Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Politialguru/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Politialguru is currently halfway into a two week block for edit waring but appears to be editing using an IP address. The IP cited has a very similar editing pattern: articles about UK law enforcement, UK politicians (particularly Labour) and Canada, repeated small edits to articles, limited use of edit summaries, use of mobile device to edit (advanced mode not available to IP editors), edits into early hours of the morning. ninety:one  19:02, 22 November 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

 * Checkuser isn't used for checking an account against an IP. Declining CU...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   22:07, 22 November 2020 (UTC)


 * The account and IP are blocked. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 00:45, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

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

 * User:HMWikiSoldier and User:Thebossofwiki are ✅ to User:Politialguru and blocked.The ANI discussion here may also be of interest. This SPI is being filed for the record. Would the clerks please tag as needed? EdJohnston (talk) 01:42, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Not a clerk, but I've added the appropriate tags to the user pages - if that's not the done thing then apologies and revert as needed. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:17, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Obvious case of WP:QUACK. Politialguru's last sock was, who was blocked on 14th Jan. One hour later Crunchynotsmooth's account was created.

There's some obvious similarities. All of Politialguru's socks have a particular focus on UK politics, especially Conservative Party (UK). They also seem to edit specific articles within Canadian politics, such as Conservative Party of Canada. He appears to have a particular obsession with altering the political positions of parties, always making the same changes:


 * Conservative Party (UK): Crunchynotsmooth vs HMWikiSoldier.


 * Conservative Party of Canada: Crunchynotsmooth vs HMWikiSoldier — Czello 22:28, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

His tactics are rather similar too: making changes and then forcing others to seek consensus to revert back to the status quo, completely ignoring WP:BRD in the process, and unashamedly edit warring to ensure his preferred version of an article is on top. — Czello 15:11, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Another near-identical edit:


 * Labour Party (UK): Crunchynotsmooth vs HMWikisoldier

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

I believe this accusation is being made in bad faith, i.e. Czello is making a fake case for an "attack". It is possible this is on the basis of his disagreements with me on Conservative Party (UK) and the fact I have sought RfC and consulted members of the arbitration committee including BRD about our dispute and his behaviour. Crunchynotsmooth (talk) 14:47, 20 January 2021 (UTC)


 * I see there has been no actual attempt to explain any of these odd coincidences above. — Czello 14:52, 20 January 2021 (UTC)


 * I'd just like also to note that along with Czello's evidence above, Crunchynotsmooth also deletes things from their Talk page when users raise issues with them, which is another behaviour consistently exhibited by HMWikiSoldier, if the account being created very shortly after the last sock was blocked and continuing the same Quixotic arguments as them isn't quite enough evidence. Ralbegen (talk) 15:31, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

My academic interests relate to politics. That is no conclusive evidence that I also ran the other account I am falsely being accused of, which you should know. I will reiterate that I believe this case being built against me is merely a vexatious on the part of Czello owing to our dispute on talk:Conservative Party (UK), or If you genuinely believe me to be responsible for this other account, then you are quite mistaken. Crunchynotsmooth (talk) 02:54, 21 January 2021 (UTC)


 * Pretty weird coincidence that 1 hour after HMWikisoldier's account was blocked, your account was created and you resumed making the exact same edits he did, right? — Czello 08:32, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Clear WP:QUACK. The skills evident are not those of a new user and for the creation to be coincident with their previous demise is telling. Mutt Lunker (talk) 11:25, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * . Same country, different ISPs, ranges, and same (common) user agent.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   23:03, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
 * . Behavioural evidence is quite compelling. El_C 17:22, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Closing per the above. The SandDoctor  Talk 04:05, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Account opened on date of latest sock's ban. Editing in same or similar areas: United Kingdom; articles combining themes of UK (particularly Newcastle/NE England), Canada, politics/politicians/positions on political spectrum, police. Rarely leaves edit summaries, which are similarly tagged "Mobile edit Mobile web edit Advanced mobile edit", sometimes "Visual edit". Evidently has a grudge against me: and subsequent edits, presumably for my involvement at this ANI and previous SPIs. Multiple warring. Mutt Lunker (talk) 22:38, 4 February 2021 (UTC)


