Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Romeparis/Archive

22 August 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

There has been edit warring on, with many IPs attempting to return an image made and added to the article by Romeparis. The full list of reverts is as follows (dates in UTC):


 * 1) 10:13, 21 August 2012 (edit summary: "Undid revision 508429679 by 178.232.7.114 (talk)")
 * 2) 11:11, 21 August 2012 (edit summary: "Undid revision 508434748 by 178.232.7.114 (talk)")
 * 3) 11:48, 21 August 2012 (edit summary: "Undid revision 508440217 by 178.232.7.114 (talk)")
 * 4) 13:15, 21 August 2012 (edit summary: "Undid revision 508448584 by 178.232.139.198 (talk)")
 * 5) 22:34, 21 August 2012 (edit summary: "Undid revision 508527582 by 89.8.131.249 (talk)")
 * 6) 07:01, 22 August 2012 (edit summary: "Undid revision 508527582 by 178.232.10.159 (talk)")
 * 7) 07:24, 22 August 2012 (edit summary: "Undid revision 508579020 by 89.8.146.70 (talk)")
 * 8) 07:27, 22 August 2012 (edit summary: "Undid revision 508579577 by 89.8.24.175 (talk)")
 * 9) 07:29, 22 August 2012 (edit summary: "Undid revision 508579781 by 89.8.24.175 (talk)")
 * 10) 08:12, 22 August 2012 (edit summary: "Undid revision 508583111 by 89.8.24.175 (talk)")
 * 11) 09:29, 22 August 2012 (edit summary: "Undid revision 508587126 by Wiki13  (talk)")
 * 12) 11:03, 22 August 2012 (edit summary: "Undid revision 508590282 by Wiki13  (talk)")

I suspect that Romeparis logged out of their account to repeatedly attempt to return their picture to the article, an inappropriate use of an alternative account as they are "circumventing policies or sanctions" (namely the three revert rule) and "contributing to the same page or discussion with multiple accounts" (SOCK). This is supported by Romeparis' listing as an "Italian cross wiki picture vandal. Replaces correct pictures with mediocre quality made by himself or copyvio. Keeps editwarring. Accounts are created cross-wiki. ... Checkuser done on commons. Global block for 3 days (= maximum allocation time) for IP-addresses; long block for the static ip-address and global lock for accounts is preferred." Further evidence to suggest that the editor was at least actively watching the article is his rapid response to Talk:Ben Bulben, where the issue of sock puppetry was raised by another editor. I have not requested a CheckUser because they will not link accounts to IPs, but believe this behaviour passes the duck test. Michael  An  on  12:23, 22 August 2012 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * - Please take a look at this file compiled on this cross wiki vandal on nl-wiki here. Kind regards, MoiraMoira (talk) 20:39, 22 August 2012 (UTC) admin on nl-wiki
 * I have to confess that I didn't recognise the extent of alleged sockpuppeting when I made this report (I misunderstood nl:Wikipedia:Checklijst langdurig structureel vandalisme/Italiaanse fotovandaal as a list of "Italian cross wiki picture vandal[s]" as opposed to a list of accounts being abused by one person). I have therefore added the other unblocked user accounts to this report. I also now recognise that this report should probably be attached to the report of the oldest account, Archita78, located at Sockpuppet investigations/Archita78 and archived to Sockpuppet investigations/Archita78/Archive, but have no idea how to do this. Michael   An  on  07:53, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh yes it is one vandal. I am afraid that his newest bunch of pictures uploaded by RomeParis might all turn out to be copyvio again as well and will contact a commons admin about this. As global sysop I already protected and rollbacked matters on various smaller wikiversions as well. Thanx for the link of the cu done here - I have added the data now in the file and will later transfer it to meta as well. Kind regards, MoiraMoira (talk) 14:59, 23 August 2012 (UTC)


 * The checkuser results done on nl-wiki are positive on all fronts - see here (our checkusers are by nl-wiki policy no admin).
 * In translation this reads:
 * Done. Positive link between Romeparis, Archita78, and the static IP-adress 2.227.170.81. Also there present Πάρις. On the dynamic range next to the already reported (dynamic) IP-adresses also discovered 151.71.142.131
 * Kind regards, MoiraMoira (talk) 17:36, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Kind regards,Kind regards to much!!! lock it away, it is impossible to find a dynamic ip, create another user and have already uploaded new photos and editing a few hundred edit ... good! are the genes of computing! Really ...  --Qwerty09876543211234 (talk) 18:22, 23 August 2012 (UTC)
 * this account has just been blocked on nl-wiki after psoitive cu there as newest sockpuppet of this vandal. Also now globally locked. MoiraMoira (talk) 11:08, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
 * perfect forward in this way :D --Monthends123445 (talk) 12:58, 24 August 2012 (UTC)


 * I've added Qwerty09876543211234, who has commented above, to the list of suspected sockpuppets after they were confirmed to be a sockpuppet of Romeparis. I have also added Monthends123445 for their similar name and behaviour (Monthends123445's only edits to the English Wikipedia have also been to add a generic comment to this page). Furthermore, I will change the investigation status to request a CheckUser as a case in which there is "ongoing, serious pattern vandalism involving dozens of incidents". The editor has been shown on other Wikipedias to have abused a large number of accounts; I would therefore consider it advisable to check for additional new accounts and to search for sleepers. Michael   An  on  16:37, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

One off-topic comment with regard to the comment of MoiraMoira ("our checkusers are by nl-wiki policy no admin"): that's not per policy - it just happened that nl-wiki has checkusers without admin rights (though there is still one admin-CU left). It's not forbidden to become a checkuser with having admin rights at the same time. Trijnstel talk 12:16, 26 August 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
— Berean Hunter   (talk)  6:43, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
 * - to help sort this out. A bureaucrat steward may need to lock some accounts globally, too.

— Berean Hunter   (talk)  13:28, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Everything else is ..
 * Though if I read nlwiki correctly, there is some sort of link between the following:, , and --  DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  15:03, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
 * No, it simply says in consecutive checkusers performed that all are positive and socks of the same vandal. Kind regards, MoiraMoira (talk) 05:52, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Accounts have been locked. Tagging and closing.