mare and The Poetry of Menotti Lerro. The former was edited by Sellysellyheart, while the latter was edited by Rainermaria27. However their arguments for inclusion at Articles for deletion/The Poetry of Menotti Lerro were different somewhat than that of Selly's, but their arguments also tended to contain praise- as did Rainermaria27's. It also doesn't help that their first edit was to add Lerro's work to an article.
 * Rainermaria27 has also created Lerro related articles with l Mio Bambino (edited by Sellysellyheart), Raccontarsi in versi. La poesia autobiografica in Inghilterra e in Spagna (1950-1980) (edited by Prettycatss and Delicatedelis), and 2084. Il potere dell'immortalità nelle città del dolore (edited by Sweetsleeping and Prettycatss). They were also the original creator for the article Augusto Orrel back in August, but it was deleted for a lack of notability. This article was re-created in April by Ornellasweetg and was later edited in May by Rainermaria27. Their assertions for notability tend to center around praise for Lerro when it comes to AfD. They've also made edits to other articles, but only in relation to Lerro. They've also uploaded a few photos where they've asserted that it was their work, as with File:Menotti Lerro at The University of Reading, Poetry Reading, 2011.JPG.
 * Delicatedelis only has a few edits to their name, but they edited the article for Augusto Orrel, Menotti Lerro, and Raccontarsi in versi. La poesia autobiografica in Inghilterra e in Spagna (1950-1980).
 * Ornellasweetg only has one edit to their name, the creation of Augusto Orrel in April. The day after it was created it was edited by Delicatedelis.
 * Sweetsleeping only has two edits, both of which were to Lerro related articles, this edit to Menotti Lerro and this edit to 2084. Il potere dell'immortalità nelle città del dolore.
 * Falsfersws has only two edits as well. Their major edit was to add a raw html source to the article for Profumi d'Estate. This is a habit shared by many of the accounts, including Sellysellyheart, who created the article.

The only thing with this group is that their account creation times aren't entirely the same.
 * Prettycatss signed up around December 15, 2014. (Last edit May 28)
 * Rainermaria27 signed up around July 14, 2014. (Last edit May 25)
 * Ornellasweetg signed up around April 12, 2015. (Only one edit)
 * Delicatedelis signed up around April 13, 2015. (Last edit April 14)
 * Sweetsleeping signed up around April 27, 2015. (Only two edits, same day)
 * Sellysellyheart signed up around May 3, 2015. (Last edit May 19)
 * Falsfersws signed up May 18, 2015. (Two edits, same day.)

Now I also came across an issue with some of the edits by Rainermaria27. They edited other articles to link to Lerro's article or to an article about his books. Some of them were edits just to link to the articles but a closer look showed that there are likely more possible SPAs here. There was the account named User:Sunnydaysdays that set about inserting raw html links to Lerro's books in various articles- similar to how most of the above editors tend to insert their own references. This account also entered in one of Lerro's works as a source for the article for Seamus Heaney with this edit. I'm not saying that these shouldn't be in the article, just that I've noticed that there are a lot of editors that seem keen to only edit Lerro related materials.

I'll add the older accounts next. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  06:31, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Here are the older accounts. I'll go through them one by one, but they're by large positive.
 * Positive accounts (older)
 * Veritysss. This account was only active in 2012. Their edits were only to the article for Mennoti Lerro. They added a lot of raw html links as sources to the article with edits like this one.
 * Olden47. Active in 2012, but mostly in 2013. Their edits are only Lerro related and one of their first edits was to add Raccontarsi in versi. La poesia autobiografica in Inghilterra e in Spagna (1950-1980) to Autobiography. Their subsequent edits were entirely to Lerro's article to add raw html links as sources. In one instance they actually removed a properly formatted citation with this edit. Per this edit you can see that they were not the account that added the citation in the first place.
 * Yahoo12345678 Active only in 2012 with two edits, their only edits were to Lerro's article. They were also an account that used raw html links
 * Flowersxxxxx. This account made only one edit, where they added a photo to the article. They were also the ones who uploaded the photo, which they said was their own work.
 * Ladypoetry1975. They made only one edit, which was to add a lengthy quote to the article for Lerro. There's another, more recent account that did a similar action so I'll try to find out which one it was.
 * FILLY19. A one off account, they were also a raw html link fan.
 * Tinarellaa. They made a handful of edits on the same day. Like Olden47, they actually removed a properly formatted citation to add a raw html link.