 * There's also this deletion of a comment I posted to another user. Mutt Lunker (talk) 11:07, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * To which add suspected links to User:Politicsnerd123 and thus indeffed User:Ciaran.london. Mutt Lunker (talk) 17:49, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * User:GiantCheeseBall also worth checking. Mutt Lunker (talk) 12:31, 6 February 2021 (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
Although I blocked GiantCheeseBall some time yesterday without any knowledge of this SPI, I would strongly suggest this report continues until the master is identified. Behaviourally, Doubledoppler seems to be the master (I was about to block them too while blocking GCB but just about eased off the block button). Thanks, Lourdes  02:42, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * - I'm pretty sure Doubledopler is a Politialguru sock based on the behavioral evidence, but it's worth CU to confirm, and do a sleeper sweep. I'm particularly interested to see if Crunchynotsmooth matches Doubledopler.  Crunchy was found to be "Same country, different ISPs, ranges, and same (common) user agent", which would be explained by just popping a new sim card in their phone. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:51, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Just a quick update. Have blocked Doubledoppler too for a week for edit warring. As mentioned above, it would be beneficial to get the CU results on DD and GCB. Thanks, Lourdes  02:59, 7 February 2021 (UTC)


 * - Mz7 (talk) 06:31, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Doubledoppler is ✅ to the following accounts:
 * HMWikiSoldier was previously blocked and tagged as a confirmed sockpuppet of Politialguru. All accounts, closing. Mz7 (talk) 06:36, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks . Per my added note above, could you also check against User:Politicsnerd123 and User:Ciaran.london please? Mutt Lunker (talk) 08:57, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , they didn't come up immediately when I ran the check on Doubledoppler. Just to be clear, why do you think those accounts are related? Mz7 (talk) 09:04, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * HMWikiSoldier was previously blocked and tagged as a confirmed sockpuppet of Politialguru. All accounts, closing. Mz7 (talk) 06:36, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks . Per my added note above, could you also check against User:Politicsnerd123 and User:Ciaran.london please? Mutt Lunker (talk) 08:57, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * , they didn't come up immediately when I ran the check on Doubledoppler. Just to be clear, why do you think those accounts are related? Mz7 (talk) 09:04, 7 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Behavioural, with similar areas of interest, per my opener above (United Kingdom article, UK/Canada/politics/politicians/positions on political spectrum, often addressing infoboxes), warring, mobile editing, generally not leaving edit summaries. Mutt Lunker (talk) 09:58, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * I ran another check to compare the accounts to Politicsnerd123 and Ciaran.london, and at this time, I would say they're to be related from a technical standpoint. Mz7 (talk) 17:57, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets





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

Echoing previous investigations: edits to articles combining themes of UK (particularly Newcastle/NE England & status or term applied to Scotland/England/Wales/NI (constituent/country v. nation etc)), police, Dr Who. (To note, as yet I haven’t noted edits re other favoured themes: Canada, politics/politicians/positions on political spectrum.) Regarding diffs, as far as I can see, essentially all edits by this user fit the pattern noted. Rarely leaves edit summaries, which are similarly tagged "Mobile edit Mobile web edit", sometimes "Visual edit". Editing portrays high level of sophistication, not to be expected in someone who hasn’t been here before. Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:50, 11 March 2021 (UTC)


 * On further investigation I have now found characteristic edits to politician articles, targetted by previous socks, such as Rishi Sunak (cf. ) and Catherine McKinnell] (cf., and probably ). Mutt Lunker (talk) 11:39, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, User:Mince pies (squinting eyes) targetted articles edited by others in the sock farm. Mutt Lunker (talk) 12:00, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
 * And the Canada theme has also appeared: Mutt Lunker (talk) 14:59, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

User:LearnGuitarWithDavidBrent would seem to be the latest from the farm. Mutt Lunker (talk) 06:05, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
 * As if proof were needed, from the User Creation log: "03:57 User account LearnGuitarWithDavidBrent talk contribs was created by SunriseUntilSunset" Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:12, 13 March 2021 (UTC)

