Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Migosyrn/Archive

02 August 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

I believe we are dealing with ducks. Personally requested an admin to deal with repeated vandalism from M3 two days ago at O.T._Genasis. M5 and 6 started attacking Smen today with similar edits between both users. Links: 1, 2. Attempted to create M7, 8, 9 with blocking admin intercepting. User:Migosyrneternal and User:Migosyrnimmortal tried to vandalise User_talk:zzuuzz, the blocking admin. Also check between 13:54, 2 August and 7:11, 3 August for block log of blocking admin of M5 and above. Quack quack. Requesting checkuser as account creation history shows continuous disruption from the sockmaster. Sockmaster has also vowed to carry on disruption:. Optakeover (Talk)  17:40, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Added User:Migosyrnomnipresent. Vandalised my talk page. Adding User:Migosyrnsupremeallah. Sockmaster still active as of this account creation. Optakeover (Talk)  07:33, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

78.179.99.35 suspected due to reverting my revert of M3 at 3. 2602:306:BD41:E1A0:29FF:EAF9:1CC7:ED22 suspected due to reverting the revert of Mtrill at 4. Optakeover (Talk)  16:49, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

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

I would add, which was around the same time, but possibly related elsewhere. Request a checkuser to see if a range can be taken out. -- zzuuzz (talk) 17:45, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Adding, which has been vandalising this SPI, now semi'd in anticipation of more migosyrns. Bishonen &#124; talk 09:49, 3 August 2015 (UTC).
 * I have asked to create an abuse filter that blocks an account from being created if it contains "Migosyrn" in it. Thank you, --ceradon ( talk  •  edits ) 10:16, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Sockmaster has resumed disruption on new prefix: Migosyr*. Check my latest name addition. Optakeover  (Talk)  15:29, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I've adjusted filter 102 to cover this -- I don't think we need a new filter. NawlinWiki (talk) 15:35, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, he is now bypassing the filter today with such names as and . Zzyzx11 (talk) 07:30, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I inadvertently created a 2nd SPI here: Sockpuppet investigations/Mig0syrnl3910n. Four more accounts to add to the list. Wildthing61476 (talk) 13:45, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I moved them here.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  16:56, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - to look for possible sleepers, and to block underlying IP.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  15:13, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * CU makes all the named accounts (except, who's on a different continent and appears ❌) but isn't a great deal of use for sleeper hunting; he's clearly switching his router to get a new IP for each sock. The range is also too great for a rangeblock; this is going to have to be a flag, tag and bag deal for each one. Yunshui 雲 水  12:24, 4 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Closing the case. Open new one if more socks appear.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  16:58, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

06 September 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

I suggest that User:‎Themigcannotbestopped is a sock of User:Traphouseiii. The latter was indefinitely blocked at 14:45; User:mig's account was created at ‎15:18. They have both focused on vandalising User:Noq's talk and user pages, and demonstrate the same attitude and use of language.

For example, from User:Traphouseiii: "The truth about noq - I like nob" here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Noq&diff=prev&oldid=679745637 And "I am a nobhead" here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Noq&diff=679744879&oldid=630947625

And then from User:‎Themigcannotbestopped: "I have been marked by the Mig clan for being a sad stalker with no life" https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Noq&diff=679750193&oldid=679746117

Although both accounts have now been indefinitely blocked, I have requested a technical investigation as I believe it is not at all unlikely that there are other socks or a puppeteer to be found. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi  16:44, 6 September 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

 * The master account is User:Migosyrn-- please merge with that SPI. Hopefully a range block or proxy block could do some good here. NawlinWiki (talk) 23:58, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Hahaha, seems that you're all noticing how we're back in full effect! Also note User:Eastatlantasanta, User:Donyute111, User:Radricdavisgucci and the rest of our fallen comrades will not be forgotten as they'll just get other accounts! You cannot hope to destroy the clan with your corrupt ways. Signed- Mig (because you gnats censored our name but never our actions!) "Consider yourself censored, creep!" Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi  09:45, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅ sockpuppetry; matched to the already-voa-blocked users User:WinningClann, User:Radricdavisgucci, User:Streetsacrifice, User:Migclannnbringthepain and User:RickyRozayCl4n. Also picked up User:Yaboy2chainz in the process, no other sleepers found. Whilst there's no direct link to Migosyrn, I am convinced this group is the same and am tagging them accordingly; could the closing clerk please move this report to the main casepage? Yunshui 雲 水 13:25, 7 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Why not indeffing Yaboy2chainz?  Vanjagenije  (talk)  14:02, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Found another one... well found is a slight exageration; he advertised himself on my TP. Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi  14:04, 7 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Admin action needed - I need an admin to history-merge this page into Sockpuppet investigations/Migosyrn.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  14:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅ Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:00, 13 September 2015 (UTC)

18 September 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

see contributions Stephenb (Talk) 13:54, 18 September 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

 * Already blocked. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  22:53, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

18 September 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

another Stephenb (Talk) 14:41, 18 September 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

 * Already blocked. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  22:53, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

18 September 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Change History Stephenb (Talk) 13:34, 18 September 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

 * All blocked. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  22:53, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

09 September 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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


 * Obvious vandal, autoblock is teh fail. -- slakr \ talk / 23:42, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Can we get a case for it? It's not just a vandal, he has a series of accounts I think should be on record. Nonetheless webhost . -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:30, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Copied over. I mainly put it in Quick ideally to expedite it (since apparently admins can't self-endorse obvious things like this and the attack was ongoing).  slakr  \ talk / 05:21, 9 September 2015 (UTC)

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

seems to be another sockpuppet of this person. KSF T C 02:01, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
 * A few more from today


