Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Njoidjer/Archive

09 January 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets










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

All of these accounts have been created today, and used to create articles consisting of a single character 'w', with titles following the same format of abusive phrases. A handful of account names have followed the same abusive patterns as the article titles; others have been seemingly random. I've blocked all those listed, and tagged as sock puppets based on their inherent similarity. See Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Njoidjer. I now request a check user so that an IP range block may be imposed to protect against future ongoing abuse. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 17:21, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

I see a similar pattern of editing has continued today. All 6 accounts concerned have been blocked by other users, but I have now tagged them as sockpuppets and added to the above. The standard operating practice seems to be to sign up for 3 accounts at a time and use each to post a single offensively titled article. Some time later this repeats, presumably having changed IP to avoid the auto-block (which I guess in turn is why 3 accounts are created up front). My request for check user, in a bid to add an IP range block stands. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 16:52, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

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


 * The master appears to be User:Aafbwrb, who is blocked and globally locked. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 22:48, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Yep I've just found that one, and User:Zozzlekek as candidates for the master. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 22:54, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The remaining users can be blocked according to our username policy, tbh. --QEDK ( T &#128214;  C ) 16:46, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * To be clear, every entry in the above list has already been blocked by myself or another admin (if not for offensive usernames, then for the account being solely used for vandalism). The only outstanding action to my mind is to consider an IP-range block to prevent further abuse. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 19:26, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, those I've blocked, I have blocked as vandalism only accounts based on the nature of the pages they created, all of which are deleted. The usernames are not the issues here, rather it's the ongoing abuse. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:14, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The tool doesn't seem to strike out globally locked accounts (hence I said what I said). My apologies. --QEDK ( T &#128214;  C ) 14:03, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * . There is another overlapping case, Sockpuppet investigations/Moxtible, which I've put on hold just so there isn't double work by a CheckUser. I noticed it only because one of the puppets listed here is listed as the master there. If someone could take a moment to compare the shorter list at that case with the longer list here to see if there are other duplicates, that would be appreciated as this is a bit of an administrative nightmare. At the moment, my goal is to reduce the disruption. I haven't checked to see who is the oldest account listed here and there or if there is another master lurking in the background. That may come up in the check itself.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:49, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * All the accounts listed at Sockpuppet investigations/Moxtible are listed above except for user:Namshapan and user:185.58.15.66.
 * The oldest related account I can find is user:Baked Wotsits - the first creator of Nizralin, subsequently recreated by user:Twinkle and huggle users are gáy and user: Moxtible. Baked Wotsits created on 6 Jan was globally locked on 8 Jan for LTA after only one edit so that suggests there is an older master somewhere but it's not been linked to. Nthep (talk) 14:12, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks much. I've deleted the other one. No need for two. In case anyone's interested, the check isn't going well as far as the feasibility of range blocks.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:51, 12 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Almost all of the listed puppets use proxy servers, but they generally use a particular proxy server only once (most frequently a group of accounts per proxy server). Thus, there are almost no ranges to check.  There were a couple of exceptions to this pattern, but the ranges could not be hard-blocked because of collateral damage. (I've also checked the one in the report just below.)
 * I found a great many accounts not listed above. However, they were almost invariably globally locked, and I see no point to listing them.  None of them is tagged. Nor does it make sense to tag the accounts as we don’t know who the master is.
 * With respect to account age, the oldest globally locked accounts I found were created on or about December 24, 2015.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:46, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I am closing this. They are tagged as socks of Njoidjer, who is not the oldest, but I don't think that's a problem.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  18:40, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

12 January 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Username: could hardly quck louder. JohnCD (talk) 18:32, 12 January 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
Blocked and tagged per WP:DUCK, reported for the record. JohnCD (talk) 18:32, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * See my comments in the report above.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:47, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Closing the case.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  18:40, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

01 March 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Both accounts were created within one hour of each other. See Wikipedia admins have serious health problems such as morbid obesity and autism and Wikipedia admins having semen ejaculated over their faces -- both articles created by one account each. Similar account names. What more evidence do you need?!! :-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   09:13, 1 March 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

 * Both blocked. Probably this guy: Sockpuppet investigations/Njoidjer/Archive. -- zzuuzz (talk) 09:42, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅, merged. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:04, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Master? Evaded autoblock very fast, so checkuser for range block/sleepers? Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 19:40, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Isn't this User:Njoidjer? A new batch of these socks who create similar pages has been showing up basically once a week for a while now. Sro23 (talk) 20:27, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Probably. I'm usually really bad at knowing who masters are, but all these are definitely ducks to each other. Ks0stm  (T•C•G•E) 20:29, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Yes, it's Njoidjer. All are blocked. GABgab 01:10, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I blocked another account and a couple of probable open proxies. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:19, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
 * No tags, closing. GABgab 20:51, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Quack. Please check for sleepers and block the underlying IP. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 23:21, 9 November 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

 * Closing. DeltaQuad took care of it via IRC request. No sleepers found; web host blocked. Ks0stm  (T•C•G•E) 23:40, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

DeltaQuad already CU blocked the accounts I hadn't blocked for username violations, so just filing to see if anyone recognizes the MO to associate these with a master. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 00:58, 10 November 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

 * All of these now-blocked clowns are . Closing. GABgab 02:46, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Quack. Sleepers? Can we get a range and/or proxy block? Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 22:23, 21 November 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

 * ✅, along with and . Blocked without tags per DENY.  Katietalk 22:55, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Closing. GABgab 00:22, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Sock #3 might be unrelated, but the first two quack. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 01:09, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Added three. Ks0stm  (T•C•G•E) 01:14, 25 November 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

 * All ✅ to each other except the third, as Ks0stm surmised.

Wikipedia is owned by fat pigs is ✅ to Incorrigible Troll, as are, , and. Katietalk 02:57, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

. Any sleepers? Any possible rangeblocks? Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 20:48, 26 November 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

 * ✅ and already blocked. I don't see any sleepers, and rangeblocks are problematic here. Katietalk 01:05, 27 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Closing without tagging. No need for any attention. GABgab 03:50, 27 November 2016 (UTC)