...and User:Thehelpaltoeggplant. Mutt Lunker (talk) 09:40, 13 March 2021 (UTC) ...and User:82.35.172.189, who from their talk page was previously flagged as a Politialguru sock but apparently not blocked. Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:08, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
 * User:Broforbernie has just appeared. Would you agree it's them ? Mutt Lunker (talk) 12:13, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

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


 * Comment the most recent batch of edits seemed to start from the account after midnight (UTC) on 12 March, clocking up over 500 edits by making repeated small changes, mainly to Newcastle upon Tyne, but also to Emily Maitlis, Newcastle University Students' Union  and Arthur's Hill . This continued throughout the day, with the edits beginning to be larger and more controversial in nature, mainly by moving large amounts of prose around the Newcastle article for no apparent reason . At 04:07 the next morning the  was created to make the same edits to Newcastle upon Tyne , followed by  at 07:01 . The last edit by the DavidBrent account was 05:47 on 14 March , before they moved back to SunriseUntilSunset just 8 minutes later , which they have since used to edit war.

I think this erratic account-hopping proves that they are one and the same, and that all should be blocked per WP:DUCK. Best, PinkPanda272 (talk/contribs) 12:14, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
User:SunriseUntilSunset, User:LearnGuitarWithDavidBrent, and User:Thehelpaltoeggplant are all ✅ to User:Politialguru. User:Mince pies (squinting eyes) is, and I've blocked due to the behavioral overlap. I've also blocked the confirmed sleeper accounts User:Mouserinchief, User:Stottieloaf, and User:Papaspigbag. GorillaWarfare (talk) 21:36, 14 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Everybody is already blocked and tagged, closing. Blablubbs&#124;talk 16:54, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Two days after Politialguru's latest set of socks were blocked, is created and immediately starts making edits to the usual set of articles: the infobox in Nick Brown, with whom they appear to be obsessed, minor edits to articles about places in North-East England , and Labour politicians (, . ninety:one   12:15, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

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

Looks like we've come to the same conclusion simultaneously, per above. Mutt Lunker (talk) 12:19, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Time to range block? Mutt Lunker (talk) 12:29, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

I have suspicions about another potential sock, but if I'm honest I don't have much evidence other than the fact they became very active shortly after Crunchynotsmooth was blocked, again on political pages. I'm weary about making an accusation without any firm proof, however. What would you recommend? — Czello 14:18, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
✅ User:Broforbernie and sleeper account User:Fantaandvuvuzela. GorillaWarfare (talk) 13:58, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * You can mention it here and I or another CU can see if there's basis for a check. GorillaWarfare (talk) 14:20, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * thanks. The account is B. M. L. Peters (not linking to avoid pinging). They're very active on political pages, including some Canadian articles, including adding factions to party pages (something the other socks did), they have a habit of blanking or deleting messages from their talk page, and almost their entire edit history is tagged as visual edits, something Mutt Lunker noticed above. — Czello 14:31, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * That does not seem sufficiently likely to me. GorillaWarfare (talk) 14:35, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. Like I say, I don't have much in the way of real proof -- it just set off a bit of a red flag for me. — Czello 14:37, 16 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Blocked, nothing further to do here. Closing. The SandDoctor  Talk 07:24, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

The IP editor who has led to semi-protection of North East England has just registered this account, despite a block on account creation. This edit (diff) shows that the IP editor is the same person. It is also obvious that the edits by this user are of the same style. Plus "veganburger" is obviously a play on the "Cheeseburger296" ID used for uploading Wikimedia Commons images (many of which have been COPYVIO) and the name used to sign a message on my talk page (diff). 10mmsocket (talk) 06:54, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Further evidence: If it isn't already obvious, look at the edits to Metropolitan Police since 15 August. You'll see the same Redruth, Cornwall-based IP address range that was used on North East England, Northern England and other disrupted articles recently. Then on the afternoon of 17 August the IP stops editing and this account starts - with the exact same pattern. This duck is quacking very loudly. --10mmsocket (talk) 07:07, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