 * All blocked but listed here for completeness. Nthep (talk) 14:37, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
 * All blocked but listed here for completeness. Nthep (talk) 14:37, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
 * All blocked but listed here for completeness. Nthep (talk) 14:37, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
 * All blocked but listed here for completeness. Nthep (talk) 14:37, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
 * All blocked but listed here for completeness. Nthep (talk) 14:37, 16 September 2015 (UTC)
 * All blocked but listed here for completeness. Nthep (talk) 14:37, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Note &mdash; copied from quick checkuser request after completion per request / for recordkeeping. -- slakr \ talk / 05:21, 9 September 2015 (UTC)
 * for results. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 05:33, 12 September 2015 (UTC)
 * What are we waiting here to happen?  Vanjagenije  (talk)  09:29, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Any update? NativeForeigner Talk 09:42, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I apologize, I simply forgot about this case. From what I can tell right now (as I can't find my original notes), ✅:
 * It's likely every acocunt originally listed was related to a point of being confirmed, otherwise I would have said something, but of course I can't verify that. Blocks to stop further issues were put in place at the time. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 02:37, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * It's likely every acocunt originally listed was related to a point of being confirmed, otherwise I would have said something, but of course I can't verify that. Blocks to stop further issues were put in place at the time. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 02:37, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * It's likely every acocunt originally listed was related to a point of being confirmed, otherwise I would have said something, but of course I can't verify that. Blocks to stop further issues were put in place at the time. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 02:37, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * It's likely every acocunt originally listed was related to a point of being confirmed, otherwise I would have said something, but of course I can't verify that. Blocks to stop further issues were put in place at the time. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 02:37, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * It's likely every acocunt originally listed was related to a point of being confirmed, otherwise I would have said something, but of course I can't verify that. Blocks to stop further issues were put in place at the time. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 02:37, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * It's likely every acocunt originally listed was related to a point of being confirmed, otherwise I would have said something, but of course I can't verify that. Blocks to stop further issues were put in place at the time. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 02:37, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * It's likely every acocunt originally listed was related to a point of being confirmed, otherwise I would have said something, but of course I can't verify that. Blocks to stop further issues were put in place at the time. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 02:37, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * It's likely every acocunt originally listed was related to a point of being confirmed, otherwise I would have said something, but of course I can't verify that. Blocks to stop further issues were put in place at the time. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 02:37, 8 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Thein.vinciblelegend was on another range with a few other socks, but to make heads or tails of that right now, would not only be useless, but hard to do. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 02:41, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Closing the case.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  10:15, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

15 January 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

WP:DUCK edit history speaks for itself Nthep (talk) 16:18, 15 January 2016 (UTC) Probably not the last addition to this page today. Nthep (talk) 16:23, 15 January 2016 (UTC) Sadly I was right. Nthep (talk) 16:27, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
 * All blocked already. Nthep (talk) 16:39, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * May wish to include User:U-Tan Kuuuran, trolling started (for me anyway) yesterday after rolling that account back various times for vandalism, see also my User Talkpage History starting January 15th 15:50 . The contribs of this one mirror those of the other three trolling my user page and which are mentioned already above: Meffodmayne, contribs , Gfkghostdeini , and Goldenarmsthepoweru . The edits from this account quite well resemble those of these three others, for example on my Usertalkpage. Horseless Headman (talk) 16:46, 16 January 2016 (UTC).
 * And User:Returntothe36 quaks with contribs today . Same for User:Oldirtyasonunique with contribs . All 3 accounts blocked. Horseless Headman (talk) 17:11, 16 January 2016 (UTC).
 * And User:Rzarectorgravediggaz with . Blocked. Horseless Headman (talk) 17:14, 16 January 2016 (UTC).
 * January 10th quacking: User:Shaolinsfinest contribs, User:Dirtmcgirtee1 contribs (dubbed as SP of User:Methicalman), and User:Bodoodoodoo contribs , and likely User:Thefiremenbet contribs  (where the "wu" is coming for someone", again, as in . All blocked. And User:Nazteenaz contribs  with one edit especially relating to Migosyrn . Horseless Headman (talk) 17:39, 16 January 2016 (UTC). And User:Utankuran. Horseless Headman (talk) 15:21, 17 January 2016 (UTC).


 * Each "new" Username can technically have been created upon blocking the "old" one. Perhaps not strict SPs (active alongside), but definitely repeated (endless?) account creations to continue the same disruptive behaviour. There may still be additional Usernames around.
 * Personal harassment / threats, of similar wordings / nature, often by more than one of these accounts on User talkpages, e.g. mine (as said above) or here for 16 Jan.
 * If I saw this correctly, not a single edit that has not been rolled back. All accounts blocked, either for vandalism and/or recognised SP by blocking admin. Accounts typically have a high editing frequency, and after an edit typically directly jumping to another page (see contribs). Various pages keep on coming back between Usernames, as can be seen in the user compare thingy. Horseless Headman (talk) 15:21, 17 January 2016 (UTC).

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Thank you for your work, Horseless Headman, but as one of the targets (there's a new sock on my page right now), I say we shouldn't dignify the troll with all this bureaucracy. It's food for them. Just revert, block, ignore per WP:DENY. It's not as if a checkuser is needed. Bishonen &#124; talk 12:40, 18 January 2016 (UTC).
 * - Please, look for sleepers and, if possible, block his IP range.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  13:27, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Didn't find any sleepers. Ranges that were in use have already been handled. Elockid  Message me 15:47, 18 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Closing the case.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  22:48, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

25 May 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Obvious sock, and blocked. Might a sleeper check be warranted, since it's been some months? GABgab 20:33, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Similar edits to other socks e.g. addition of User BNP to user pages, various threats on user talk pages. All blocked already. Nthep (talk) 21:45, 25 May 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

 * No sleepers were found last time. I don't think it's needed. Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  08:13, 26 May 2016 (UTC)