Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Pablo909/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets

 * - maybe? not blocked
 * - maybe? not blocked
 * - maybe? not blocked
 * - maybe? not blocked
 * - maybe? not blocked
 * - maybe? not blocked
 * - maybe? not blocked
 * - maybe? not blocked
 * - maybe? not blocked
 * - maybe? not blocked
 * - maybe? not blocked
 * - maybe? not blocked
 * - maybe? not blocked
 * - maybe? not blocked
 * - maybe? not blocked

Evidence submitted by Rschen7754
and are just two of the examples of what these accounts are doing - violates multiple accounts editing the same page, and this works to avoid scrutiny. All of these accounts have been indef'ed, but we're trying to make sure we got them all, and maybe do an IP block. Rschen7754 05:42, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * - NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 05:55, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Looking at the Geolocation data and contribs from 12.38.172.9, it's possible that this person briefly edited from an Apple store, so I don't think anything useful is going to come from this IP. –MuZemike 05:58, 15 August 2010 (UTC)
 * and a lot (!) of socks blocked. -- Luk  talk 11:00, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. The oldest account appears to be D62943, so the case probably needs to be moved there. I have also left the IP mentioned in the original filing unblocked - they have not edited in several days. TN X Man  13:20, 21 August 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ SpitfireTally-ho! 16:19, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

18 November 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Need a checkuser for a possible sock. I am having some problems with User:Ynotradio and his suspected socks User:PennHelper and User:76.98.205.8. This user seems to have some obsession with WXPN-HD2 because it used the branding "YRock" which was popular in Philly, which this user now uses on his online web stream (probably against copyrights). This user has tried on two different occasions to get the WXPN-HD2 page moved to a different page name. First "Y-Not Radio" (the name of his web stream) and then "WPLY-FM", neither of which is the legal name of the station under MOS or the FCC. It appears the user is now trying to move the WXPN-HD2 page to WXPN (WXPN and WXPN-HD2 are considered separate stations per the FCC and per MOS). This is tendentious and disruptive editing at it's worst...and just plain wasting the community's time. Even if a CU can't do a checkuser, could a DUCK block be put in place or at least one for disruptive editing? Thanks. -  Neutralhomer •  Talk  • 19:43, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

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

Before this gets closed, it may be worthwhile for a checkuser to take a look at User:0pee3, who appears to have been created to participate in the nascent edit war on 5 November. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 23:26, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
 * DC, which article are we talking about? The WXPN-HD2 article or another article? -  Neutralhomer  •  Talk  • 01:17, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Ynotradio and PennHelper are technically ❌, although there is some rough geographic proximity.
 * PennHelper is ✅ to operate . No comment on the IP. WilliamH (talk) 21:53, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

0pee3 is apparently technically ❌ to Ynotradio and PennHelper, but ✅ with the following accounts: WilliamH (talk) 00:49, 19 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I've moved this case to show PhillyDarkBirds as the master. I've blocked and tagged all the confirmed socks, and the master as well. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 04:18, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

08 July 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Similar editing patterns to each other, similar subjects as other socks; similar naming convention. Rschen7754 00:04, 8 July 2012 (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
Another sock farm found. Blocked and tagged all the accounts. Elockid  ( Talk ) 00:11, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

12 July 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Same naming convention, only edit is to a road article. I was responsible for filing the SPI report last time; think this is some sort of attempted retribution. Rschen7754 09:24, 12 July 2012 (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

 * is to previous accounts in the archive. --  DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  14:49, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * This is possible but there is insufficient data to link by behavior. It is almost impossible to match behavior without at least a few contribs and we only have one revert here, which is why we like to see at least a few real contribs when it is possible, to establish a pattern.  No prejudice against refiling later if more evidence is found. Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;  14:59, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

11 May 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Similar username to User:P4403493033943, a CU-blocked sock of this master (and several others in the same family), edited a road article (same topic). Requesting CU to dig up a potential sockfarm (the last two sockfarms that were found numbered in the hundreds). Rschen7754 23:19, 11 May 2013 (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

 * Rschen7754 23:19, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

T. Canens (talk) 09:09, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Adding self-admitted to the report, and closing. Rschen7754 09:32, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

