Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mamadoutadioukone/Archive

14 July 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

All three use similar patterns of editing, consistent with paid creation of content in violation of WP:COI; for example, parent wrote the second version of and attempted defense against deletion of an article on a non-notable martial arts studio that has since been deleted five more times. Parent has defended against deletion an advert-like article by sock1. Parent and sock2 have both been engaged in large changes on the Adobe Creative Cloud page that make the page read more like an ad. The edited version removes substantial sections on controversies with weak explanations. The article for IronFX Global has been edited repeatedly by all three, despite having fewer than 20 unique human editors. Parent created the nominated-for-deletion Sean Fahey while sock1 created a page for his company, VidCruiter.

Checkuser is necessary as the users' multiple accounts appear to be used for professional manipulation of wikipedia, and the parent account's wide array of promotional edits, suggest there may be a larger network involved beyond the parent user. Ctbeiser (talk) 09:46, 14 July 2014 (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

 * is ❌ to any of the others.
 * is ❌ to any of the others but is clearly editing in violation of the Terms of Use - I would recommend a block for undisclosed paid editing.
 * is ❌ to any of the others but may have other issues which I will examine separately from this case. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (Message me) 18:20, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Nothing left to do. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  03:21, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

24 August 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets
 * - added for comparison purposes
 * - added for comparison purposes
 * - added for comparison purposes
 * - added for comparison purposes
 * - added for comparison purposes
 * - added for comparison purposes
 * - added for comparison purposes
 * - added for comparison purposes
 * - added for comparison purposes
 * - added for comparison purposes


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

Melpon created Vegas Weddings which User:Mamadoutadioukone was working on in a sandbox before they were blocked. General editing patterns are also very similar - i.e. creating obvious paid articles on non-notable subjects. As you can see here they also cross over with Kaledit at VidCruiter.

OneoNater displays a similar behaviour in general and specifically to Mamadoutadioukone by creating articles in sandboxes with very similar titles e.g. User:Mamadoutadioukone/sandbox/SMB User:Mamadoutadioukone/sandbox/MTL (any others) and User:OneoNater/sandbox/YA.

Is it possible to see if there are any other accounts linked to these two? SmartSE (talk) 21:55, 24 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I have also added Svenstpaul who is editing in a similar manner and specifically editing Troy Fodemski (including removing the COI template) which User:Greg115 created, who was blocked as a sock of Mamadoutadioukone. SmartSE (talk) 19:32, 25 August 2014 (UTC)


 * And Bouake123 who I found has a Wikipedia Portfolio at dewiki which is almost exactly the same as this one in Mamadoutadioukone's sandbox. SmartSE (talk) 19:46, 25 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Rahfatsalman created Godinterest which is listed in the portfolio linked above. They also created Draft:Kashif Saleem which Reusha 007 then used to create Kashif Saleem (CEO). SmartSE (talk) 20:21, 25 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Skyheight23 has been working on Adobe Creative Cloud (also listed in the portfolio) and using similar sandboxes: User:Skyheight23/sandbox/ACC. SmartSE (talk) 21:55, 27 August 2014 (UTC)


 * I've added Bostonscribe to the list. Bostonscribe has also been working with identical sandboxes, using the same style and conventions, and also has been working on an Adobe article in a sandbox: . There is additional off-wiki evidence, but the style similarities and Adobe relationship should be enough. - Bilby (talk) 13:04, 30 August 2014 (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'm endorsing this partly to possibly clear up some confusion (at least in my mind) as to who is the master of some of these accounts and if there is more than one master despite the apparent overlap in MO. At the same time, among the accounts listed (several other accounts are referred to in the evidence), the oldest is Rahfatsalman, not the master. I'll wait for the CU to see if anything needs to be done about that.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:48, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Also see Sockpuppet investigations/Ireneshih which might be related., if you've got some time and the inclination a behavioural analysis would likely be the best course of action. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 16:53, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the link, . I think I'll take the easy way out and wait for the CU before trying to sort through the behavior in greater depth. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 17:04, 1 September 2014 (UTC)


 * The following accounts are fairly related:


 * The following accounts are / connected to each other, however are ❌ to the previous group:


