Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Opinion786/Archive

Report date August 30 2009, 14:21 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets

All these accounts edit a few Pakistan related articles, namely Shaukat Aziz, Economy of Pakistan, Ayesha Siddiqa Agha, Pervez Musharraf. The edits are problematic because they are adding propaganda/BLP vio material, sourced to wordpress blogs. See and  -if you read that you'll notice its blatant PoV. These accounts have participated in same edit wars, reverting to each other's versions so I have a reason to believe that these might be socks. —SpaceFlight89 14:21, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Evidence submitted by —SpaceFlight89


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users

Requested by —SpaceFlight89 14:21, 30 August 2009 (UTC) . However, I will say right now that User:Brosnan us and User:Gladiator Maximus are for CheckUser purposes; only behavioral evidence will be able to show any connection. User:Opinion786 only has three edits that are not stale. MuZemike 23:05, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * CheckUser requests


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * Check underway. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 02:00, 31 August 2009 (UTC)


 * and
 * ✅: ==  == . No question these are the same person; Dave Hanks and Opinion786 appear unrelated to each other on their own, but Daniel Maverick is the missing link between the two.
 * The IP addresses are all over the place (this person uses multiple ISPs, and those ISPs have several /16 blocks allocated to them), so no IP block would be terribly useful here, or should really be considered.
 * I'll leave it to someone else to look at the evidence here in more detail to see how blocks should be issued. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 02:16, 31 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Conclusions


 * Confirmed accounts blocked and tagged. Stale accounts not blocked. Nathan  T 02:59, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Report date September 10 2009, 03:03 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets

Opinion786's new account PoV pushing again. . and were "stale" during last investigation, however, right after the blocks on other accounts both of them have started editing again; these can be checked now and blocked if they are found to be related. Thanks,—SpaceFlight89 03:03, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Evidence submitted by —SpaceFlight89

. The behavioural similarities of the two unblocked accounts makes this an obvious case, so I've blocked them. Another checkuser is requested to see if any other accounts were created. Peter Symonds ( talk ) 12:47, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * All socks are blocked. Brandon (talk) 21:49, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

All accounts tagged. MuZemike 03:03, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Conclusions