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

I've been tracking the activity of this user for some time and will elaborate further when I get the chance but in the meantime I'll note that today they have surfaced as User:Ggggetitgurl. Mutt Lunker (talk) 14:54, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Prior to their recent relocation to Cornwall, their IPs were indicating London or non-specific UK as a location, prior to that NE England, possibly specifically Newcastle, if I remember correctly. As well as concentrating on articles regarding the North East of England, police etc., they target the articles of politicians and the copious IP editing at Nick Brown over the course of months gives an illustration of the IPs they have been using. I give a fuller description of their habits here. They have returned to IP editing, e.g. at Metropolitan Police, so a range block would be desirable. Mutt Lunker (talk) 21:52, 18 August 2021 (UTC)


 * Another tracker here. This sequence of edits is textbook Politialguru - repeated, tiny edits that add little or nothing of value, an obsession with the north east of England. This will also be them - they cannot stay away from the Nick Brown article. The two accounts listed will definitely be them, based on the intense editing pattern, low-value edits and article choice, and other than that it's just a question of regularly checking their edit history of their favourite pages - their edits soon stand out. None of the articles they choose are particularly high traffic so spotting them is pretty easy. ninety:one 22:10, 18 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Another account [Ggggetitgurl] launched shortly after previous account was outed as a suspected sockpuppet. Same MO - low level wikifiddling on North East / Police / Fire articles. 10mmsocket (talk) 15:22, 18 August 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Blocked, tagged, closing. Bbb23 (talk) 18:44, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Back editing all the same previous articles, in particular north east England related and politicians. This edit which happened immediately after page protection is a repeat of previous edits to the same article. 10mmsocket (talk) 06:26, 22 October 2021 (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

 * Rangeblocked. GeneralNotability (talk) 19:49, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

He's back again and making the exact same edits on the exact same articles as his many many previous sock accounts. WP:DUCK is obvious. 10mmsocket (talk) 09:37, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Politicians, Northeast England, transport, police - quack. Mutt Lunker (talk) 18:08, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

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

See "comments by other users" above! 10mmsocket (talk) 12:46, 23 December 2021 (UTC)


 * My comments in this user's SPI archive from 18th August 21, from the second sentence onwards, apply equally to this new sock regarding subject matter. Typically also, the new sock's edits are from a mobile device and make fairly significant but apparently pointless changes, rarely if ever supported. As this applies to pretty much any of their edits in any of their guises, highlighting individual diffs is superfluous.
 * , your mention of "comments by other users" appears to regard material that has been removed because of its disruptive nature. If you can remember, can you elaborate as to its content and relevance? Mutt Lunker (talk) 22:01, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Metrosteve is also edit warring. Severe storm  28  18:11, 30 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Other users are possible sockpuppets . Severe  storm  28  18:13, 30 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Politialguru has the same editing pattern as metrosteve-Editing many times, only to get reverted. Then, the user starts edit warring. Metrosteve may be a sockpupppet of Politialguru. Severe  storm  28  18:20, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
 
 * Thankyou for your report, however not everyone at SPI is familiar with this case. Please provide 2-3 diffs directly comparing the socks to the suspected master using bullet points, with a brief explanation of what the diffs are showing (no more than 1 sentence per bullet point) so that a clerk can process this. Thanks, --Jack Frost (talk) 09:15, 23 December 2021 (UTC)
 * , your request for additional information is sound, and, in my view, the users you pinged have failed to provide the requested information. However, I've done my own investigation and am satisfied that Metrosteve is a sock of Politialguru. Therefore, I've blocked and tagged the account. I hope you don't mind. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 19:39, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Just as User:Metrosteve was blocked today, this IP has popped up to revert the good work of those involved in undoing his bad work. 10mmsocket (talk) 22:06, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

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

Also, on, reverted one of my edits, same edit as User:Metrosteve. Others include  Severe  storm  28  22:10, 30 December 2021 (UTC)