 * The following accounts are ❌ to each other and the other 2 groups:
 * In this context, it appears we have multiple sock masters with similar behaviour. PhilKnight (talk) 21:21, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * , it's not clear to me whether the first group is related to Sibtain or no one is. I think the answer is no one, but I wanted to be sure before I attempt to sort this mess out. Thanks (I think).--Bbb23 (talk) 21:30, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I don't know. Sibtain and his confirmed socks are all stale. PhilKnight (talk) 21:40, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Following your email, on the basis that Opellured is a confirmed sock of Sibtain, groups 1 and 2 are unrelated to Sibtain. PhilKnight (talk) 22:38, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Based on the clarifications, I am going to assume that none of the listed accounts is a puppet of Sibtain. With that in mind, my hope is I'll work on this tomorrow as (a) I'm operating on very little sleep and (b) I have off-wiki plans.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:59, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I don't know. Sibtain and his confirmed socks are all stale. PhilKnight (talk) 21:40, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Following your email, on the basis that Opellured is a confirmed sock of Sibtain, groups 1 and 2 are unrelated to Sibtain. PhilKnight (talk) 22:38, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Based on the clarifications, I am going to assume that none of the listed accounts is a puppet of Sibtain. With that in mind, my hope is I'll work on this tomorrow as (a) I'm operating on very little sleep and (b) I have off-wiki plans.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:59, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

I moved this open report from Sockpuppet investigations/Sibtain 007 with the intention of blocking those accounts related to this master (Group 1 above). I was unaware of how the Wiki software worked and thought I could keep the history of both masters' pages. I won't go into the gory details, but that wasn't possible. I believe the history here, though, is correct. I am not going to finish clerking this until late next week because I'm leaving on vacation.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:29, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I've tagged the accounts and am closing manually because of the new case below.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:49, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

07 September 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Sock created Curve-controlled modeling (admins only), which is very similar to the version created by the sockmaster and deleted at Articles for deletion/Curve-controlled modeling. MER-C 08:59, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

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

Also by Ranhua1234. Recreated M-GO which was speedy G5 deleted after being created by block evading sock Bostonscribe. duffbeerforme (talk) 09:12, 9 September 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
. I think it's fairly obvious but because there've been only two edits, I'd like confirmation. This account was created after the CU at the Sibtain 007 page.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:53, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The following are ✅ to each other, I'd go for a (technical only) link to Mamadoutadioukone, though behaviour is fairly convincing:
 * is stale but they've also created M-GO (also shows a link to ). I haven't checked but it might also be worth having a look at the page history of Pereira Derwin as there are a number of new accounts there. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:59, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I have blocked these three accounts and deleted and salted everything. MER-C 06:53, 15 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Tagged the three accounts. I'm changing the status to open in case, , or someone else wants to pursue the new accounts at the Derwin article. (Aside: someone ought to at least figure out the guy's name and the article title.)--Bbb23 (talk) 00:31, 16 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Those accounts didn't come up in range which the accounts I confirmed above did, though I didn't check them specifically. I'll have a closer look at them and see whether a check is warranted later today or tomorrow. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:31, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I'd prefer another report be filed for those accounts with evidence of a link. None of them popped up in my sleeper check (though that can't be fully trusted) and I'm not convinced a check is justified as they seem to be arguing against each other at quick look. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:56, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks,, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:13, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Those accounts didn't come up in range which the accounts I confirmed above did, though I didn't check them specifically. I'll have a closer look at them and see whether a check is warranted later today or tomorrow. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:31, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I'd prefer another report be filed for those accounts with evidence of a link. None of them popped up in my sleeper check (though that can't be fully trusted) and I'm not convinced a check is justified as they seem to be arguing against each other at quick look. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:56, 17 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks,, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:13, 17 September 2014 (UTC)

23 September 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

All of these edited Derwin Pereira, which I just G5'ed. A few show the classic editing-to-become-autoconfirmed activity. Very ducky. § FreeRangeFrog croak 06:19, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Regarding Sierraforest:

Today I received a "Request for Comment" which directed me to User_talk:Bostonscribe/sandbox, a subpage of the user page of User:Bostonscribe, who has already been indeffed as a sockpuppet of User:Mamadoutadioukone. The plea for assistance on this subpage is signed by User:Sierraforest. Maproom (talk) 07:06, 27 September 2014 (UTC) Maproom (talk) 07:06, 27 September 2014 (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

 * Following is ✅ to the archive:
 * Following are :
 * The rest I've got no idea about. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:47, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * The rest I've got no idea about. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:47, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * The rest I've got no idea about. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:47, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
 * The rest I've got no idea about. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 04:47, 10 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Blocked and tagged. Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 09:59, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