25 May 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Created hours after the last CU blocks. Comparing to, and going down both contribution lists, both editors have the same types of editing: Pennsylvania roads, editing templates similar to Template:Johnstown, Pennsylvania (PA cities), creating redirects, uploading similarly-named Pennsylvania pictures. Comparing to we can add an interest in Chinatown, uploading New Jersey pictures with the same naming convention, and more creating Chinatown redirects, especially ones with anchors:   Hoping to flush out more sleepers. --Rschen7754 02:33, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Also note userpages: and . --Rschen7754 02:35, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' Both RowEpict and ParadeCloud have made edits to articles pertaining to Exton and Chester County in Pennsylvania. Both users have edited the Exton, Pennsylvania, Exton Square Mall, Main Street at Exton, Chester County Library System, and Chester Springs, Pennsylvania articles. In addition both users have edited Template:Exton, Pennsylvania and Template:Chester Springs, Pennsylvania. In addition, they have uploaded similar photos. Both File:Main Street Town Center.jpg by ParadeCloud and File:ExtonMainStreet2PA.jpg by RowEpict have similar summary sections, were both taken with an iPhone 4S, and in both images the same car hood can be seen.  Dough 48  72  02:42, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * for sleeper check. Rschen7754 02:44, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅, to previous socks:
 * -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  13:55, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  13:55, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  13:55, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
 * -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  13:55, 25 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Blocked, tagged, closed. Rschen7754 19:18, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

10 November 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Sumpsrummy and Saberbelt have the same interest in Chinatown districts as blocked sock RowEpict. In July 2013, Saberbelt said that "there are 4 Chinatowns in San Francisco" and tried to establish this with unsuitable sources. Today in this edit to Template:SFBayshopping, Sumpsrummy added three more Chinatowns of San Francisco. He labeled the Chinatowns "1st", "2nd", "3rd", and "4th" in the edit. The numbering of San Francisco Chinatowns is unique to this sockpuppeter: User Saberbelt created the redirect First Chinatown. User RowEpict created the redirects Second Chinatown, San Francisco, Third Chinatown, San Francisco, and Fourth Chinatown, San Francisco. Checkuser requested to flush out sleepers of this inveterate socker. Binksternet (talk) 15:32, 10 November 2013 (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

 * - Usually a farm, so sleeper check would be good. Rschen7754 public (talk) 16:48, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * The users Sumpsrummy, Pantsbalks, Gatesverna, Baldsgale, Camryhurst, Millshied and Bandybores are ✅ to each other and now blocked. Everything else is, and I can't relate anything back to the master from technical evidence. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  21:12, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Suspected socks all blocked indef. Closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:22, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

17 December 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

New accounts with same interest in playing with junction lists in infoboxes, over a brief period:. I suspect that this is not a new user either but possibly one of the road sockpuppeteers (Sockpuppet investigations/D62943 maybe?), requesting CU for confirm and identification. Rschen7754 07:20, 17 December 2013 (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

 * -  Rschen7754 07:20, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * The users Zesttimid, Placeessen, Kafkaervin, Bowlsgalls, Digsafros, Softyvaduz, Knowtraps, Moundizaak, Weptnatal, Damspeaks, Lodzmutes, Outdonote1, Pawlelena, Roesluna and Jinnyetta are now blocked and ✅. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  20:37, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Is Mwara thuku confirmed? --Rschen7754 20:49, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that, I assumed they were in the results. In this case it appears that they are ❌. That said, there are 2 other fresh accounts with no edits, and a fair amount of inappropriate logged out editing going on with Mwara thuku. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  02:17, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Apparently Roesluna is the oldest confirmed account. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:51, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * All confirmed socks have been blocked indef, and I've blocked the IP one week for disruption and Mwaura thuku one week for evading scrutiny via IP editing per the above finding. Closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:35, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

26 May 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Please see the recent edit history of Template:San Jose Radio for details. Similarly-named socks Geoffrey100a, Geoffrey100e, Geoffrey100z, and Geoffrey101 (also listed in the recent edit history of Template:San Jose Radio) have already been determined to be socks of this editor. Steel1943 (talk) 12:38, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