 * This may be a sockpuppet and a possible block evasion, since this IP user is reverting other users' edits, which is the same editing pattern as the other sockpuppeteers. Severe  storm  28  22:24, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Blocked the /64 range for 48 hours. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 22:26, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Resumption of activity from same geolocation as last known IP, User:2A01:4C8:1488:8B62:F997:1338:1555:BB9F, range-blocked for 48 hours on 30th December. Nick Brown is a highly-favoured target of this sock. I'm mot sure how to view other edits by IPs in this range but suspect the sock will be hopping and that they will have made other edits. Ping who addressed the recent activity and may have a perspective. Mutt Lunker (talk) 19:55, 5 January 2022 (UTC)


 * @Mutt Lunker regarding seeing the contributions of a IP range, you need to do something like this. The ticky part is knowing how big a range you should specify.  According to the WHOIS database, this is part of 2a01:4c8::/29, which is a humongous range.  So large in fact, the Wikimedia software won't even let you list it (the maximum is /32).  Suffice it to say, range blocking is not going to be useful here.  Page protection will probably be a more useful tool, but I looked at the last few edits to Nick Brown and they look legitimate to me, so I'm not going to do that.  The folks at WP:RFPP might be willing to do a deeper investigation, however. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:36, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks RoySmith. Yeah, the edits by this sock are largely inconsequential, often pointless and actively damaging ones are in the minority but the sock is prolific and evading a block. If the stream of mundane edits is unchecked, they become emboldened and more destructive. Mutt Lunker (talk) 20:46, 5 January 2022 (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

 * Closing per my comments above. -- RoySmith (talk) 20:37, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Along the lines of yesterday's, now archived, SPI: resumption of activity from same geolocation as last known IPs, User:2A01:4C8:1488:8B62:F997:1338:1555:BB9F, range-blocked for 48 hours on 30th December, and User:2A01:4C8:1489:EC39:B4A4:66F6:9F25:244. Newcastle upon Tyne is a favoured target of this sock. The edits by this user are largely inconsequential, often pointless and actively damaging ones are in the minority but the sock is prolific and evading a block. Mutt Lunker (talk) 15:24, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
 * In regard to your reponse, I'll elaborate on the reason that I've logged the likes of this case. Formerly, I would note on an identified sock's userpage that they were a suspected sock of whichever master and, if there was no particularly egregious editing, or if the master was likely to hop IP without making further edits, would not log an SPI. The tag would however prove useful for tracking the sock by having a list of suspected socks, recording IPs used, geolcations etc. However, several times I had the sock tag removed from the suspected socks' user pages on the basis that no SPI had been filed, thus removing them from the list of suspected socks. Is it in fact perfectly okay to tag suspects without lodging an SPI or, if not, is there some other way of maintaining a record of suspected socks of a master? I'll note that, as can be seen from the SPI archive, this particular sock is highly prolific and a considerable waster of time of multiple users, so also highly expensive. Mutt Lunker (talk) 17:03, 6 January 2022 (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

 * as RoySmith explained at the last SPI, there's not much that can be done block-wise given this sockmaster's IP situation. We're not going to block a massive range of IPs for edits that, by your own admission, are "largely inconsequential"—or really for anything other than the worst of the worst. In the future, if there's active vandalism from an IP or a small range (see WP:/64), report to WP:AIV, and if it's from a broader range report to WP:RFPP, in either case with a link to this SPI; given how dynamic their IP situation is, anything you say here will likely be stale by the time anyone arrives to review your filing. Please also see my essay User:Tamzin/SPI is expensive. . --  Tamzin  [ cetacean needed ] (she/they) 16:39, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
– bradv 🍁  22:11, 20 July 2022 (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

 * ✅ by CU. Blocked and tagged. – bradv <sup style="color:transparent;text-shadow:0 0 0 red;font-size:60%">🍁  22:13, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
Part of the same pattern of edits, on the same and similar articles, to the socks recently confirmed in Sockpuppet_investigations/Politialguru/Archive. Often reinstate or repeat edits of the other socks. All these identities share the usual interests (UK politics, NE England, police, emergency services, transport, UK political and administrative divisions (others listed in previous investigations)); largely making apparently pointless, often sweeping but insignificant tweaks to articles. Mutt Lunker (talk) 11:57, 22 July 2022 (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