How this all ties into Leicesterdedlock is that they were the article creator for Lerro and also the related article for Andrew Mangham. They also tried to insert Mangham into other articles with this link and this one. This wouldn't be an issue except that this was paired with a lot of edits to Lerro's article, especially since Mangham is linked to Lerro via his book "The Poetry of Menotti Lerro". Like the others, they have a tendency to use raw html links as sources.
 * Leicesterdedlock

Basically what we have here are a lot of SPAs that have signed up and only edited Lerro related articles. The most common pattern is that they edit Lerro's article or they'll create or edit an article about a book he wrote or was related to. There are some edits to other articles where they try to insert his work into other articles that aren't explicitly Lerro related. A common habit between all of the accounts is that they will add raw html links instead of properly formatting them or even doing a sort of deal.
 * Summary

There's an assertion that the recent edits were done by a group of 3 friends/students that are editing from the same computer, however there are quite a few accounts here that have edited within the last 1-2 months. Prettycatss said that they might have created other accounts and forgot the passwords, but they didn't sound sure whether they did or not, which I found somewhat concerning. If this isn't socking then there is certainly a case of coordinated editing here. I do have to add that while I was compiling all of this I saw that a new account, User:Angynap, has signed up and edited the article for Andrew Mangham, where they removed tags from the article and also added raw html links as sources.

This probably wouldn't be so concerning except that the harder I'm looking at Lerro's article, the more his notability is put into doubt. LaMona is helping with that, but so far it just seems like the sources to show notability are getting fewer and fewer. I can't help but get the impression that if this is a group of people, then it's a group of people that were deliberately sent here to edit articles about Lerro and Mangham. It certainly seems that there is a very focused, organized attempt to add Lerro to Wikipedia. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  07:41, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Adding a few more bits of information: there is no article in the Italian WP for this author. The only other article is in the Romanian WP, and that, too, was created by an SPA and is very similar to the @en article, although it has no references. In terms of similarities among the editors, none has a user page (ditto the @ro editor). LaMona (talk) 15:04, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Dear Tokyogirl79, it is something interesting and (sorry if I say it) hilarious to follow all this you are saying and investigating because I am really understanding that I never will understand anything about wikipedia. First of all, please, consider I am not native english and secondly consider I am not as good as you with WP and it is the real reason of everything. As I tried to explain in the discussion on one of the book propose for delation, I have started to work on the Lerro's page a long time ago. I did not think about the "problems" you are stressing here. My aim was just a genuine wish to create the Lerro page giving all the reference possible (thats why I added so many links, I thought It was better for the page). During the time I keep periodically adding some reference to the page and I thought I was doing a good job. As I have already said sometimes I did it at my work place - to kill the time - and because I did not have the password of my wiki account I created for Lerro I created one/two more account (not 10...). I use to create an account everytime I write about an author (now I understand it is not the best way). However, I did not think it could be a problem. Moreover, in the last weeks, I thought it could be nice to start to work on the opera, I thought it was a normal consequence of my work on Lerro. So I wanted propose his books at the community and I new there were the risk to be deleted, and I could accept that. ...all the bestRainermaria27 (talk) 22:36, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

PS I did not create the page and unfortunatly nobody pays me to support him ;-)

PPS I wanted to use this energies to create pages of him or others and not to answer at these strange accuse of Spa, Isp Socks Rask Risk and Frusk. I really don't know anything about that and it is strange to notice how many things I did just working hard to create an exsaustive page of an author. Sorry for mistakes, I think i wrote too much and I am lazy to read it again to try to check them :-D Cheers!Rainermaria27 (talk) 22:36, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