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

The SPI filings are separated; you can see more of this puppet master at Sockpuppet investigations/Geoffrey100/Archive. The guy is insistent that San Francisco and San Jose, California, are the same radio market, though the actual market considers them separate. The geographical nearness of the two cities gives some credence to his stance, but market practice and tradition do not. WP:Reliable sources do not support his view. Binksternet (talk) 16:11, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Oh, I've already blocked the accounts. They were all created at roughly the same time (see ) and the edits confirmed socking. I blocked a couple of fairly obvious sleeper accounts too. Nick (talk) 16:15, 26 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Looks like the block on the IP recently expired. ✅ along with Geoffrey100z, Geoffrey101, Geoffrey103, Geoffrey102, Geoffrey900, and
 * 3 years, this time. T. Canens (talk) 00:14, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * 3 years, this time. T. Canens (talk) 00:14, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * 3 years, this time. T. Canens (talk) 00:14, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * 3 years, this time. T. Canens (talk) 00:14, 28 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Already tagged, now blocked. Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:55, 31 May 2014 (UTC)

22 June 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

The promotional/commercial article Milpitas Square was created by a sockpuppet, User:Geoffrey100, and has often been edited by socks of D62943, such as User:KGO810, User:KSL1160 and User:RowEpict. Any time I see a mention of this article by a new account I am suspicious of socking! With this creation of a new article, Fhhftgjjgfd inserted a promotional WP:COATRACK bit about Milpitas Square. I'm asking for checkuser because previous checks have found sleeper accounts. Binksternet (talk) 15:21, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

