Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Pararubbas/Archive

Report date February 9 2009, 14:17 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets
 * (only user not blocked)
 * (only user not blocked)
 * (only user not blocked)

It has happened:
 * Evidence submitted by NothingButAGoodNothing

User PARARUBBAS (at least the first account i acknowledge) had the custom of the following: removing, just because, links, references, sections ("SEE ALSO", "NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH") and paragraphs, "gluing" all sentences (list of "contributions" here Special:Contributions/Pararubbas); i provide an example here (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Aly_Cissokho&diff=prev&oldid=226305530).

(Over)Duly warned (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Pararubbas#Blocked), including in what seemed his mother tongue, Portuguese (i am also from that country and did so), he, after having made zero edit summaries and responded to zero talkpage "interventions", was finally blocked indefinitely (see here User_talk:Pararubbas).

Afterwards, the person logged in under the account PEP10 (list of "contributions" here Special:Contributions/Pep10), continuing with the same disruptive patterns (example here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jo%C3%A3o_Pereira_(Portuguese_footballer)&diff=prev&oldid=257327999). After a while and some reports, this account was blocked indef as well (User_talk:Pep10), after a check user was performed by admin/user Satori Son (see here Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Pep10)

It did not deter this individual still, as he opened a third account, PASD08 ("contributions" here Special:Contributions/Pasd08), with same modus operandi (example here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pawe%C5%82_Kieszek&diff=prev&oldid=265304604). After extensive reports (see here for instance http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=265562039#Disruptive_editors) a sock puppetry pattern was finally acknowledged and the person received its due punishment (User_talk:Pasd08).

You'd think the vandal had had enough by now, would you not? Well, here is the FOURTH account, KAKD08 (list of "contributions" Special:Contributions/Kakd08), with the same patterns (example here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vitorino_Antunes&diff=prev&oldid=269312444). He has already been warned in this fresh new "vandalic adventure" (talkpage here User_talk:Kakd08).

Attentively, VASCO AMARAL - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 23:31, 8 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Urgent update (and i apologize if i am not allowed to post here): "Person" returned, after a day's rest, "contributing" in this fashion (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jos%C3%A9_Carlos_Fernandes_Vidigal&diff=269806802&oldid=259804600)

VASCO AMARAL - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 02:32, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users
 * The vandal has chased an editor off of Wiki diff. This is not good.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 03:09, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Requested by -- lucasbfr  talk 14:17, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * CheckUser requests


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * Moved and formatted from Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations. The editing interests seem similar, I'm unsure whether a CU is warranted or if the latest user's contributions should be examined on their own merits. -- lucasbfr  talk 14:17, 9 February 2009 (UTC)


 * All three blocked. Tiptoety  talk 04:04, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Conclusions
 * that =  =  Jayjg (talk) 05:04, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Report date March 17 2009, 21:09 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets

Regarding this report (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Pararubbas/Archive),

Unfortunately, the "song remains the same". This "user" has opened a new account, Mnht08 ("contributions" here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Mnht08), and continues to: operate almost exclusively on Portuguese soccer, glue all sentences into one, creating a very pleasant-to-watch article and, much much more worse, remove all links and refs, just because.

Examples: Rio Ave FC (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rio_Ave_F.C.&diff=prev&oldid=277218083, only glued sentences here), Orlando Sá, Hélio Sousa, Bassey William Andem (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Orlando_S%C3%A1&diff=prev&oldid=277163912, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=H%C3%A9lio_Sousa&diff=prev&oldid=275588926, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bassey_William_Andem&diff=prev&oldid=275791155, here sentence were glued, infobox signs and external links were removed, just because)

I think a long-range is block could be in order. Attentively, Vasco Amaral, Portugal - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 21:09, 17 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.

I have been asked for input from editor User:NothingButAGoodNothing on many of the previous occasons of puppet vandalism in this ongoing problem, and can appreciate his discomforture at it being a continued disruption to his work in improving the project. If some long-term solution were available, I would endorse it being considered.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:22, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments by other users

Requested by EdJohnston (talk) I have notified Mnht08 of this report. The evidence seems convincing, and an indefinite block of Mnht08 as a sock of Pararubbas seems right. Genuine socks who repeat their behavior usually don't bother to respond when notified, so let's wait a day or two. No objection if a checkuser wants to run a check, but the evidence seems adequate without that. EdJohnston (talk) 21:39, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Request for CheckUser
 * - Tiptoety  talk 19:13, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * I see that Vasco has requested a 'long range block' (above). My translation of that request is: can a checkuser look for an underlying IP that can be blocked? Are there more socks in the drawer? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 02:27, 19 March 2009 (UTC)

