Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ma.darbandi/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Adding exactly the same promotional content to Yös exam. Account is about a month old, so can CU flush out any more sleepers? Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 17:48, 21 May 2020 (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

 * - Sleeper account, endorsing check to check for other sleepers. The suspected sock is a duck based on edits (see Pouriya22 and Ma.darbandi). Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 11:26, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
 *  Maxim (talk)  19:47, 22 May 2020 (UTC)


 * . . Close as CU check found no sleepers. Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 20:01, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Seems to add the same content as Ma.darbandi and Pouriya22 BSMIsEditing (talk) 12:16, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Identical edits: Ma.darbandi, Pouriya22, 5.114.19.164, 5.114.104.21, 5.114.21.77, 5.78.71.9. Plus a number of other IPs in the history of Yös exam.
 * Looking at all the IPs in the article history, the range is too big for a rangeblock (>/10). Given it’s such focused vandalism, could ’s semi-protection be extended indef?
 * Hope that helps. --Jack Frost (talk) 09:14, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Hope that helps. --Jack Frost (talk) 09:14, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
-- RoySmith (talk) 22:51, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
 * - .&#32;In order to facilitate and expedite your request, please provide diffs to support your case. Please give two or more diffs meeting the following format:
 * 1) At least one diff is from the sockmaster (or an account already blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet of the sockmaster), showing the behaviour characteristic of the sockmaster.
 * 2) At least one diff per suspected sockpuppet, showing the suspected sockpuppet emulating the behaviour of the sockmaster given in the first diff.
 * 3) In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided. Around one sentence is enough for this.
 * thanks for the diffs. That made it really easy to see what was happening.  As you noted, a range block is probably not feasible here.  I see the existing semi-protection has a while left to run.  I'm going to let that go for now, but if the problem starts up again when it expires, please ping me and I'll do something longer term.  Closing with no further action. -- RoySmith (talk) 12:52, 7 July 2020 (UTC)