- Excellent work by DoRD and company! D62943 was created in July 2010. The oldest account may be: Other suspicious accounts, showing much the same interest as the ones above, include: It's quite the sock drawer. Whew! Binksternet (talk) 03:12, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm adding IP 96.227.234.39 because the IP's first edit directly followed Fhhftgjjgfd's edit to the same article about Chinese Americans, an article started by who was in 2004 an editor interested in much the same mix as D62943: Chinatowns, broadcast stations, shopping malls. As well, the IP 96.227.234.39 edited the newly created article Chinese enclaves in Silicon Valley, created by Fhhftgjjgfd. Not only that, but IP 96.227.234.39 somehow found the newly created article Chinese enclaves in New Jersey and edited it, the article having been created by Fhhftgjjgfd. Binksternet (talk) 06:07, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I've merged those two SPIs into this one and (re)tagged the socks. I've also blocked and tagged all confirmed socks from the current check above. I haven't renamed this SPI given that there were already a large number of accounts with blocks and tags linking to here and that those accounts hadn't done enough to warrant it. Archiving clerk should feel free to do so if you wish. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 14:58, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
 * BeerBelly82 (15 December 2006).
 * (created 18 April 2010)
 * (blocked as a result of SPI:Mwaura thuku, at which the similarity to D62943 was observed.)
 * (blocked as a result of SPI:Mwaura thuku, at which the similarity to D62943 was observed.)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' I am unrelated to the people you spoke of. I am the same sa Fhhftgjjgfd. I happen to be of Chinese descent which is why I edited the articles you referenced.--96.227.234.39 (talk) 06:18, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
 * You appear to be a sockpuppet of D62943 because you somehow found the little seen article Chinatown,_Atlanta, which was created by confirmed sockpuppet User:Mfwo3df. Binksternet (talk) 06:39, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - On the account only. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 18:49, 25 June 2014 (UTC)
 * Alright...after consulting with another CheckUser, I've finally come up with a list. These are all ✅ to one another:
 * , of course. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:10, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Also, please note that there are three accounts here that are older than the current master. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:12, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * As for the added report, these are ✅:
 * The rest of the accounts are, and . ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:55, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Per Binksternet's comment above, I looked at the CU logs for SPI:Mwaura thuku. The accounts Zesttimid, Placeessen, Kafkaervin, Bowlsgalls, Digsafros, Softyvaduz, Knowtraps, Moundizaak, Weptnatal, Damspeaks, Lodzmutes, Outdonote1, Pawlelena, Roesluna and Jinnyetta, blocked by, are almost certainly related to this case. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:17, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * After digging deeper in the CU logs, it looks to me like Sockpuppet investigations/PhillyDarkBirds is also related to this case. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:25, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * , of course. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:10, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Also, please note that there are three accounts here that are older than the current master. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:12, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * As for the added report, these are ✅:
 * The rest of the accounts are, and . ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:55, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Per Binksternet's comment above, I looked at the CU logs for SPI:Mwaura thuku. The accounts Zesttimid, Placeessen, Kafkaervin, Bowlsgalls, Digsafros, Softyvaduz, Knowtraps, Moundizaak, Weptnatal, Damspeaks, Lodzmutes, Outdonote1, Pawlelena, Roesluna and Jinnyetta, blocked by, are almost certainly related to this case. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:17, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * After digging deeper in the CU logs, it looks to me like Sockpuppet investigations/PhillyDarkBirds is also related to this case. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:25, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * , of course. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:10, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Also, please note that there are three accounts here that are older than the current master. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:12, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * As for the added report, these are ✅:
 * The rest of the accounts are, and . ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:55, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Per Binksternet's comment above, I looked at the CU logs for SPI:Mwaura thuku. The accounts Zesttimid, Placeessen, Kafkaervin, Bowlsgalls, Digsafros, Softyvaduz, Knowtraps, Moundizaak, Weptnatal, Damspeaks, Lodzmutes, Outdonote1, Pawlelena, Roesluna and Jinnyetta, blocked by, are almost certainly related to this case. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:17, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * After digging deeper in the CU logs, it looks to me like Sockpuppet investigations/PhillyDarkBirds is also related to this case. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:25, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * , of course. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:10, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Also, please note that there are three accounts here that are older than the current master. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:12, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * As for the added report, these are ✅:
 * The rest of the accounts are, and . ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:55, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Per Binksternet's comment above, I looked at the CU logs for SPI:Mwaura thuku. The accounts Zesttimid, Placeessen, Kafkaervin, Bowlsgalls, Digsafros, Softyvaduz, Knowtraps, Moundizaak, Weptnatal, Damspeaks, Lodzmutes, Outdonote1, Pawlelena, Roesluna and Jinnyetta, blocked by, are almost certainly related to this case. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:17, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * After digging deeper in the CU logs, it looks to me like Sockpuppet investigations/PhillyDarkBirds is also related to this case. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:25, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * , of course. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:10, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Also, please note that there are three accounts here that are older than the current master. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:12, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * As for the added report, these are ✅:
 * The rest of the accounts are, and . ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:55, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Per Binksternet's comment above, I looked at the CU logs for SPI:Mwaura thuku. The accounts Zesttimid, Placeessen, Kafkaervin, Bowlsgalls, Digsafros, Softyvaduz, Knowtraps, Moundizaak, Weptnatal, Damspeaks, Lodzmutes, Outdonote1, Pawlelena, Roesluna and Jinnyetta, blocked by, are almost certainly related to this case. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:17, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * After digging deeper in the CU logs, it looks to me like Sockpuppet investigations/PhillyDarkBirds is also related to this case. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:25, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * , of course. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:10, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Also, please note that there are three accounts here that are older than the current master. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:12, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * As for the added report, these are ✅:
 * The rest of the accounts are, and . ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:55, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Per Binksternet's comment above, I looked at the CU logs for SPI:Mwaura thuku. The accounts Zesttimid, Placeessen, Kafkaervin, Bowlsgalls, Digsafros, Softyvaduz, Knowtraps, Moundizaak, Weptnatal, Damspeaks, Lodzmutes, Outdonote1, Pawlelena, Roesluna and Jinnyetta, blocked by, are almost certainly related to this case. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:17, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * After digging deeper in the CU logs, it looks to me like Sockpuppet investigations/PhillyDarkBirds is also related to this case. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:25, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * , of course. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:10, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Also, please note that there are three accounts here that are older than the current master. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:12, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * As for the added report, these are ✅:
 * The rest of the accounts are, and . ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:55, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Per Binksternet's comment above, I looked at the CU logs for SPI:Mwaura thuku. The accounts Zesttimid, Placeessen, Kafkaervin, Bowlsgalls, Digsafros, Softyvaduz, Knowtraps, Moundizaak, Weptnatal, Damspeaks, Lodzmutes, Outdonote1, Pawlelena, Roesluna and Jinnyetta, blocked by, are almost certainly related to this case. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:17, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * After digging deeper in the CU logs, it looks to me like Sockpuppet investigations/PhillyDarkBirds is also related to this case. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:25, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * , of course. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:10, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Also, please note that there are three accounts here that are older than the current master. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:12, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * As for the added report, these are ✅:
 * The rest of the accounts are, and . ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:55, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Per Binksternet's comment above, I looked at the CU logs for SPI:Mwaura thuku. The accounts Zesttimid, Placeessen, Kafkaervin, Bowlsgalls, Digsafros, Softyvaduz, Knowtraps, Moundizaak, Weptnatal, Damspeaks, Lodzmutes, Outdonote1, Pawlelena, Roesluna and Jinnyetta, blocked by, are almost certainly related to this case. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:17, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * After digging deeper in the CU logs, it looks to me like Sockpuppet investigations/PhillyDarkBirds is also related to this case. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:25, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * , of course. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:10, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Also, please note that there are three accounts here that are older than the current master. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:12, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * As for the added report, these are ✅:
 * The rest of the accounts are, and . ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:55, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Per Binksternet's comment above, I looked at the CU logs for SPI:Mwaura thuku. The accounts Zesttimid, Placeessen, Kafkaervin, Bowlsgalls, Digsafros, Softyvaduz, Knowtraps, Moundizaak, Weptnatal, Damspeaks, Lodzmutes, Outdonote1, Pawlelena, Roesluna and Jinnyetta, blocked by, are almost certainly related to this case. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:17, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * After digging deeper in the CU logs, it looks to me like Sockpuppet investigations/PhillyDarkBirds is also related to this case. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:25, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Also, please note that there are three accounts here that are older than the current master. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:12, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
 * As for the added report, these are ✅:
 * The rest of the accounts are, and . ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:55, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Per Binksternet's comment above, I looked at the CU logs for SPI:Mwaura thuku. The accounts Zesttimid, Placeessen, Kafkaervin, Bowlsgalls, Digsafros, Softyvaduz, Knowtraps, Moundizaak, Weptnatal, Damspeaks, Lodzmutes, Outdonote1, Pawlelena, Roesluna and Jinnyetta, blocked by, are almost certainly related to this case. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:17, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * After digging deeper in the CU logs, it looks to me like Sockpuppet investigations/PhillyDarkBirds is also related to this case. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:25, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Per Binksternet's comment above, I looked at the CU logs for SPI:Mwaura thuku. The accounts Zesttimid, Placeessen, Kafkaervin, Bowlsgalls, Digsafros, Softyvaduz, Knowtraps, Moundizaak, Weptnatal, Damspeaks, Lodzmutes, Outdonote1, Pawlelena, Roesluna and Jinnyetta, blocked by, are almost certainly related to this case. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:17, 2 July 2014 (UTC)
 * After digging deeper in the CU logs, it looks to me like Sockpuppet investigations/PhillyDarkBirds is also related to this case. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:25, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