The rest are. There's far too much collateral damage to consider a rangeblock. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 05:33, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Conclusions
 * The following are ✅:

All confirmed blocked.  MBisanz  talk 05:39, 20 March 2009 (UTC)

Report date March 26 2009, 01:26 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets

Pararubbas opens a new account, the 7th, still fresh, now named User:Thn08 (contributions here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Thn08), he has not edited much. However, it's "hot" enough to recognize some patterns: he has, so far, ceased to remove links and refs, highly appreciated by the community, but, at least here, he did what he usually does: glued all sentences into one (i still fail to see the point in this) and removed useful signs in infoboxes (i.e. →) (diff here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ant%C3%B3nio_Alberto_Bastos_Pimparel&diff=279235867&oldid=278414076). I kindly request a checkuser.

Attentively, Vasco Amaral --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 01:26, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * UPDATE! I guess Thn08 also waited a few days, as User:EdJohnston suggested below, he waited a few days to see if we would forget, then charged as usual in the previous six accounts: removing links, refs and gluing sentences (see here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Mitchell_van_der_Gaag&diff=next&oldid=277738177 and here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alfredo_Castro&diff=next&oldid=278716014)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users

Similarity of account names, and similarity of interests suggests this is Pararubbas. However, checkuser was very effective in certifying that the previous accounts were him, so it would be helpful here too. If we have to rely on WP:DUCK we would have to wait for more edits to be sure it is him. EdJohnston (talk) 01:40, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments


 * Conclusions
 * Please tag and close, all socks blocked indef. Its pretty obvious based on behavior and account names. ——  nix eagle email me 03:30, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I would agree with Nixeagle on this, archiving. Foxy Loxy  Pounce! 04:41, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Report date April 9 2009, 00:51 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets

User:Pararubbas has returned, with the account User:Asz08 ("contributions" here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Asz08). I will only provide one example of this sad "user"'s deeds because the pattern is so striking it needs no more: gluing sentences, removing signs in infobox, links and refs just because...all in appalling English, with POV/WEASEL to spare. Here it is: (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Beto_(Portuguese_footballer_born_1982)&diff=282355808&oldid=280265401)


 * Evidence submitted by Vasco Amaral - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 00:51, 9 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * To make a behavioral case that this is Pararubbas, we don't need to show actual vandalism, just observe that he is making the same type of changes to Portuguese football articles as the previous socks. The distinctive points noted by NothingButAGoodNothing above are:
 * Running all the sentences together into a single paragraph
 * Removing the small right-arrow symbols from the infobox: "→", which show that the player was transferred to another team
 * Removing reference links.
 * I'm satisfied of the resemblance to the other socks, and the user name fits the pattern Xxx08, so I'd be willing to block indef. I'll wait first to see if there are other comments. EdJohnston (talk) 03:56, 9 April 2009 (UTC)


 * concur with Ed's assessment here. This one is waddling, and the block button awaits.... Mayalld (talk) 12:44, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The new sock has been blocked indef and tagged. Can the report be closed? EdJohnston (talk) 15:21, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

blocked and tagged Mayalld (talk) 15:34, 9 April 2009 (UTC) Mayalld (talk) 15:34, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Conclusions

Report date April 27 2009, 01:54 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets

This "person" opened his eighth (!!!!) sock account, called User:Qaz08 ("contributions" seen here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Qaz08); this "person" continues with the attitude: gluing all sentences, removing signs in players (this "person" still works almost exclusively in Portuguese soccer) and, much much worse, removing all links and references. Three examples here: Flávio Meireles (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fl%C3%A1vio_Meireles&diff=prev&oldid=286251335), Nilson Corrêia Júnior (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nilson_Corr%C3%AAia_J%C3%BAnior&diff=286252234&oldid=259044501) and Tiago Ferreira (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tiago_Ferreira&diff=285890310&oldid=285889972)

Several other things could be said about this individual, but i'll keep it for myself. Attentively, VASCO AMARAL, Portugal - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 01:54, 27 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users

I have indefinitely blocked Qaz08 as a sock of Pararubbas. This is presumably the only action needed. The archive of this case contains the behavior to watch out for, which I observed. EdJohnston (talk) 02:09, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