PPPS I really cannot understand what is the problem to create more accounts. I did not use them (the ones I created) to do strange things. I just used them to improve the page, but there was not bad intentions in that. I create account to not leave my IP and I can do it everytimes I want to contribute to WP. As I told you in another comment if you notice I did not give any "keep vote" to the Lerro books (it was just to be correct i suppose). So what are you talking about? The problem would be if I used them to give different votes for instance, but I didn't. I think you are concentrating on some a very irrilevant thing. Sorry if say that, but it is true! Me, and I suppose other users, are creating accounts just to improuve the page and not leave IP. They don't think it can be a problem. And indeed, I don't think it is. If I wanted to be cunny I could write something around in other authors pages, do you really think I would be so silly to not think that? My editing was just genuine, and if I created more account was just for the reason I said. It should be really clear and I hope you can understand it... all the bestRainermaria27 (talk) 22:58, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

Two last things:1) You accused me of "sock puppetry", which means that someone suspects me of using multiple Wikipedia accounts for prohibited purposes (this is the wikipedia explanation of "sock puppetry". So, please, could you tell me what "prohibited purposed I used them? I used them just to edit a page, that's all. Is that prohibited? All I did with them was improving pages related to the author, is that prohibited? Let me understand... Rainermaria27 (talk) 23:40, 29 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Below you said that you signed on with multiple accounts to vote "keep". (If that's what you're saying that you did.) That's probably one of the biggest violations of WP:SOCKPUPPET that can be done. I also have to say that if you're trying to get people to work with you, the worst thing you can do is post WP:ADHOMINEM attacks against people where you accuse us of deliberately acting in WP:BADFAITH because you are called out on the possession of multiple accounts, creating a promotional article, and because the sourcing you've used has been almost entirely primary. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  03:32, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Indeed, I said just the contrary. Is my english so bad? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rainermaria27 (talk • contribs) 06:14, 30 May 2015 (UTC)


 * No offense meant, but it really is quite poor. It's definitely something that would work against you on Wikipedia, especially alongside your other actions on here. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  06:19, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

It is good enough to understand your bad behaviour. I think it is much worst of my "actions". You change the reality of things. I perfectly explained everything, and that is the reality. But you keep "accusing" of nosense things. Enjoy!Rainermaria27 (talk) 06:23, 30 May 2015 (UTC)


 * I think that it's safe to say that nothing I say will come across to you. You are repeatedly misinterpreting policy and whenever someone does something that goes against your personal interpretation of policy, you accuse them of bad faith. This isn't just myself, but others as well. I also note that on the talk page for Lerro I asked you to stop making attacks against other people and to stop writing things that are clearly meant to be insults against anyone that disagrees with you. Your response was to accuse me of being another editor that is currently disagreeing with you. (To my knowledge there is no editor by the name of Erodide.) I need to repeat that this is not going to help you any when it comes to editing on Wikipedia. Right now a number of people, myself included, suspect you of abusing multiple accounts in order to promote someone of dubious notability on Wikipedia. The worst thing you can possibly do right now is continue to act the way you have. If multiple editors are having problems with the way you are editing that should be a sign that you are doing something wrong and that maybe, just maybe people are reacting this way because you are going against several policies and it's not because we're trying to be mean or spiteful. The worst thing you can do is to continue acting the way you currently are acting, as this gives off the impression that you are not here to learn policy and edit Wikipedia in a beneficial manner. If anything, it comes across like you're trying to willfully ignore policy and that you will continue to act in the same manner- things that can lead to you eventually getting blocked from editing entirely. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  07:22, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Tokyogirl79 The user name was Erodiade and if you check the Lerro talk page will find it... You say "multiple editors are having problems with the way I edit" I know why: they started to be unfriendly about the author I worked on, before saying his books were "books" after you were saying his books by Zona (and the Mangham book) were self-published (and they are not because Zona publisher use a doble chanel, as I explained previously...) Moreover there were in the past user like Erodiade being very rude without reasons offending the author. I think Wikipedia should change policy: people sometimes use their power to offend and denigrate authors and other users, I have noticed it many times in other pages of other users. I tried to explain kindly my motivations but you seem don't mind, keep saying the contrary and never say you were wrong abut something. The facts are very clear: I explained why I used multiple accounts, and Indeed I did not use them to give "keep votes"... But you want to say the contrary, and you don't accept expanations, and it is not nice at all. I can see clearly the limits of this sistem. I don't mind about pages i created in themselves, I just don't like to notice how users sometimes act without any good reasons. This is a perfect mirror of the time... Rainermaria27 (talk) 09:03, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * PLease, provide WP:diffs of edits made by all those accounts to illustrate their similarity.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  21:23, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Please, add WP:diffs for all accounts mentioned above. I see no diffs for Delicatedelis and Ornellasweetg and some others.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  15:11, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Delicatedelis diff
 * Ornellasweetg has one edit, creating this page for a book by Lerro, which was later edited by Sellysellyheart and other possible SPs. LaMona (talk) 17:52, 29 May 2015 (UTC)


