Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MahsaMehran/Archive

03 November 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Constant removal of sourced material by multiple editors, all sharing similar editing habits. Page was protected, and as soon as protection lifted, a new editor began editing in exactly the same manner as previous. If edit summaries are used, they are either nonsensical, or unhelpful in explaining their purpose. Example diffs: ,(4RR edit),,(claims "happy to bring this up further", and subsequently invited to discuss changes, but no response),,,.

Checkuser requested - it seems likely that the accounts are the same person attempting to create a consensus by making it appear as though multiple individuals are supporting their opinion. As the user has also created an account called "Marsha Mehran" there is both an obvious COI, and also impersonation of the article subject to consider. The accounts are not being used simultaneously, but one after another, which when viewed as a single editor show a constant pattern of disruption, which is not apparent if all accounts are considered different. Chaheel Riens (talk) 06:55, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I've been watching this one for quite a while. Indeed, all three WP:SPA accounts are devoted to removing a passage from Marsha Mehran that states that she was previously married and that she met her husband when she was working as a waitress.  The various accounts have been invited multiple times, both on the article's talk page and on their own talk pages, to give a rationale for removing the material, but have never responded.  The article was page-protected, and as soon as the protection was lifted, the same editing pattern continued, this time from a new WP:SPA.  A check-user is definitely required in this disruptive case. Qworty (talk) 19:06, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I had only ever looked at the last 50 edits, as is the Wiki default. Based on Berean's comment below, I've just looked at the edits since page creation, and had I done so earlier would indeed have included many more editors in the list.  I had no idea it had been such a long running issue.  Chaheel Riens (talk) 10:20, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
— Berean Hunter   (talk)  04:22, 5 November 2012 (UTC)
 * to determine extent of socking. From looking at the history of the Marsha Mehran article, I believe that the checkuser will find several more than the socks listed in this report.


 * ✅. User:MahsaMehran is likely the sockpuppeteer.

-- Avi (talk) 17:22, 5 November 2012 (UTC) — Berean Hunter   (talk)  15:40, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Moved case to MahsaMehran and closing since all are now blocked.

11 January 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Editing behaviour is strikingly similar to that of previous editors as outlined in this SPI:


 * Removal of references that they do not like
 * Refusal to engage on the talk page
 * inadequate edit summaries

Editor also shares the same partial name - "hough" - as a sock of the previous sockmaster. Chaheel Riens (talk) 18:11, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

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

As per this diff I believe that Upmayo Castle is a sock, based on the fact that their edit summary is very similar to that of Mich.hough in removing the edit, and that this is their very first edit - which they have dived into without engaging on the talk page as has been requested. I don't wish to appear paranoid, but this seems like wp:duck to me. I would request checkuser on this account as well. Chaheel Riens (talk) 11:18, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - Please give specific diffs to justify a CU. Rschen7754 23:12, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I see enough to warrant a check. This is . The best I can tell you is that they are on the same continent. T. Canens (talk) 07:26, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I added two to the list per behavior, ran checks, and although I don't exactly know where to put it on the scales, the evidence and the behavior tell me that the three listed are socks of each other. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  04:25, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Blocking the lot per behavoir showing a relation to the master. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  04:26, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

14 January 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

. Reaper Eternal (talk) 22:15, 14 January 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
Procedural filing, and the article has been protected for six months. Reaper Eternal (talk) 22:15, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * For the record, this was ✅ on my talkpage. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  22:25, 14 January 2013 (UTC)