Mayalld (talk) 13:02, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Conclusions

Report date April 30 2009, 23:32 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets

Since i don't have a watchlist, it was bound to happen: found another sock account of Pararubbas, User:Wsx08 ("contributions" here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Wsx08), the "person" has edited very little with this account (incidentally this account is previous to the one in my last report, Qaz08), and i have not seen - i only checked three or four "contributions" - any link/REF removal; however, you can be 100% it is him. Take this example (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rui_Orlando_Ribeiro_Santos_Neto&diff=283574872&oldid=283246021): the introduction is always the same, he writes capitals in middle of sentences, his English is appalling, he is also an especialist in over-linking and, as you can see clicking on the example (Portuguese footballer, as 99,9999% of his "deeds"), the sentences are all glued into one, another horrible pattern. Ah, and THERE WAS one removal: someone entered to place the tag that this article needed (did it ever!! I already took care of that) improvement, he entered anon and BANG! off it goes the annoying template (see here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rui_Orlando_Ribeiro_Santos_Neto&diff=283336467&oldid=283252473)

Hope this too can be blocked, it's him (what i find incredible is that the eighth account was not yet blocked, and he goes and opens the ninth...Very odd).

Attentively, VASCO AMARAL, PORTUGAL - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 23:32, 30 April 2009 (UTC)


 * THIS JUST IN!!! This "person", obviously, also removed links, honouring master Pararubbas...Found this (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Boris_Pe%C5%A1kovi%C4%8D&diff=283245564&oldid=265070638)

"Signing off" again, VASCO - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 00:17, 1 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Evidence submitted by NothingButAGoodNothing (talk)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users

User:Wsx08 blocked indef as Pararubbas. EdJohnston (talk) 01:16, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * Blocked and tagged.  Syn  ergy 06:05, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

 Syn  ergy 06:05, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Conclusions

Report date May 5 2009, 21:22 (UTC)


Did not rest long; this "person" has a new account, User:Tgb08 ("contributions" here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Tgb08), the disruptive patterns are the same, clearly seen in this example i now provide (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Paulo_Jorge_Carreira_Nunes&diff=prev&oldid=287689400); i typed this player's name by a mere hazard, and when article displayed, sentences ALL GLUED, i did not have to scroll down to find out that....the link was missing, having been removed!! I already told this "person" PARARUBBAS i will not rest, he can open 500000 accounts, i will block them all.

Attentively, VASCO AMARAL - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 21:22, 5 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Evidence submitted by NothingButAGoodNothing (talk)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users

Tgb08 has been blocked indef as a sock of Pararubbas. EdJohnston (talk) 21:46, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * All blocked and tagged.  Syn  ergy 05:06, 6 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Conclusions

Report date May 20 2009, 00:48 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets

Not a surprise, this "person" has returned, now with the account Edc089 (what a genius move, add a "9" to the "8" and continue to vandalize away, that way people won't notice it's PARARUBBAS!!), and the modus operandi is, unfortunately, the same: sentences glued, links/refs removed ("contributions" here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Edc089; example here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bruno_Tiago&diff=prev&oldid=289681304).

Attentively, VASCO AMARAL - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 00:48, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Evidence submitted by NothingButAGoodNothing


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments


 * Conclusions

✅ Peter Symonds ( talk ) 00:53, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Report date July 25 2009, 17:19 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * This "user", Pararubbas, had, for a brief moment, the brilliant idea of having two socks open at the same time, and this one User:Edc018, went, apparently unnoticed, thus not being blocked. As far as i have seen, he has ceased to remove links and refs, but continues to insert POV/WEASEL, as well as, in player infoboxes (his sole interest continues to be football, 99,999999% Portuguese), remove signs and "destroy" club links (i.e club link is S.L. Benfica, he just writes Benfica, it redirects but it's not the same).

Another custom that dates from the first sock is that he glues all sentences in storylines (no paragraphs for this person); examples here (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=F.C._Pa%C3%A7os_de_Ferreira&diff=next&oldid=303911157, anon) and here (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rui_Bento&diff=303746064&oldid=300668721). If you don't want to take the first example in consideration, because it is anonymous (but it's Pararubbas, IP from England with same modus operandi), at least take the second.

