Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Professor Henyo/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Despite Draft:Francis Baraan IV (Draft:Francis Martin Beltran Baraan IV) was first created by an ip user (dynamic ip), was heavily involved in the process of pushing the draft to the article namespace. After the deletion, he was well notified to create a clean draft. Not sure he missed the point or not, now he was recreating the draft by creating another account.

Also, compare Draft:Francisco Baraan III with the page history of User:Professor Henyo. Matthew_hk  t  c  09:23, 26 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Lastly, Baraan III article was deleted before as Francisco Fontelera Baraan III in 2013, not sure that version created by stale account had connection to the current draft or not.  Matthew_hk   t  c  09:26, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

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

Hi, I don't why I'm being targeted. I am not abiding Wikipedia. I am just here to contribute and write articles. Filipino Idiotor (talk) 12:53, 26 March 2018 (UTC)


 * , in case you did not understand, the Sock-puppet is a terminology in wikipedia to describe user create another account. Having two accounts is allowed, but using alternative account for improper use is not (see Sock puppetry). Your contents in Baraan IV and Baraan III were exactly the same as the content that was (re)created by . Please stick to use only one account, not create another account in order to submit the same draft that was deleted. Matthew_hk   t  c  12:59, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

I get it now. Apologies for my ignorance. I won't be using the other account anymore. This is what I'll be using from now on. I actually thought my other account got deleted, too, together with my draft. Apparently, I was wrong. Filipino Idiotor (talk) 13:02, 26 March 2018 (UTC)  Filipino Idiotor (talk) 13:02, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - Given the admission, could an admin please soft block Professor Henyo so that the user is restricted to one account? Thanks. Sro23 (talk) 04:11, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Soft blocked Professor Henyo. Closing. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:34, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Recreating of Draft:Francis Baraan IV with same set of citations, which were routine coverage of the subject. Matthew_hk  t  c  10:11, 19 September 2018 (UTC)


 * More specific to compare the old deleted draft and new draft, using the same archive.is link http://archive.li/gRFtJ as well as https://www.philstar.com/entertainment/2010/02/13/548872/i-am-not-immoral that were discussed with the sock master, a sponsor of some event is not a significant coverage. Also on Draft:Francis Baraan IV, if i remember right, the wording was roughly the same and without citation. Matthew_hk   t  c  13:19, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

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

Outrageous. I don't know what Matthew HK is talking about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheFourthStatesman (talk • contribs) 10:15, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
This case is. CU declined.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:55, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
 * The draft is similar enough to all of the deleted versions that it's clear it was written by the same person. In the last report, the user admitted that they created a new account because they thought they lost access to the old one when their draft was deleted. explained that they may only use one account, and softblocked the "lost" account. Tony was right to assume good faith but it is now apparent that this was at least partially a deception. I see two possibilities: this account is a different person working with copy supplied by a common third-party (undisclosed paid editing); or they are the same person as the previous accounts trying to republish their article under a new name, after having been told not to do that (WP:SCRUTINY). It doesn't matter which one it is because I would indefinitely block them either way, and I have. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:21, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Not that it matters, but for the record, I endorse this action and the reasoning. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:19, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Able to re-summit the draft Draft:Francisco Baraan III, which exactly the same as the old content (which later WP:REFUNDed). Other ip edit on Cory Quirino and Ariella Arida are also related to Draft:Francis Baraan IV, which either the sockmaster is Francis Baraan IV, or people that under his direction. Matthew hk (talk) 10:25, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Also, the sockmaster also contested the speedy in User talk:Professor Henyo. Matthew hk (talk) 10:30, 26 December 2018 (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

 * . IP blocked for 3 days. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:25, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Recreation of the draft Draft:Francisco Baraan III. Yes, anyone can create a draft, but not the same wording in the sections Family Life, education, etc. The only new addition, probably Drug Matrix Scandal and Maguindanao Massacre Controversy (if i remember it right). Matthew hk (talk) 15:10, 9 March 2019 (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 far too obvious to require CU attention. . Sir Sputnik (talk) 18:22, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Sorry for reopen the SPI case that locate in Sockpuppet investigations/EditorManagerPH. Based on behaviour, above sock suspects solely want to publish Francisco Baraan III, Francis Baraan IV, Draft:Francis Baraan IV, is clearly matching the behaviour of User:Professor Henyo and previous sock. Also Professor Henyo = PH. Matthew hk (talk) 19:57, 22 August 2020 (UTC)


 * read also the protection log of Draft:Francisco Baraan III. Matthew hk (talk) 19:58, 22 August 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

 * Closing with no action taken. MediaManager1 and EditorManagerPH were already determined to be the same person but not in violation of WP:ILLEGIT in Sockpuppet investigations/EditorManagerPH.  So there's really nothing to do here.  If the articles they are creating are contrary to our content guidelines, that can be dealt with via non-SPI means, and I see that's already under way. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:57, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
 * - Could you please take another look at this case? Yes we know the two new editors are the same person, but I agree with Matthew hk, this appears to be another Professor Henyo sock, given the repeated attempts to recreate the salted BLP. Sro23 (talk) 00:22, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * , thanks for your note. I'm happy to take another look.  Looking at the last version of Francis Baraan IV edited by Professor Henyo vs the version created by  EditorManagerPH, they are substantially different.  I also looked at this version by DJWikiEditor747, which looks more like Professor Henyo's than EditorManagerPH.
 * EditorManagerPH uses mostly mobile and visual editor. Professor Henyo and DJWikiEditor747, not.  But, that could be explained away by the passage of a year's time.  People change what tools they use.  I'm also looking at the user names of the Professor Henyo socks vs the Managers; they don't feel like the same style.  On the other hand, I can't deny the Professor Henyo -> PH similarity.  The Managers disclosed their paid editing status.  None of the socks did that.
 * So, I'm having a hard time calling Professor Henyo and EditorManagerPH the same person. Meat, sure, but not socks.  I'm happy to have somebody else re-close this with a different result, but that's what I'm seeing. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:02, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * PS, the managers mostly edit on Friday, Saturday, Sunday. That's not the case with the Professor Henyo socks.  -- RoySmith (talk) 01:08, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * So, I'm having a hard time calling Professor Henyo and EditorManagerPH the same person. Meat, sure, but not socks.  I'm happy to have somebody else re-close this with a different result, but that's what I'm seeing. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:02, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
 * PS, the managers mostly edit on Friday, Saturday, Sunday. That's not the case with the Professor Henyo socks.  -- RoySmith (talk) 01:08, 26 August 2020 (UTC)


 * We can all agree at the very least these accounts are paid meatpuppets of PH, but with the direction the AFD is currently headed, I suppose we won't have to worry about them causing any more disruption. Reclosing. Sro23 (talk) 01:29, 26 August 2020 (UTC)