Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Piznajko/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

New user appeared editing Ukrainian topics including voting in an ongoing RFC at talk:Kyiv, moving topics on the list of related RFC's there [], and started using one-click archiver - all on their first day. A few days later they also edited wp:List of cabals and participated in a discussion at wp:AN. It is extremely unlikely that a new user would know about any of these things, and edits to create their own user and talk pages seem designed to create the appearance of a more established user by avoiding red links (their user page was the first edit they performed:, ). They strongly support moving all instances of Kiev to Kyiv, and Piznajko, as an IP, was the one who started the RFC that resulted in the current renaming of the article. who performed the checkuser blocks on Piznajko and the IP. Ermenrich (talk) 12:54, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Some additional behavior evidence: several edits to fairly obscure Ukrainian linguistic topics by both users before starting/participating in an RFC at talk:Kyiv . Similar sense of humor "Colonial Fowl Club"  and "Ukrainian Cabal" . The IP also engaged in "clerking" sorts of activities at talk:Kyiv, similar to the "clerking" done on the list of relate RFCs mentioned above:, , including on the exact same subject , .--Ermenrich (talk) 15:53, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
 * More behavior evidence based on new activity, namely a focus on, see e.g. Sysop Ymblanter re-enforced this harassing methodology in 2018-2019 by threatening those pro-Kyiv editors labeled as 'Ukrainian nationalists' vs. the current  Ymblanter actively reinforces this kind of anti-Ukrainian rhetoric. More examples of Piznajko's focus on Ymblanter (as an IP) can be found at Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement/Archive272. I'll also note that after I posted about my belief that they were a sock on Ymblanter's talk page on October 8  the user suddenly stopped posting until Ymblanter was brought to ANI on an unrelated matter.--Ermenrich (talk) 23:42, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Since Ymblanter openly stated that RogueRickC137 is Piznajko at ANI, the account has gone silent. I think this is further evidence in favor of the identification. If this were a real user, surely he would object to being called a sock at ANI.--Ermenrich (talk) 15:42, 17 October 2020 (UTC)
 * I've have a second suspicious account that I'd like a check user on, who recently voted at the RFC on renaming Battle of Kiev (1918) after three previous edits . I can't figure out how to add them to the list of suspected socks at the top.--Ermenrich (talk) 18:18, 9 October 2020 (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

 * It is that the two are the same person, but it is also very possible that RogueRickC137 is a meat puppet. This needs to go off of behavioral evidence -- Guerillero  &#124;  Parlez Moi  14:38, 8 October 2020 (UTC)


 * I'm not convinced Piznajko and RogueRickC137 are the same person. It seems likely, but I can't quite get to being certain enough to block them.  I'm guessing the "possible" finding from CU is something like "both located in the same country", but for a topic which engenders such strong nationalistic feelings as how to spell the name of your country's capital city, that doesn't mean much.  I agree that RogueRickC137's edit history suggests knowledge beyond what you would reasonably expect from a brand new user (i.e. how to set up and use one click archiver), but that's not enough to hang a sock tag on.  I really can't base a decision on " said it was true".  Ymblanter is an admin; If they didn't feel the evidence was strong enough to block on their own, I'm certainly not going to do it second-hand.  And, finally, RogueRickC137 hasn't edited in over a month, so blocking them now does not serve the purpose of preventing ongoing damage.  If they start up again, we can take another look.  Closing with no action taken. , you cu-blocked Piznajko, but I'm not seeing who they're a sock of.  If that's something which can be revealed, it might provide a clearer behavioral history. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:28, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
 * This is exactly how I feel about it. Piznajko was CU blocked for socking from IP, so it does not help much.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:42, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
 * PS: I only took a brief look at BritishProfessor, but there's nothing in their contribution history that makes me think socking. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:31, 16 November 2020 (UTC)