Checkuser requested, please block this "user", as we have done in the past with the other 11 (!!) socks. Attentively, VASCO AMARAL, Portugal - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 17:19, 25 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Evidence submitted by NothingButAGoodNothing


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users

Requested by NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 17:19, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
 * CheckUser requests

Additional information needed: Please provide a code letter. SPCUClerkbot (talk) 17:20, 25 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * – This is a pretty clear case where WP:DUCK would apply, especially considering the account name of the most recent vandal. No need for a check, someone just has to block. However, it was suggested that I change this to endorse, to check for sleeper socks. NW ( Talk ) 23:42, 25 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Conclusions
 * Pararubass is, but ✅ Edc018 is the same as some of the socks listed above. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 13:51, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Report date August 30 2009, 20:34 (UTC)
Regarding this investigation on User:Pararubbas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Pararubbas/Archive), i would like for a checkuser on this other account, Asde09, to see if it is the same person. So far, the contributions have not been disruptive (see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Asde09), but the name account is strikingly similar. If indeed it is the same person, i'll be on this case like a wild dog on raw meat, promise - or some good admin can block the account, i think it is customary for accounts which have proven to be socks.

Attentively, VASCO AMARAL - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 20:34, 30 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users

Requested by NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 20:34, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * CheckUser requests


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * Checking now. Contributions and name are similar enough this is a clear WP:DUCK that wouldn't ordinarily need CU, but a) past reports have included half a dozen other names, so there may be more and b) I'm new to the tool, so I'm still practicing with it and this should be an easy confirmation. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 21:56, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
 * How shocking. I was right, there's a nice little sockfarm growing here. Full list of accounts coming soon. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 21:58, 30 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Conclusions


 * ✅ that ==  == . All blocked and tagged. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 22:08, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Report date September 14 2009, 19:27 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Evidence submitted by NothingButAGoodNothing

Pararubbas returns (even tough he has continued to "contribute anonymnously) with the 14 sock!! User:Fgh089 ("contributions" here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Fgh089) - note name similarity, edits in Portuguese soccer, etc, etc - I would appreciate some actions if possible. I also requested a checkuser earlier at the proper page, but it did not work for some reason. However, the outcome of any eventual checkuser does not fret me the least, since i know it is User:Pararubbas.

Take care, ty very much in advance,

VASCO AMARAL, Portugal - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 19:23, 14 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users

Requested by NW ( Talk ) 19:27, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * CheckUser requests


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * Last time I found an extra sock or two on the IP; can't hurt to look again. Again, however, this is certainly a sock and anyone passing by before I finish the check is welcome to block the accused. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 20:22, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * No other socks found, and a rangeblock is out of the question - the ISP being used holds a very large block of addresses, and there would be far too much collateral damage if we tried knocking out even a portion of them. Hers <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:gold">fold  (t/a/c) 20:29, 14 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Could you please check as well please? <b style="color:navy;">NW</b> ( Talk ) 22:02, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ -- Luk  talk 09:25, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Conclusions
 * Both blocked and tagged. <b style="color:navy;">NW</b> ( Talk ) 19:50, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Report date September 27 2009, 18:42 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets

Here comes the 15th sock (at least)!! It is called User:Nji089 (contributions here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Nji089 - so far i don't think it has been disruptive, but it will).

Attentively,

VASCO AMARAL, Portugal - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 18:42, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Evidence submitted by NothingButAGoodNothing


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users

Requested by NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 18:42, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
 * CheckUser requests


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * <b style="color:navy;">NW</b> ( Talk ) 18:57, 27 September 2009 (UTC)


 * . Brandon (talk) 00:24, 28 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Conclusions
 * Sock blocked and tagged. <b style="color:navy;">NW</b> ( Talk ) 00:27, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Report date October 6 2009, 14:27 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets

Here comes sock 16!!! This guy does not understand and won't stop, well neither will i (contributions for new account, Qsx089, seen here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Qsx089) Attentively, VASCO AMARAL, Portugal - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 14:27, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users

Requested by NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 14:27, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * CheckUser requests

to check for IP/range and sleepers. MuZemike 14:59, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * Range check not possible. Brandon (talk) 16:00, 6 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Conclusions

Closing. Peter <b style="color:#02b;">Symonds</b> ( talk ) 13:58, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets


New account for User:Pararubbas, the 17th, called Zxcv089. I had noticed, in the last accounts, this person had ceased to remove links and refs, "only" ruining club links and gluing sentences in storyline and indulge in ridiculous overlinking, but i was preparing to "let this one go"...

