Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Prairespark/Archive

04 January 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets






 * User compare report Auto-generated every six hours.

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

Both are new unregistered users hitting the same articles with sweeping controversial additions and citing the same polemical sources (Great Leap Forward, Great Chinese Famine, Mao's Great Famine). Also, they both refer to me as "Mr. Griffin." Coincidence? C.J. Griffin (talk) 15:20, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Paramanami emerged on 7 January making comments very strongly reminiscent of Prairiespark Collect (talk) 11:20, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I'm wondering if this user is related to User:Jacob Peters--PCPP (talk) 15:45, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Hardly. However, there are other suspicious accounts that make similar edits and could be socks of Prairespark, including, and  . Biophys (talk) 23:45, 4 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I had just started filing an SPI case against Prairespark myself! More socks:, , .  All are a bunch of WP:SPA accounts that have popped up in the last week or so, all related to the Great Chinese Famine and the recent book about it, Mao's Great Famine.  They all argue from the same ideological basis in Talk:Mass killings under Communist regimes and edit (usually, edit war) from the same basis in these articles as well as Great Leap Forward.  Wasted Time R (talk) 01:54, 5 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I would also check . Something strange is going on here.Biophys (talk) 17:37, 5 January 2011 (UTC)


 * 170.170.59.133 has just shown up making comments akin to the socks at Talk:Mass killings under Communist regimes at .  Collect (talk) 21:52, 5 January 2011 (UTC)


 * The newest account, might be indeed a sock of User:Jacob Peters based on his editing style (could be also a sock of  or ). Biophys (talk) 17:45, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Adding a CU to see what comes up. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 02:37, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

The two accounts are ✅ as each other. As far as User:Jacob Peters is concerned, I wouldn't be able to tell via CU. –MuZemike 19:29, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

To clarify, the following five are ✅ as each other:



As a small protip, add any additional suspected socks to the list at the top of the page so I can easily see them. –MuZemike 19:45, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

User:Huaxia is ❌ and User:Hcfwesker is. –MuZemike 19:46, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the clarification. I've blocked and tagged all the accounts that were confirmed. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 20:03, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisting, as another account was added. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 20:45, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

– I'm going to need to confer with another CU on this, as I found an interesting tangent with regards to the latest reported sock. –MuZemike 21:12, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * To update MuZemike's comment, LaoZi81 appears to actually be, whose SPI has been updated accordingly. TN X Man  12:50, 7 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Another obvious sock of Prairespark has shown up:, who has adopted the identical viewpoint on the same set of articles. Wasted Time R (talk) 11:18, 7 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Blocked Paramanami as a sock per WP:DUCK. Is there anything else to do with this case, or are we done? All the accounts are blocked. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 15:25, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think so; all accounts have been blocked. Hey  Mid  (contribs) 15:32, 8 January 2011 (UTC)