27 August 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Obvious new sock doing the same thing as many previous socks, trying to turn the San Francisco Radio template into a much wider one encompassing San Francisco, Oakland and San Jose. Here is AndrewLei1999 making that edit, and here are other socks making the same edit: Geoffrey100, 24.5.202.48, Geoffrey100, Geoffrey100, 205.155.225.1, KGO810, Geoffrey100a, and Geoffrey101. No need for checkuser since this is so easily identified. Binksternet (talk) 22:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Adding EvanGrange2006 because of this edit, the same as the above-linked edits by socks. Binksternet (talk) 14:56, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
 * And again from EvanGrange2006. I'm making this into a CU requested case to confirm the connection between EvanGrange2006 and AndrewLei1999. Binksternet (talk) 21:19, 3 September 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

 * - Check for sleepers. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 03:48, 5 September 2015 (UTC)


 * The accounts seem likely to the master account base upon behavior. Mike V • Talk 23:48, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The accounts seem likely to the master account base upon behavior. Mike V • Talk 23:48, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The accounts seem likely to the master account base upon behavior. Mike V • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 23:48, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The accounts seem likely to the master account base upon behavior. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 23:48, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The accounts seem likely to the master account base upon behavior. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 23:48, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The accounts seem likely to the master account base upon behavior. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 23:48, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The accounts seem likely to the master account base upon behavior. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 23:48, 5 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The accounts seem likely to the master account base upon behavior. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 23:48, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

