Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nanobear/Archive

03 December 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Nanobear also edited as User:Offliner.

User CASTMoscow was recently blocked for promoting spam (“spamusernameblock”).

I believe this is promotional/COI editing using multiple accounts, so it would be important to know if they belong to the same person or organization.

Among other things, Nanobear/Offliner created three pages on the following closely related and barely notable subjects:
 * Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies This page was extensively edited also by LarryHolds and CASTmoscow, but almost no one else
 * Ruslan Pukhov, a director of this Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies. This page was extensively edited also by CASTMoscow, but almost no one else
 * Moscow Defense Brief (edit history), a magazine published by Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies

These people and organizations are located in Russia and almost unknown. There are no even corresponding pages in Russian Wikipedia. Given that, the chances that accounts are unrelated are very small. Note the promotional style of these pages.

Next account, Antonioptg, was involved in edit war on page Russo-Georgian War and temporarily blocked. The reason for the edit war: he wanted (the diff) to include references to writings by the same Ruslan Pukhov created and printed by his "Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies" (link from the diff above). It should be noted that Russo-Georgian War was main subject previously edited by Nanobear (his user page)

I suspect Nanobear could create a number of additional accounts for editing subjects related to the current Russia-Ukrainian conflict. There are quite a few recently created edit-warring SPA in this area with the same POV as POV of Nanobear. My very best wishes (talk) 00:22, 3 December 2014 (UTC)


 * These are not simply the same pages, but pages on subjects no one knows about (and the corresponding pages do not exists even on ruwiki). These pages were significantly edited only by these accounts, and in the same promotional manner. Is it possible to check if the both "red-linked" accounts are related to Antonioptg? I believe they are related, because very few people know about the Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies (created and expanded by Nanobear and red-linked accounts), but the reference to this "Centre" appears 7 times in text inserted by Antoniopog on Russia-Georgia war (right side of this diff).


 * Other than that, there is little evidence, because the red-linked accounts and Antonioptg made very few edits and avoided making long edit summaries. This is obviously a common strategy by multiple through-away accounts to avoid detection. Thinking who else opened such multiple accounts, had the same POV, and edited in the same subject area, I remember only this user, who is (I assume) someone else. Based on this  compared to that   and also these edits, , , they could be involved as  or/and . However, that would probably be a different SPI request - for . My very best wishes (talk) 21:52, 16 December 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
. Offliner was renamed to Nanobear, so that's a red herring. The evidence connecting Holds and CASTMoscow is better than for Antonioptg. Even as to the other two alleged puppets, it shows that Nanobear dropped out of those articles quite some time ago and the other two became active later, two years elapsing on Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies and five years elapsing on Ruslan Pukhov. That doesn't make a great deal of sense. The third article wasn't edited at all by the alleged puppets. Based on all that, my endorse is lukewarm. Unless there is a positive CU finding, I would decline to take any action based on the behavioral evidence presented.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:13, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
 * - I'm not at the point where I'm convinced this is sockpuppetry, with the evidence presented. (mind you I haven't dug any further). Right now, this case makes for editing the same articles and using one reference on one account, which is related to another article that another user edited. At best, were looking at same subject area. Please present some diffs between socks that will show similiar behavoir. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  17:40, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
 * based on your reaction to this report and mine, which are similar, and the update by the filer, I favor declining the case. I'm not sure if you've had a chance to see what the filer added, so I'll wait for your comment before taking any action. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:18, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I agree. Decline the case without prejudice for a future one if more substantive evidence shows. We are just way too far below the probable cause line for my liking. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  18:25, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
 * ✅. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:56, 18 December 2014 (UTC)