Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mega Z090/Archive

19 December 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

In this diff, Mega Z090 asked another editor to nominate a page for deletion, stating that he couldn't do it himself because he was concerned about being called a sockpuppet (I presume of either Justa Punk and/or Curse of Fenric, two other Australian professional wrestling editors who have been blocked for edit warring and sockpuppetry). When the nomination didn't happen, the IP added a notability tag to the article.

Similar edit summaries, including the word "rubbish".

Both carrying on an edit war on Professional wrestling, making identical edits -- Mega Z090:, ; IP: , , ,.

Mega Z090 voted to keep Preston City Wrestling. After the AfD was closed as keep, the IP removed a notability tag from the article, citing the AfD result.

Mega Z090 added a bunch of "citation needed" tags on an article after a reference link stopped working. The IP then came along and added a notability tag to the article.

Ultimately, every single article edited by these IPs has also been edited by Mega Z090 either shortly before or shortly after, with the same focus in the edits. Add all of these similarities to the "I need this done but can't do it under my account name because it would raise red flags"-style request to User:Safiel, and there's a strong case for this editor using an IP to avoid scrutiny and to add another voice to his side of disputes. A checkuser report to verify this and seek out other possible accounts would be helpful, especially given the history of sockpuppetry in Australian professional wrestling. GaryColemanFan (talk) 07:15, 19 December 2015 (UTC)

Adding to my earlier evidence, the Professional wrestling article was semi-protected due to an AN3 report about the 101 IP (this is where that conversation is at currently). After the article was semi-protected and the IP could no longer edit, Mega Z090 returned to continue the edit war:,. GaryColemanFan (talk) 18:51, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

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


 * Additional Sockpuppet of user Mega Z090

Similar activities by Mega Z090, 101.189.22.150, 101.182.142.136 on the Professional wrestling and its talk page to above listed actions and characteristics, including frequent use of the word "rubbish" and its preference to remain an IP rather than get an account. As GaryColemanFan stated, the article was put on semi-protection after the two IPs began edit warring with two other users and I, at which time Mega Z090 continued the edit war in very similar manner. On the Professional wrestling talk page, 101.189.22.150 admitted he was the same user as 101.182.142.136, but changed due to a modem reboot. World Heavyweight Wrestling Champion (talk) 00:40, 22 December 2015 (UTC)


 * I request a check user to confirm that I have never used those IP's. That should be an end to the matter. Mega Z090 (talk) 01:53, 22 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Additional Sockpuppet of user Mega Z090

After another modem reboot, IP is now editing as 101.182.144.48. The IP is now tagging several articles with "notability" tags that were targeted by IPs 203.17.215.26 and 203.17.215.22 (Amy Action and Steve Rackman, as well as blanking sections on Hartley Jackson, both of which were blocked for one year as sockpuppets of banned user User:Justa Punk, as well as posting a comment at Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy stating that it should be easier for an IP to initiation deletion discussions for these articles as well as the Explosive Pro Wrestling article mentioned at the beginning of this SPI and the Melbourne City Wrestling article that Mega Z090 removed content from when the reference link went dead . GaryColemanFan (talk) 17:36, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Before I even saw this on my watchlist I saw what happened to Amy Action, and so reverted as she is notable without a doubt. Again, a check user is requested to confirm that I have never edited under that IP. I'll look at the others, except for Melbourne City Wrestling where a clearly unsourced claim was made and I removed it as I have from many other articles in my editing history. I have no idea what you're talking about the Deletion policy talk page, and if you are objecting to that right being given I agree with you. Mega Z090 (talk) 22:02, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I've now also reverted the tag on Steve Rackman for the same reason and added it to my watchlist. The others appear to be correct tags although EPW and MCW are borderline. The deletions on Hartley Jackson were unsourced so no issue there either. No proof of connection between this IP and me. Mega Z090 (talk) 22:16, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Additional - this IP has now left a message on my talk page telling me to "Rack off". If he reverts again on both Amy and Steve he'll be in violation of WP:3RR and I told him that. If he does I'll need someone else to revert because I'll violate 3RR if I do. Mega Z090 (talk) 05:52, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Love to help, but when I try to I get blanked and ignored. Sorry.  Crash Under  ride  06:29, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
 * That's not trying. Editing a page that I banned you from (it's my talk page so I have that right) does nothing. Target the IP, and revert his edits on Amy Action and Steve Rackman as I can't because of 3RR. Mega Z090 (talk) 09:09, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
 * You can't ban people from your talk page. Also, don't tell me what to do. I was providing evidence, you ignored it. Your problem.  Crash Under  ride  16:59, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes I can ban people from my talk page. And I was telling you how you can help. If you don't want to follow that it's your choice. If you want to leave something on my talk page, apologise for this. Mega Z090 (talk) 03:37, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

