Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/National Names 2000/Archive

10 February 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

I could see many a similarities in their editing behaviors.
 * Their user names resemble (2000).
 * Both mark their many edits as minor. 1.1 1.2 2.1 2.2
 * Both capitalize each word of their message. NN Bry - T H (here I am) 16:58, 10 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I have added Jackninja5. I am suspicious because both suddenly became very interested in "Year in Country" articles around the start of the year and Jack suddenly reappeared on Wikipedia after a long hiatus right about the time National Names registered.  The case is not nearly as slam dunk as Bryant2000, but I think it is enough to warrant looking into. --ThaddeusB (talk) 21:12, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

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

It seems that the user is giving barnstars to itself, and also double voting. I can confirm its a sock, though I'm not a CheckUser. --ToonLucas22 (talk) 17:03, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

The history of File:New Years Eve In Metro Manila 2014.png is a bit telling. &mdash;Cryptic 17:08, 10 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I left this user a warning that it appeared they were engaging in sock puppetry and what the consequences would be if it continued. Since it appears this advice has been ignored I recommend a lack of leniency. The behavioral evidence seems sufficient to proceed with CU or even just a block at this point. Chillum 17:13, 10 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note the identical idiosyncratic behavior here and here. Chillum 17:17, 10 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I am not a sockpuppet. I joined in 2012. National Names 2000 joined in 2014. Check the contributions if you don't believe me. Jackninja5 (talk) 11:00, 12 February 2015 (UTC)


 * While Jackninja5 has interest in expanding those "years" articles, NN2k doesn't seem to be having that. Anyone would want to replicate mass article creation since it raises both article creation count and edit count. Jackninja5 has communicated well, unlike other two named accounts.  Occult Zone  (Talk • Contributions • Log) 13:03, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * That's not completely true - I became aware of the situation because Bryant requested two of them be undeleted at WP:REFUND and then NN did expand one of the two, 2002 in Jordan. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:27, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I have blocked Bryant2000 as an obvious sock puppet. I will leave the rest up to SPI regulars. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:05, 11 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I've blocked the master for one week. I'm not convinced that Jackninja5 is a sock, more evidence needs to be presented regarding them. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 07:13, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I agree with Callanecc, I don't see strong evidence to suggest that Jackninja5 is a sock. They accounts have interacted slightly, but it mostly appears to be from Jack performing edits while following the new article feed. I'm going to close this case now. Mike V • Talk 23:57, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

24 April 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

I previously suspected Jackninja5 of being a sock of National Names 2000 (or visa versa), but it was declined for insufficient evidence. Previously, I wrote ''I am suspicious because both suddenly became very interested in "Year in Country" articles around the start of the year and Jack suddenly reappeared on Wikipedia after a long hiatus right about the time National Names registered. ''

I randomly happened across National Names 2000 again today and something struck me - their edits were adding copyrighted material in a manner that seemed very familiar to me. (Specifically, adding a copy sentences of content copied from a news source.) After jogging my memory, I figured out I was thinking of the contributions of Jackninja5 whom I had previously report to CCI, see Contributor copyright investigations/Jackninja5. Investigating further, I found this curious edit where NN2000 restores content to an article after Jack removed it (presumably because of my copyright complaints). NN2000 had not previously edited that article. It is possible that this is still a coincidence, but I feel there is now enough evidence to warrant a CU. ThaddeusB (talk) 20:12, 24 April 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

 * Some questions for you. When NN2000 added back the copyrighted content, their edit summary expressly said they were adding back Jack's content. Why would they be so open about it if they were trying to hide any relationship between them? Second, I see a fair number of templates created by NN2000 where Jack comes in minutes later to edit it. I also see a couple of comments by Jack on NN2000's Talk page. Taken together, they again don't seem to be hiding anything. It's almost like they're working together because they share some common interests, as opposed to trying to gain some advantage through sock puppetry. I realize a more sinister interpretation is possible, but I'd like to hear your take on it. Finally, as an aside, if the accounts belong to the same person, the master would be Jack.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:55, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Per Jack's comment on my talk page, I'd actually like to withdraw this. There is a lot of suspicious overlap, yes, but no clear motive for socking. I think I was thrown off by NN2000's previous sock puppetry and thus overly concerned when I saw some similarity between the accounts.  Thanks. --ThaddeusB (talk) 15:39, 26 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Withdrawn by filer (thanks). Bbb23 (talk) 16:05, 26 April 2015 (UTC)