Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MrsSnoozyTurtle/Archive

22 March 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

The duck test Ndazza and 1292simon are the same. Ndazza a new user with only one focus, to agree with 1292simon 10:06, 21 March 2012 Ndazza‎ vs 08:41, 12 March 2012 1292simon 10:07, 21 March 2012 Ndazza‎ vs 08:33, 12 March 2012‎ 1292simon 10:11, 21 March 2012‎ Ndazza vs 08:25, 12 March 2012‎ 1292simon 10:14, 21 March 2012‎ Ndazza vs 08:22, 12 March 2012‎ 1292simon 10:16, 21 March 2012‎ Ndazza vs 00:21, 4 March 2012‎ 1292simon 10:21, 21 March 2012‎ Ndazza vs 07:59, 12 March 2012‎ 1292simon

1292simon is also a sock puppet of another user. This user is apparently new to Wikipedia, yet right from the beginning this user was aware of obscure internal wikipedia policies the first day of editing. 1292simon has only a few edits in other subjects, each revolving around Cars, Technology & Australia. So I looked for similarities of edits with Greglocock, Binksternet & Mattnad. My first guess was that it would be Binksternet, since on the talk pages the edits are almost always complementary of each other. But I noticed no other similar edits between the two. I then checked the other two users. Both had edits that were computer related User:Mattnad/htpc draft. Both had edits that were car related Mattnad's BMW. But Greglocock also seamed to have something the others didnt. British Spelling.
 * "Being an american company the spelling should be in the US standard." -- Phoenix (talk) 05:55, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry about the Brit spelling! 1292simon (talk) 07:55, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

And coming from Australia
 * "in Australia (where I live) only about 20% of the roads are paved."

Checking the user more deeply I have noticed many edits not only about cars but specifically around BMW's BMW 8 Series (E31) Talk:Fuel economy in automobiles File:Top gear australia tv ratings.png User_talk:Greglocock Talk:Twin-screw_type_supercharger Talk:Four-stroke engine Australian skaand much, much more. I believe that this is enough to warrant a check user. -- Phoenix (talk) 20:50, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Australia 20:54, 28 October 2011 1292simon vs 11:21, 4 February 2007 Greglocock BMW 23:44, 20 January 2012 1292simon vs 08:15, 14 September 2006 Greglocock Motronic ‎13:28, 21 January 2012 1292simon vs 00:53, 23 January 2012 Greglocock Including Greglocock's edits on another site dealing with Motronic Is there a utility to search a users edit history for common article subjects? Google isn't the best at this. -- Phoenix (talk) 21:01, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

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

This SPI should not be about Greglocock—not at all. That part appears to me to be a fishing expedition mounted by Phoenix79. Binksternet (talk) 18:09, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Greglocock is arrogant, obnoxious, and frequently in violation of No personal attacks, but sockpuppetry just doesn't fit his MO. In the absence of concrete proof, I'd reject accusations of socking on his part as not in character. Ebikeguy (talk) 18:54, 26 March 2012 (UTC)


 * You forgot to include "and usually right", but thanks for the support. Anyway, go your hardest UKPhoenix, you are wasting everybody's time as usual. A long time ago before I had an account, I did make a few edits under an IP, before I had an account, and I do post from several ISPs ALL over the world. So it must be a conspiracy. Absolutely pathetic.Greglocock (talk) 22:37, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I also forgot "humble." ;)  Bottom line is that Greglocock brings a wealth of knowledge to Wikipedia, even if he does not always present it in the most diplomatic ways.  However, he tends toward being overly honest and "in your face," not devious and backstabbing.  He has no reason to create socks, that I can think of.  Ebikeguy (talk) 00:01, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Not Fishing in the lest, I am being very genuine and quite serious. As to the motivations I cannot speak to this, as I am quite perplexed also. I wouldn't have thought that any of the editors would do that. But both editors have a fascination with cars, technology & australia. Since 1292simon is almost only editing in one subject those are the only other edits done. There is 0% chance that 1292simon is a new user with his editing habits and knowledge of wikipedia. That is why I researched more thoroughly the situation and brought it to the powers that be. -- Phoenix (talk) 07:35, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Look, pulling wings off flies never interested me, and to be honest treading on worms writhing on the ground doesn't. As I have said elsewhere you are capable of good editing, apparently, but when it comes to Bose you seem to lose all reason. Bose doesn't even really interest me, as I have already written in that article's talk, if someone buys an overpriced piece of consumer hardware sold by a mob with a rather strange view on things, nobody is really hurt, it really doesn't fucking matter. But, at the same time, there is no real reason I can see to promote that mob, or reward their behaviour, on wiki. On a personal basis, yes I am annoyed, one of my friends was talked into buying a cheap sounding and nasty looking hifi system from Bose. As to socks, presumably you are going to present some solid evidence at some point. I specifically deny that I am a sock of either of those two editors, and confirm that they are not socks of mine. Presumably at some point a grownup will check this out, and then you will be asked to justify your pathetic actions. Greglocock (talk) 08:14, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I have justified it and I have stated my reasons. I do hope you are indeed telling the truth. I still cannot see any reason that this user is a new one to wikipedia since he does not edit like one. -- Phoenix (talk) 08:24, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Even though it's closed, I just wanna say that I have only ever used one account for wikipedia (1292nomis). Phoenix, thanks for the compliment on my editing habits and knowledge of wikipedia!! (gotta find a silver lining to this somehow) 1292simon (talk) 00:25, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Ndazza is almost certainly 1292simon's sock, but do you have diffs regarding Greglocock? WilliamH (talk) 14:53, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

1292simon and Ndazza are at best; there is very little difference between the two technical-wise. I have not checked Greglocock, but I do not think he is related to either of them and will not bother to. --MuZemike 23:24, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm going to be very nice today, and let the master off with a warning and not issue an autoblock on the sock. There is no evidence that Greglocock is involved. Would the archiving clerk please move this to 1292simon before archival please. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  20:49, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Simon added a picture of his BMW to the BMW 3 Series article in November 2018 - From then to now Simon as well as IPs and newly created accounts have all been adding the picture back and all have been reverted,

10FA18794 signs up today and immediately replaced the infobox photo,

TdU4kluT59Rju replaced the image back in February of this year,

If they're not him then their certainly meatpuppets as it's very odd to create an account and immediately revert especially on a non-controversial article such as this one, Anyway thanks, – Davey 2010 Talk 01:44, 8 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Without spilling the beans here there's one thing here that's glaringly obvious and would certainly make it obvious it's them (I'd be happy to email or confirm on here if needed but like I said don't wanna put my foot in it), Thanks, – Davey 2010 Talk 01:49, 8 March 2019 (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
If the "one thing" is "glaringly obvious", why can't you disclose it publicly? Still, if you think noting it here may run afoul of policy, please e-mail me the information. I'll wait until I hear from you before posting my findings (my check is complete). Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:17, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Davey's e-mail made a minor point I had already noticed and didn't change anything. The three accounts are ❌. The two suspected puppets might be meat.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:53, 8 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Per checkuser results, I'm closing with no action. Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:39, 13 March 2019 (UTC)