17 September 2015
Note that TVBI2006 was blocked by for sockpuppetry, with TVBI2006 doing the same exact things as Geoffrey100 and other confirmed socks. Binksternet (talk) 18:51, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Multiple controversial page moves were done on various Montreal articles without discussion. Examples here, here, here and here. The subsequent edits by several similar IP addresses seem to be related to these moves and occurred minutes after each of the moves. MTLskyline (talk) 02:36, 2 September 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

 * The following accounts are ✅:
 * Blocked and tagged.
 * This case is behaviorally and technically connected to Sockpuppet investigations/D62943. Although all the accounts in that case are, the technical connection is supported by the CU logs. I would move this case to that one, but the master here is significantly older than D62943. Therefore, I'll let a clerk merge the other case into this one. There are a few editors familiar with the other case, although it's been a while, so I'm pinging them in case they want to comment.  .--Bbb23 (talk) 17:55, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I'd wondered; I'd seen a bunch of these accounts swarming around the Philadelphia transit articles. I assume is another? Is the IP usage isolated enough to ban account creation? Mackensen (talk) 18:27, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * You assume correctly. ✅, blocked and tagged.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:46, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I haven't run any checks on this sockfarm in a long time, but the behavior certainly does look similar. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 00:42, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  12:04, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Unless there's a persuasive argument against it, I want this case merged as I described above. I've changed the status back to checked.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:54, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged.
 * This case is behaviorally and technically connected to Sockpuppet investigations/D62943. Although all the accounts in that case are, the technical connection is supported by the CU logs. I would move this case to that one, but the master here is significantly older than D62943. Therefore, I'll let a clerk merge the other case into this one. There are a few editors familiar with the other case, although it's been a while, so I'm pinging them in case they want to comment.  .--Bbb23 (talk) 17:55, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I'd wondered; I'd seen a bunch of these accounts swarming around the Philadelphia transit articles. I assume is another? Is the IP usage isolated enough to ban account creation? Mackensen (talk) 18:27, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * You assume correctly. ✅, blocked and tagged.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:46, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I haven't run any checks on this sockfarm in a long time, but the behavior certainly does look similar. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 00:42, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  12:04, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Unless there's a persuasive argument against it, I want this case merged as I described above. I've changed the status back to checked.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:54, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged.
 * This case is behaviorally and technically connected to Sockpuppet investigations/D62943. Although all the accounts in that case are, the technical connection is supported by the CU logs. I would move this case to that one, but the master here is significantly older than D62943. Therefore, I'll let a clerk merge the other case into this one. There are a few editors familiar with the other case, although it's been a while, so I'm pinging them in case they want to comment.  .--Bbb23 (talk) 17:55, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I'd wondered; I'd seen a bunch of these accounts swarming around the Philadelphia transit articles. I assume is another? Is the IP usage isolated enough to ban account creation? Mackensen (talk) 18:27, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * You assume correctly. ✅, blocked and tagged.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:46, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I haven't run any checks on this sockfarm in a long time, but the behavior certainly does look similar. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 00:42, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  12:04, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Unless there's a persuasive argument against it, I want this case merged as I described above. I've changed the status back to checked.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:54, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged.
 * This case is behaviorally and technically connected to Sockpuppet investigations/D62943. Although all the accounts in that case are, the technical connection is supported by the CU logs. I would move this case to that one, but the master here is significantly older than D62943. Therefore, I'll let a clerk merge the other case into this one. There are a few editors familiar with the other case, although it's been a while, so I'm pinging them in case they want to comment.  .--Bbb23 (talk) 17:55, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I'd wondered; I'd seen a bunch of these accounts swarming around the Philadelphia transit articles. I assume is another? Is the IP usage isolated enough to ban account creation? Mackensen (talk) 18:27, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * You assume correctly. ✅, blocked and tagged.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:46, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I haven't run any checks on this sockfarm in a long time, but the behavior certainly does look similar. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 00:42, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  12:04, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Unless there's a persuasive argument against it, I want this case merged as I described above. I've changed the status back to checked.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:54, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged.
 * This case is behaviorally and technically connected to Sockpuppet investigations/D62943. Although all the accounts in that case are, the technical connection is supported by the CU logs. I would move this case to that one, but the master here is significantly older than D62943. Therefore, I'll let a clerk merge the other case into this one. There are a few editors familiar with the other case, although it's been a while, so I'm pinging them in case they want to comment.  .--Bbb23 (talk) 17:55, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I'd wondered; I'd seen a bunch of these accounts swarming around the Philadelphia transit articles. I assume is another? Is the IP usage isolated enough to ban account creation? Mackensen (talk) 18:27, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * You assume correctly. ✅, blocked and tagged.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:46, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I haven't run any checks on this sockfarm in a long time, but the behavior certainly does look similar. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 00:42, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  12:04, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Unless there's a persuasive argument against it, I want this case merged as I described above. I've changed the status back to checked.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:54, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged.
 * This case is behaviorally and technically connected to Sockpuppet investigations/D62943. Although all the accounts in that case are, the technical connection is supported by the CU logs. I would move this case to that one, but the master here is significantly older than D62943. Therefore, I'll let a clerk merge the other case into this one. There are a few editors familiar with the other case, although it's been a while, so I'm pinging them in case they want to comment.  .--Bbb23 (talk) 17:55, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I'd wondered; I'd seen a bunch of these accounts swarming around the Philadelphia transit articles. I assume is another? Is the IP usage isolated enough to ban account creation? Mackensen (talk) 18:27, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * You assume correctly. ✅, blocked and tagged.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:46, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I haven't run any checks on this sockfarm in a long time, but the behavior certainly does look similar. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 00:42, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  12:04, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Unless there's a persuasive argument against it, I want this case merged as I described above. I've changed the status back to checked.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:54, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged.
 * This case is behaviorally and technically connected to Sockpuppet investigations/D62943. Although all the accounts in that case are, the technical connection is supported by the CU logs. I would move this case to that one, but the master here is significantly older than D62943. Therefore, I'll let a clerk merge the other case into this one. There are a few editors familiar with the other case, although it's been a while, so I'm pinging them in case they want to comment.  .--Bbb23 (talk) 17:55, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I'd wondered; I'd seen a bunch of these accounts swarming around the Philadelphia transit articles. I assume is another? Is the IP usage isolated enough to ban account creation? Mackensen (talk) 18:27, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * You assume correctly. ✅, blocked and tagged.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:46, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I haven't run any checks on this sockfarm in a long time, but the behavior certainly does look similar. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 00:42, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  12:04, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Unless there's a persuasive argument against it, I want this case merged as I described above. I've changed the status back to checked.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:54, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * You assume correctly. ✅, blocked and tagged.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:46, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I haven't run any checks on this sockfarm in a long time, but the behavior certainly does look similar. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 00:42, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  12:04, 4 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Unless there's a persuasive argument against it, I want this case merged as I described above. I've changed the status back to checked.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:54, 4 September 2016 (UTC)