Thank god i took a second look!! In Paulo Sérgio Bento Brito, nothing less than five (!!!) REFS were removed (see here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Paulo_S%C3%A9rgio_Bento_Brito&diff=320256898&oldid=320003679). Full list of "contributions" here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Zxcv089).

Attentively, VASCO AMARAL, Portugal - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 13:55, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

CheckUser requests
Requested by NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 13:55, 25 October 2009 (UTC)


 * , and a . Do all of these edits need to be reverted, or are some of them good? <b style="color:navy;">NW</b> ( Talk ) 15:18, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
✅ =  =

is probably ❌.

All the rest are. J.delanoy <sup style="color:red;">gabs <sub style="color:blue;">adds 19:42, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Conclusions
Peter <b style="color:#02b;">Symonds</b> ( talk ) 19:50, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets


And counting!!! Almost 20 socks now, this one called (see pattern) Rdcv089, "contributions" here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Rdcv089), again, almost 100% Portuguese soccer, please kill it before it grows, nothing to add to WP from this individual, i have studied "his case" at length.

Signing off - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 16:01, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

CheckUser requests
Requested by NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 16:01, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * for CU attention to find any other socks and determine whether a rangeblock is possible/necessary. <strong style="color:#0033CC">Nathan <strong style="color:#0033CC"> T 20:48, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

✅

Also,. There could be more, but he is editing from a very dynamic, very busy /14 or possibly /13. There is a lot of noise, so I am not sure of others. J.delanoy <sup style="color:red;">gabs <sub style="color:blue;">adds 01:09, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Conclusions

 * Well, that's annoying. Both tagged and blocked. <b style="color:navy;">NW</b> ( Talk ) 01:12, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets


New account by User:Pararubbas (and i think i may have forgotten one or two socks), called User:Ghjkl890 ("contributions" here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Ghjkl890). User/admin NuclearWarfare had already blocked and reverted this "person", but he kindly asked me to request this action, because he wants to see whether it is possible to block the "person"'s underlying IP.

Attentively, VASCO - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 16:44, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Requested by Vasco Amaral (talk) 16:44, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


 * <b style="color:navy;">NW</b> ( Talk ) 16:46, 18 February 2010 (UTC)


 * All but one account listed above is ; speaking of that one account, though, is a ✅ match for . It might be possible to infer some possibility those accounts are linked to the others, based on technical evidence, but finding out would be labor-intensive and is probably moot in the face of behavioral cues anyway. If there are more recently used socks, I wouldn't mind running some more checks against those. –  Luna Santin  (talk) 00:49, 20 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Is there any chance that the underlying IP could be blocked? <b style="color:navy;">NW</b> ( Talk ) 19:18, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
 * By the looks of it, not easily. – Luna Santin  (talk) 04:11, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by NuclearWarfare
Standard MO; for CU attention. <b style="color:navy;">NW</b> ( Talk ) 21:42, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users
Requested by <b style="color:navy;">NW</b> ( Talk ) 21:42, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

✅. I couldn't find any obvious sleepers. J.delanoy <sup style="color:red;">gabs <sub style="color:blue;">adds 19:55, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by VascoAmaral
User:Pararubbas with a new sock, this one called User:Iklop890 (and list above is somewhat incomplete, he is nearing 30 socks now), please note similarity in name (again!) - see contributions here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Iklop890); no refs or links removal as of yet, but they will start, as well as links "destroyed" and turned into redirects, sentences "glued", etc, etc.

After more than two years since the sockmaster came, this "person" still has not written ONE summary or responded to ONE talkpage message. Checkuser is "mandatory" i reckon. Only to comply, really, i am 100% sure it is Pararubbas.

Attentively - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 03:59, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users
I have indef blocked as an obvious sock based on contributions and username pattern. A sleeper check would still be warranted and helpful. Thank you. — Satori Son 12:44, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Requested by Vasco Amaral (talk) 03:59, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

it's not necessary to list all the accounts, only the ones that haven't been subject to previous SPI cases, I've removed all but the most recent from the "suspected sockpuppets" section, let me know if you have any questions about this. Thank you very much for reporting this case, regards, SpitfireTally-ho! 10:43, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

pretty standard MO and account name. Endorsing for a sleeper check and to check the link, please. SpitfireTally-ho! 10:43, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