This IP should be removed from the list as it should be clear now that it's not me or has anything to do with me. It's been banned for a week, and yet I'm still posting. What does that tell you? Mega Z090 (talk) 03:37, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
 * No need to remove. Anyhow, I can honestly say that I've seen stranger things on Wikipedia than a user staging an edit war with himself. The checkuser report will sort things out. GaryColemanFan (talk) 05:57, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes it will and I'm perturbed it's taking so long. I know it's not me and a check user will confirm it. Mega Z090 (talk) 06:19, 29 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Additional Sockpuppet of user Mega Z090

Similar edits to Mega, fewer in number however. User commented on a discussion Mega and I were part of, almost a month after the discussion had ended.  Crash Under  ride  21:07, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Bad faith report and should be ignored. User offered a resolution to a matter which I never thought of. Additional edit irrelevant as I had already disengaged. Likely this addition is in petty response to me banning Crash from my talk page. Mega Z090 (talk) 22:05, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Actually is a good faith report. User's have similar edits and behavior on the same topic. Therefore, a worthwhile look is needed. It's also funny you chose me as a "bad faith report" when everyone else here has been against your behavior.  Crash Under  ride  22:41, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't believe you. I wasn't talking about other's beliefs. I was talking about your conduct. You're just riding coat tails here. Mega Z090 (talk) 02:29, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, a) I don't give two turds if you believe me or not and b) I'm not riding any coat tails. I saw a similarity, I reported it. It's that simple. You can be offended all you want, but that's what happened.  Crash Under  ride  02:48, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Curse of Fenric once admitted to editing while logged out, the IP is traced near Melbourne, Australia, much like the IPs here, and shares the same ISP. Fenric made a loud fuss after being blocked and made a blog where he aired his grievances about all he had been through here, he made it clear he wasn't going to go quietly.LM2000 (talk) 23:32, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Evidence by LM2000
 * And this is relevant how? Mega Z090 (talk) 02:29, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
 * The IPs are connected to each other and you are suspected of being connected to them. If both you and Fenric are both connected to the same IPs...LM2000 (talk) 03:10, 28 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Good grief you are drawing the longest bow in the history of the universe. I call BS on it. Mega Z090 (talk) 05:45, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I declined the CU request as we rarely connect a named account with an IP. As for the last-minute addition of a named account, I see no evidence supporting the connection. The bickering isn't helping anyone, certainly not the people will evaluate this report.--Bbb23 (talk) 04:50, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I think connecting IP's to accounts are only an issue if there's a match. If there's not (as I know there isn't) then it's perfectly okay to say "No connection". I don't feel vindicated at this point, so I ask that you re-consider that aspect. Mega Z090 (talk) 05:15, 31 December 2015 (UTC)
 * On second thoughts - stuff it. I'm done here. Too tiring. Got better things to do. Mega Z090 (talk) 05:46, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Still waiting... It's obviously important to follow through with this to issue any appropriate blocks. Claiming a retirement doesn't mean that a user can't return, so this should still be completed as usual. GaryColemanFan (talk) 22:57, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
 * ...and waiting. GaryColemanFan (talk) 00:33, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
 * ...and waiting. GaryColemanFan (talk) 07:00, 19 February 2016 (UTC)


 * No edits from the account of either IP in 2016. Whatever issue there were months ago are no longer relevant and taking any action now wouldn't be preventative, it'd be punitive, which runs contrary to blocking policy. If there is ever a return of the user and a reason to believe there are violations of of sockpuppetry policy, a new SPI can always be filed. ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  03:56, 27 March 2016 (UTC)