 * - - To compare accounts listed above as "Newer accounts". All of those are single purpose accounts editing Menotti Lerro and his books. Diffs are provided above by .  Vanjagenije   (talk)  19:54, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * These accounts are ✅:
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:30, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:30, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:30, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:30, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:30, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:30, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:30, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:30, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:30, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:30, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:30, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:30, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:30, 29 May 2015 (UTC)


 * You created several user accounts and you used them to comment in the same AFD discussion (here and here, also here and here). That is strongly prohibited per WP:SOCK. If your intention was "not to leave your IP" as you say, you needed just one account, not so many of them. You say that "there was not bad intentions", but your intention to !vote several times in the same AFD discussion is very bad. I think this is a classic case of using multiple accounts to create an illusion of support. All those accounts should be blocked.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:31, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

I did not do it for that reason. I was just receiving notifications at different accounts so I reply with that without thinking about it. I was talking with them without the intention you said. Anyway, I think it is more important to notice how rude some users was talking of the books of the author I was editing as "books" and similar things. I really think there are in some other people bad intention and not good faith in that. You still say i gave several votes, what are you talking about? I think I just left some comments without voting... About the intention to not leave the IP I was taliking of before, when I edited the page. I am starting to think that someone is just enjoying accusing... I tried to explain, if you want to be like that, be like that, it is indeed just your problem Rainermaria27 (talk) 23:57, 29 May 2015 (UTC)

PS My intention was not to leave IP so I created different accounts. It is because I edited the page from different places so I did not have with me the password of previous accounts. Is it clear now? I know that it would be enough one account, but if you are with another PC and you wish to edit, what can you do if not creating a new one? Is it clear now?Rainermaria27 (talk) 00:10, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Later, when I used the new ones on my laptop and passwords were all saved there I relized I had mmore accounts. So when I wanted to edit the page I just used one of them. I think there is nothing bad in that. I understood I gave the impression to support the cause with more accounts but indeed I was replying without thinking about it (and the fact I did not add keep vote show it). I was replying just with them because they were the creators of the pages and I was checking if I got new notifications. If I wanted to support as you said I could create new ones and put in "keep vote"... Rainermaria27 (talk) 00:16, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
 * All blocked and tagged. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 13:33, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

03 June 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

New account shows up to "help" in the AFD for Articles for deletion/Menotti Lerro, the Italian poet and author regarding which the previous case was about, same semicompetent English, and responds to accusation of socking with "sorry, trying to be helpful". Diffs here:   Choor monster (talk) 13:07, 3 June 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

 * Sock blocked and tagged. Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:54, 5 June 2015 (UTC)