No sleepers. --Deskana (talk) 22:14, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by NuclearWarfare
Standard MO; not much more to say. <b style="color:navy;">NW</b> ( Talk ) 21:27, 16 May 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Requested by <b style="color:navy;">NW</b> ( Talk ) 21:27, 16 May 2010 (UTC) ✅. Couldn't find any sleepers. J.delanoy <sup style="color:red;">gabs <sub style="color:blue;">adds 02:15, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
 * for CU attention. <b style="color:navy;">NW</b> ( Talk ) 21:27, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Account indef blocked and contributions reverted. — Satori Son 13:31, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Satori Son
Av9309 was recently blocked as a suspected sock, and shortly thereafter Antoniov93 was created and began making substantially similar edits. Checkuser confirmation, and a check for other new accounts, would be appreciated. — Satori Son 13:39, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Requested by — Satori Son 13:39, 27 May 2010 (UTC) . Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:29, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets


Incredible, INCREDIBLE!!!!! Vandal User:Pararubbas has two (!!) accounts running simultaneously, User:Av93089 and User:098av ("contributions" here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Av93089 and here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/098av), also found this IP, which has been active in several years, so it has a certain level of "dynamism" (here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/92.0.145.142), and this one just for yesterday (see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/92.3.220.59).

P.S. This message was originally sent to user/admin Satori Son, who blocks and revert on sight (he knows this "person" as well as i do, has nearly 50 socks now, and endless IP addresses), but he tends to have large periods absent from Wikipedia, due to out-of-site schedules.

Attentively - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 01:42, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Requested by Vasco Amaral (talk) 01:42, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

Socks already blocked by Satori Son. Also, there has been no sleepers from the last checks. <b style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:medium; color:#4682B4;"> E lockid</b>  ( Talk ) 18:49, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

The IPs look a bit stale to block. So not blocking. <b style="font-family:Calibri; font-size:medium; color:#4682B4;"> E lockid</b>  ( Talk ) 18:49, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by NuclearWarfare
Standard behavioral evidence, Self- for checkuser attention to get a double confirmation. <b style="color:navy;">NW</b> ( Talk ) 03:27, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments



 * that the following is related to the above group:

Being that is  there is no way to confirm a connection, but after looking at the logs I would say the connection to the above two groups is highly. Tiptoety talk 06:42, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * All blocked and tagged. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  13:47, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

06 May 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

With the everappreciated help of user/admin Satori Son, i (WP at large) have been dealing with User:Pararubbas, who will most certainly reach 100 socks before the year has ended (take a look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Suspected_Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Pararubbas and here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Pararubbas)...

The new account is called User:Port9307890 (see "contributions" here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Port9307890). The user's contributions are not vandalic per se (that is from the 20th account onwards, because he removed LINKS/REFS/whatever and glued all sentences in storyline in his "olden days") but: he has been warned several times to stop creating accounts and start talking to people, which he does not not even in summaries (zero of those and zero talkpage interventions!).

I lie about the last bit: he did talk to someone ONCE, precisely with Satori, asking why were his contributions removed - but speaking nothing of his antics! - and leaving an e-mail to be contacted (please see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Satori_Son/Archive_11#Deleted_pages). If possible, i would like to know if a checkuser is possible, to dig up (more) possible sleepers.

Attentively, keep up the good work - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 00:46, 6 May 2011 (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

 * - Endorsing for sleepers and confirmation. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 01:54, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Everything in the archive is and I didn't see any sleepers.  TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  12:53, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Port9307890 is blocked anyway. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 22:47, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

03 June 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Can someone have a look as to whether User:Jimhellie09 (contributions here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Jimhellie09) is User:Pararubbas please? Some of his M.O. is strikingly similar and, to my reply if the former was/is the latter, he ceased all reply and started undoing me after i undid him.

Help please! Attentively - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 11:52, 3 June 2011 (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

 * We can't run a checkuser here, and I'm kinda having a hard time seeing the connection. Could you provide some diffs backing up the claims? —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 15:38, 3 June 2011 (UTC)


 * No significant diffs. Also, as i found out, he started adding refs and links instead of removing them. The only thing that stays the same is: he continues to write in appalling English, overlinking and writing club names without the dots (i.e. SC Braga instead of the correct S.C. Braga). This account, as the other 60+, operates almost exclusively in Portuguese football.

Most interesting still: i confronted him - are you User:Pararubbas? - he did not respond, undid me after i undid him, and ceased all activity after that. Strange, or not (must be opening another account) - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 16:14, 3 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, whatever. I found my own behavioral evidence on this, and per that I've blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 22:24, 4 June 2011 (UTC)