31 December 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

I have no truly major evidence to show that this is a sock of Mamadoutadioukone except that this is a fairly new account that has signed up and specifically requested that they be allowed to create an article for Derwin Pereira at requests for undeletion. They've created a page for Lazada Indonesia and Sedudo Waterfall, both of which are somewhat promotional in nature. I've warned the user that I would open up an SPI because they're new and one of their actions was to ask for this page to be unprotected. This is too much of a hallmark for Mamadoutadioukone socks to be ignored. If this ends up that it's not a sock then they'll at least be able to point to this SPI if anyone asks. However if this is a sock then a check for sleepers or other accounts may be necessary. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   10:34, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

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

This submission fails to comply with the basic requirements for such reports. Read the advice box above the edit window, at least!

Where's the evidence of socking? You need to supply at least some evidence of why you suspect sock puppetry. The least you need is diffs of edits that suggest the accounts are connected. Vaguely worded submissions, such as this one, will not be investigated. You need to actually show why your suspicion that the accounts are connected is reasonable. Grewia (talk) 22:32, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
 * The reason I'm reporting them is that they signed up recently, have made very promotional edits, and have specifically asked for access to the page for Derwin Pereira, a page that was pretty much solely edited by sockpuppets of Mamadoutadioukone. It's just more than a little fishy that someone has signed up and asked to edit this page and that they've made several promotional entries. The majority of pages that were created by these socks have been deleted, but they all shared a similar pattern in that they all made very promotional entries for various entities. It's very similar to the previous edit patterns of other Mamadoutadioukone socks, enough to where it probably should be investigated since the guy is a pretty prolific socker. The person has said that they understand the reason for the investigation and it'd just be nice to know that this is just a new editor and not the first in a new wave of sockpuppets. Mamadoutadioukone isn't exactly as prolific as Morning277 when it comes to creating socks, but they're prolific enough to where being cautious is a good idea. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   07:04, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I mean, we could wait and see if they do end up making more similar edits, but if they do happen to be a sock then that would mean that it'd end with a larger cleanup and potentially a lot more work in the long run. If they aren't then they'll be free and clear from suspicion in the future as far as sockpuppetry goes. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   07:06, 1 January 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The technical evidence from the previous accounts is now, so checkuser is of no help. Personally, I don't feel comfortable with issuing a block given what you have provided. It's just not convincing enough to me. However, Tokyogirl79, if you feel that you could block the account and defend your rationale, you're welcome to do so. Mike V • Talk 02:03, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

15 December 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

It would appear that Donaldeval created a sockpuppet account under the name of Clarevel1986 for the purpose of getting Draft:Skipp Williamson approved under the Afc process. The Clarevel1986 account was created on 15 December 2015 and the only edits to this account were for the Draft:Skipp Williamson article, which was declined twice after Donaldeval submitted it, the last being on 14 December 2015. Furthermore, most of the edits by Donaldeval were on the Draft:Skipp Williamson article, with the last edit being a discussion to User talk:FoCuSandLeArN on 14 December 2015 attempting to argue with that person for declining the submission. Hermera34 (talk) 19:55, 15 December 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

 * - Please, compare those two.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  22:28, 15 December 2015 (UTC)


 * ✅ to the above, but please check behavior, I feel like i'm missing something here...:


 * Please note some the editors I ask for you to check behavior on are already blocked per Sockpuppet investigations/Mamadoutadioukone.
 * has indications of being related, and I wouldn't put it past them to evade CU, so use behavioral evidence here. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 09:48, 16 December 2015 (UTC)
 * The behavior of both groups is similar, they created promotional (paid) articles either in their userspace or in the draft namespace. What evidence we have to connect DanTree and Patrickday357 to Mamadoutadioukone?  Vanjagenije   (talk)  11:01, 21 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I meant to get to this tonight, but I'll have to check my notes in the morning. I'll see what I have and get back asap. - Bilby (talk) 13:38, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Patrickday357 & DanTree were connected through paid editing jobs taken by Mamadoutadioukone - in particular, HomeStars and Yoga Ventures, which were confirmed to be jobs for which the editor was hired to complete. There was also other evidence, mostly in following the same patterns generally used by Mamadoutadioukone when using socks for paid jobs. Recently I noticed that the editor had become more active in the freelance jobs market again, so I'm not surprised to see new socks turning up. - Bilby (talk) 13:44, 23 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks, . I merged Sockpuppet investigations/Donaldeval here. Blocking and tagging all as socks of Mamadoutadioukone and closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  16:10, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