 * I history-merged the other case here, but now all the older socks should be re-tagged as socks of Pablo909. There are too many of them (Category:Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_D62943). Is there some automated way to do that?  Vanjagenije  (talk)  09:04, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I have very limited skills in this area. The only thing I can think of is to copy all the accounts temporarily to this page, run the standard tagging script, and then revert back to where you started. I don't know how hard it would be to even copy them, and perhaps there is a better solution. ?--Bbb23 (talk) 11:17, 8 September 2016 (UTC)
 * This just needs a script to go through and change out the username in Sock, correct? If so, it's technically trivial to do this using WP:AWB, and I can complete that when I find 10 spare minutes somewhere. Let me know. ~ Rob 13 <sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">Talk 07:00, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Yes, that's right. Any instance of template where the parameter is "D62943" should be changed to "Pablo909". I don't use WP:AWB, so I don't know anything about its possibilities.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  08:47, 11 September 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ In case you run into a similar situation in the future, any edits that sound like formulaic "find-and-replace" rules can be handled efficiently with AWB, especially when the pages you're working on are in an existing category or transclude a common template. ~ Rob 13 <sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">Talk 17:40, 11 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Thanks, . Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  17:46, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Similar usernames, similar first edits to create a nonsense user/talk pages, similar editing focus on Interstate Highway articles. Requesting CU for a sleeper check. Sockpuppet investigations/Pablo909/Archive is one possibility. Rschen7754 06:33, 19 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
. This is going to take some time.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:07, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * The following accounts are ✅:
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2016 (UTC)