 * I'm blocking the two IPs for disruptive editing for three months and have semiprotected Nick Brown for two months. No comment on whether the IPs are Politialguru, though the behavior fits. Marking for close. No tags are needed. EdJohnston (talk) 15:07, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
As with previous reports, the same pattern of edits, on the same and similar articles. Usual interests (UK politics, NE England, police, emergency services, transport, UK political and administrative divisions); largely making apparently pointless, often sweeping but insignificant tweaks to articles. I already had my eye on them but had neither taken action nor made contact when they made this unexplained edit to my user page. indicates CU confirms User:Consequencesortruth as the same individual and that there was a large amount of logged-out editing as well. User:5.151.120.139, User:5.151.120.138 and User:5.151.120.141 fit with the pattern, as does User:Dessertmenu. Mutt Lunker (talk) 23:42, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Add User:5.151.120.137. Mutt Lunker (talk) 23:59, 14 January 2023 (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

 * do you want to upgrade the block on Mark Pougatch or shall we close this off considering everything is blocked? Leaving the call to you, my friend. The SandDoctor  Talk 19:30, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
 * , I figured I'd leave it to you guys since I always have to look for the right template. ;) Drmies (talk) 21:52, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
 * isn't CU confirmed just a Twinkle dropdown option? I can't see it anymore as they hid from non-CUs but I do recall it being there. Looking it up from memory, the template is Checkuserblock-account. The SandDoctor  Talk 21:55, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
 * User:TheSandDoctor, you're right--I was thinking of the tag, not the block. I did just change the block (I think the WMF pays $1 for the upgrade), but yeah, those tags, I never memorized this. Old age! Keep in mind that for YEARS I did all the uw-warnings from memory, so I paid my dues! Drmies (talk) 22:17, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Now tagged too. Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:01, 16 January 2023 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
Blatant duck, revisiting previously visited articles and similar. Searching edit histories for "Politialguru" will throw up numerous edit summaries noting reversions of socks of said, e.g. Surrey, South Yorkshire, Tyne and Wear, Tyne and Wear Fire and Rescue Service, North Yorkshire, Hampshire, County Durham... Similar interests - politics, English local government divisions, emergency services, general tendency to NE England. Mutt Lunker (talk) 16:38, 18 March 2023 (UTC)


 * As a seasoned Politialguru mole-whacker I agree with Mutt Lunker's summary. Nicely spotted. 10mmsocket (talk) 16:48, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Comments by other users

 * Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Can I please request an admin to investigate? BlaineCreek (talk) 19:31, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Hi, These accusations of sockpuppeting made against me are false. I would like to continue to edit Wikipedia but I will of course stop should my edits be undone. I would be glad if an administrator could investigate and report back with evidence which will clear my name concerning these allegations. Thank you BlaineCreek (talk) 19:39, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
They're confirmed to: -- zzuuzz (talk) 21:37, 19 March 2023 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
Similar interests, English towns and cities, tendency to NE England. Revisiting previously visited articles and similar (e.g. Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Hampshire; searching edit histories for "Politialguru" will throw up edit summaries noting reversions of earlier socks). Watched as a sleeper for some time, they are now making characteristically sweeping and contested changes to Middlesbrough. Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:52, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Comments by other users

 * Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Agree with Mutt Lunker's summary; the evidence is irrefutable. XtraJovial (talk • contribs) 16:48, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
I've blocked the account as pretty much confirmed, and I'm putting this on hold for a few days while some technical things get sorted out. -- zzuuzz (talk) 20:39, 28 May 2023 (UTC)

Yup,. -- zzuuzz (talk) 13:09, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
Exact same focus on Labour party politicians and wikifiddling with the images and lead section of north east England settlements. Quack, quack, quack! 10mmsocket (talk) 17:38, 5 July 2023 (UTC)