05 January 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Copy-and-paste recreation of the full text of the deleted page Derwin Pereira at User:Pereirawiki/sandbox. Oddly, they included the speedy deletion notices in the recreated page too. BoxOfChickens (talk · contribs · CSD/ProD log) 17:50, 5 January 2016 (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

 * - Obvious sock blocked, but endorsing a CU check for sleepers.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  19:26, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
 * -Philippe (talk) 00:38, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Clerk filing for information. Verbatim recreation of previously deleted article Skipp Williamson. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:43, 18 March 2017 (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

 * , page deleted. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:46, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Noting that the master account is likely to be stale, recently Mario.calona appeared to be hired to create the Brosnan C. Hoban article. That was deleted under CSD G5 and the account blocked as as a Mamadoutadioukone sock. Subsequently, the article was recreated two days later by Variation 25.2 at the alternative location of Brosnan Hoban. Having it appear so quickly after it was deleted, and given that this was originally a paid job, it seem likely that there is a connection between the two editors. - Bilby (talk) 03:04, 10 April 2017 (UTC) Bilby (talk) 03:04, 10 April 2017 (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

 * The following accounts are ✅ to each other and to :
 * Blocked without tags.
 * Mario.calona is ❌ to the above accounts.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:02, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Tagging and closing/  Vanjagenije  (talk)  11:53, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Blocked without tags.
 * Mario.calona is ❌ to the above accounts.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:02, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Tagging and closing/  Vanjagenije  (talk)  11:53, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Mario.calona is ❌ to the above accounts.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:02, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Tagging and closing/  Vanjagenije  (talk)  11:53, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Recreation of 's Anjhula Mya Singh Bais as Anjhula Mya Singh. Slightly different but overall same tone, ref(s), including photos uploaded by. CHRISSY MAD ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  15:39, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * The article Anjhula Mya Singh Bais has been recreated by user:Canadianeditorboy. - Mar11 (talk) 05:40, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Blocked both and . Marking as closed. Mkdw  talk 05:46, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

I'm extremely suspicious of a new user who creates a large, well-formed (except for the vanity bolding) new article on a slight variation of an article previously deleted as the work of a sockpuppet. New user's efforts at Jamal Sanad Al Suwaidi and Draft:Jamal Sanad Al Suwaidi. Previously created at Jamal Sanad Al-Suwaidi and Draft:Jamal Sanad Al-Suwaidi. Quack! Cabayi (talk) 19:15, 17 March 2018 (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

 * Is there a particular reason you didn't block the author of Jamal Sanad Al Suwaidi, after deleting the page per WP:G5? Sir Sputnik (talk) 15:17, 18 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Sir Sputnik, possibly because of the wording of the db-banned tag. I think I assume that the sock is already blocked. This one now blocked and I will be more careful in future. &mdash; RHaworth (talk · contribs) 22:35, 21 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Closing. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:44, 21 March 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Block evasion: re-created identical Abdelaziz Bougja at User:Kurapikaandgon/sandbox. TMGtalk 19:51, 2 July 2018 (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 don't understand the connection here. The original (now deleted) version of Abdelaziz Bougja article was uploaded by  whow is NOT blocked as a sockpuppet. Yet,  deleted that version as G5 . Why?  Vanjagenije   (talk)  23:16, 9 July 2018 (UTC)


 * See Sockpuppet_investigations/Gatongakinsella/Archive and . There was incontrovertible off-wiki evidence that that group of socks belonged to this sockfarm as the username on upwork matched this sockmaster, but for a reason I can't recall (and I can't find any diffs) it wasn't merged. I disregarded the CU findings and G5d per DUCK. SmartSE (talk) 12:20, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * Why didn't you block the socks?  Vanjagenije  (talk)  14:48, 10 July 2018 (UTC)

— Berean Hunter   (talk)  23:28, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I can't remember to be honest. I think I must have got distracted as there is a lot of clean up left from those socks too. SmartSE (talk) 21:37, 10 July 2018 (UTC)
 * I believe that they are UPE and have blocked. I found them as one of the few unblocked accounts in a proxy range of UPEs. I don't know if they are this master, however.


 * Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  15:12, 13 July 2018 (UTC)