Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PShandAllfrey/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets


Less certain, but still suspicious:


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

Army of sockpuppets edit warring and unexplained-removing on Phyllis Shand Allfrey, going back over a year. (talk to) Gaelan('s contributions) 22:54, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Also: should we revert to the version of the article before this sock army came? The diff from April 2016 to now doesn't seem horribly bad, but I feel like clearly you're not following consensus if you have such a large sock army. (talk to) Gaelan('s contributions) 23:20, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * All of the above users are quacking. Many now inactive. Dlohcierekim (talk) 01:37, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Of the accounts listed in the first group, is the oldest, created on April 8, 2016 at 20:01., which is listed in the second group, was created just 8 minutes earlier, on April 8, 2016 at 19:53. Mz7 (talk) 00:22, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
 * - On hold for clerk training. Katietalk 11:31, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
 * - The first block of accounts with usernames based on Phyllis Shand Allfrey is obvious enough. Please block these. The second block, while suspicious, will require some evaluation of the many RevDeled edits. If it's possible, please make these available to me. Otherwise, I'll leave the evaluation to the patrolling admin. Sir Sputnik (talk) 18:36, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I've blocked all but (who made minor copyedits) and  (who simply added a cite). These could be the same person, but their edits are too minor to establish a firm behavioral connection. There are too many revdel edits for me to summarize them all individually, but the general theme is an obsession with family pedigree and social connections. I'll leave you to take things from here. ~ Rob 13 Talk 00:53, 15 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I've moved the case to reflect the oldest account as the sockmaster. With all the accounts that can be definitely linked to the master blocked, there's nothing left to do here. Closing. Sir Sputnik (talk) 02:44, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Today began editing on Phyllis Shand Allfrey, as with previous socks. Adds protection template, perhaps in mistaken belief that no one else can now edit. Adds society page name-dropping edit w/o supporting cite, as has been done previously by socks. Upgrades subject's father from "Englishman" to "Oxford Engineering graduate" and adds that daughter was also " Oxford Engineering graduate". Please note the underlying theme of bolstering the prestige of the subject, as with other socks.Please note similarity between this user's nick and other socks. Dlohcierekim (talk) 23:20, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

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


 * Agree The sock-puppeteer is consistent with account name selections and content additions. Operator873 CONNECT 23:46, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Another has appeared. Add it here or above??Dlohcierekim (talk) 01:45, 20 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Blocked both as I don't want to leave it hanging and I'm going to bed.Dlohcierekim (talk) 05:29, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - Per the above, . Please block this account indefinitely. Sir Sputnik (talk) 00:23, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * It doesn't really matter. Above is marginally better for the sake of consistent formatting, so I've put it there. That being said, you can go ahead block these yourself if you want (assuming you're not involved). This is far too obvious to need CheckUser attention. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:59, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Probably better I don't, given past contact. We send a more consistent message as a community than if a Judge Dredd her. Besides, she won;t be around long enough to not be revertable. Next one appears I'll PC the page.Dlohcierekim (talk) 02:03, 20 October 2017 (UTC)Dlohcierekim (talk) 02:02, 20 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Tagging both accounts, and closing. Sir Sputnik (talk) 12:57, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

This is yet another account with a username based on Phyllis Shand Allfrey. Their only edit was reinstate content written by previous socks, but with some additional source. Sir Sputnik (talk) 15:26, 11 November 2017 (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

 * ~ Rob 13 Talk 18:50, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
 * ~ Rob 13 Talk 18:50, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
 * ~ Rob 13 Talk 18:50, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
 * ~ Rob 13 Talk 18:50, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
 * ~ Rob 13 Talk 18:50, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
 * ~ Rob 13 Talk 18:50, 11 November 2017 (UTC)
 * ~ Rob 13 Talk 18:50, 11 November 2017 (UTC)


 * You need to make these blocks. The trainee clerk isn't an admin and they need to be CU blocks anyway. You should self-endorse for CU in a case like this next time. :-) Katietalk 21:20, 11 November 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Between the username and their edits to Phyllis Shand Allfrey, this one's pretty obvious. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:29, 3 February 2018 (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

 * - Please check to identify potential sleepers. Sir Sputnik (talk) 19:35, 3 February 2018 (UTC)


 * From one range:


 * From another range:
 * ✅ using the same single IPv6 address on Dec. 9 within minutes of each other. This is the same /64 range as listed in the CU log for :


 * Using another single IP address within the same /64 range as the above two accounts and definitely the sockmaster:

— Berean Hunter   (talk)  20:52, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
 * The only other account to use that /64 is which is an exact match on the UA. There have never been any anon edits in this range.
 * I block the first group and Henryalfordnicholls as they are obviously linked to the master. I found more account that are stale, but listing here for record:
 * -- Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:02, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * -- Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:02, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * -- Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:02, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * -- Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:02, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * -- Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:02, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * -- Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:02, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * -- Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:02, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
 * -- Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:02, 4 February 2018 (UTC)


 * - Please block the second group also, as sockpuppets of . Given the username and their edits to Herbert Volney, the link between Trinidadianpolitics2012 and that sockfarm is pretty clear cut. In light of the technical data, it looks like Uwialumniupdates is the same person. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:04, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅. GABgab 02:12, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Given the usernames, these two are clearly connected to Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:06, 5 February 2018 (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

 * - Please block these the new socks indefinitely. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:07, 5 February 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅. GABgab 02:13, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Given the username and edits to Phyllis Shand Allfrey, this is pretty obvious. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:38, 28 September 2018 (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

 * - Please block the new sock indefinitely. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:38, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Sir Sputnik - ✅.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   01:39, 28 September 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Based on the username and article edited, this is quite obvious. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:23, 28 September 2018 (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

 * - Given their history of sleeper use, please check to see if they have any other accounts on the go. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:25, 28 September 2018 (UTC)
 * ✅ The named account is confirmed. There are no sleepers Guerillero  &#124;  Parlez Moi  05:21, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

similar names SPA with similar edits to the same article Frederic Thomas Nicholls. Theroadislong (talk) 16:28, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' Not clear why this has been merged? Theroadislong (talk) 16:39, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Case merged. The only non stale account is already blocked. Sir Sputnik (talk) 16:36, 3 April 2020 (UTC)