 * I'm sure veteran politialguru hunter @Mutt Lunker will be happy to add his US$0.10 10mmsocket (talk) 17:39, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Well done. Had spotted the quacking before seeing this report but we're there anyway. Mutt Lunker (talk) 20:58, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I think he has returned under a new account SPH12 . It has reverted many of his changes at United Kingdom. For example, take a look at the edit he made to the lead regarding income inequality here. It's just been added back under the economy section here.
 * There are also other removed edits the made on Londonski that were restored today by SPH12.
 * I must admit, I've never done anything like this before. If someone could help me by reporting this, would be appreciated! Thank you. Bwflag2 (talk) 00:17, 17 July 2023 (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

 * ✅ to each other:


 * to Dreamy <i style="color:#d00">Jazz</i> talk to me &#124; my contributions 19:45, 5 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Good enough for me to be convinced. Blocking and tagging as suspected.
 * Courcelles (talk) 20:40, 5 July 2023 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
Same focus as the last sockpuppet Londonski, and they make no effort to hide this. Straight on to North-east England (Middlesborough, Northern England). Below they insert the same content, with the same terminology and sources, as the previous sock: Londonski - highest levels of Gini coefficient income inequality in Europe; SPH12 - highest levels of Gini coefficient income inequality in Europe

Looks like a duck to me <span style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#4682B4 0.1em 0.1em 1.5em,#4682B4 -0.1em -0.1em 1.5em;color:#000000"><i style="color:#999900">Cambial </i>— <b style="color:#218000">foliar❧</b> 00:22, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
 * or may also have a view. Pinging  as the previous instance is not yet archived. <span style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#4682B4 0.1em 0.1em 1.5em,#4682B4 -0.1em -0.1em 1.5em;color:#000000"><i style="color:#999900">Cambial </i>— <b style="color:#218000">foliar❧</b> 00:26, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Just seen your comments; if you have anything further add it just below. <span style="white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:#4682B4 0.1em 0.1em 1.5em,#4682B4 -0.1em -0.1em 1.5em;color:#000000"><i style="color:#999900">Cambial </i>— <b style="color:#218000">foliar❧</b> 00:31, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Well done. They might as well wear a fluorescent duck suit with flashing lights and a megaphone. Why do they bother? Mutt Lunker (talk) 08:24, 17 July 2023 (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

 * ✅ Blocked. Courcelles (talk) 00:34, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
Typically sweeping edits to usual areas of interest (e.g. law enforcement, politicians (particularly Labour), NE England). Also consider User:109.144.221.165. Mutt Lunker (talk) 20:42, 24 July 2023 (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

 * - Signed up hours after SPH12's block, consistent timecard, topical overlap. Requesting CU since it has been recently useful. MarioGom (talk) 15:22, 18 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Not seeing any sleepers, but yeah, blocked. Not quite confirmed so tagging as proven.
 * Courcelles (talk) 15:35, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
Per WP:QUACK, typically sweeping edits to usual areas of interest (e.g. law enforcement, politicians (particularly Labour), NE England, UK local government, scifi drama). Worth a sweep for sleepers. Mutt Lunker (talk) 11:59, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
 * A quick example for you: D&the B versus earlier blocked IP sock. Mutt Lunker (talk) 21:24, 14 December 2023 (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

 * - In order to facilitate and expedite your request, please provide diffs to support your case. Please give two or more diffs meeting the following format:
 * 1) At least one diff is from the sockmaster (or an account already blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet of the sockmaster), showing the behaviour characteristic of the sockmaster.
 * 2) At least one diff per suspected sockpuppet, showing the suspected sockpuppet emulating the behaviour of the sockmaster given in the first diff.
 * 3) In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided. Around one sentence is enough for this.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  15:05, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Since Mutt Lunker provided diffs and the behaviour seemed similar to past socks based on my own analysis, I ran a check to compare to historical data. The technical evidence isn't especially enlightening - it's, no more or less than that. This will need to be decided based on behaviour - further diffs would be helpful. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 02:28, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Blocking as suspected and closing. Izno (talk) 23:59, 22 December 2023 (UTC)