Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rovibroni/Archive

06 June 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

There are articles that are in the area of interest (some articles are obscure) of both of them  etc. or knowledge that an obscure article exists. Similar dubious writing styles - the term "frustrated":, the term "Slovakia...1993..." in the edit summary:, the term "xyz were noble families...so they must be Hungarians..." in edit summary: or, upon looking that Norden1990's contrib here (similar editing bahavior + edit summaries) matches Rovibroni's contrib. Edit warring: User:Rovibroni started edit war, but only User:Norden1990 discussed on Talk page. Similar Category edits + Redirected page edits  etc. Similar editing styles - moved page > Rovibroni: Norden1990: etc. Similar editing styles in the same article - file > Rovibroni  and Norden1990. There's a verifiable history of similar Rovibroni's and Norden1990's edits on articles to diminish Slovak (or non-Hungarian) influence on articles want to be more Hungarian-focused, such as these where when someone identifies someone as Slovak, these user names change it to Hungarian. Also Rovibroni's edit "I am a Slavic" and identical Norden1990's edit + there are further many similar edits of these users, where they changed Slovak to Slavic.

Edits in the same time: or new here:
 * 01:51, 1 June 2010‎ Norden1990
 * 01:43, 1 June 2010‎ 213.140.12.24 This IP also contributed on edited articles of Norden1990 and fav article was Viktor Orbán.
 * 00:30, 1 June 2010‎ Rovibroni
 * 17:07, 28 May 2013‎ Norden1990
 * 16:15, 28 May 2013‎ Rovibroni

^^Rovibroni has 4 days holidays^^ Please check also days on and off for these user names.
 * 19:57, 24 May 2013‎ Norden1990
 * 15:04, 24 May 2013‎ Rovibroni

There are also some form of cooperation Rovibroni - Norden1990 and User: Fakirbakir + User:Koertefa etc. I am sure that the evidence above are not random (similar writing/editing styles and grammatical usage) and this case is some form of sock puppetry. Please check for sleepers... probably this user has more socks. Omen1229 (talk) 11:52, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Version 2: I wrote 39 diffs for illustration of idenical editing habits and similar wording among all of them and knowledge that an obscure article exists. I think this case is some form of sock puppetry. Ok, smaller sample of diffs for a check: 2013 European floods: Alexander Rudnay: Counter Terrorism Centre: the term "Slovakia...1993..." in the edit summary: and some form of cooperation Rovibroni - Norden1990.--Omen1229 (talk) 11:47, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I edited these articles. So what? --Norden1990 (talk) 11:59, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

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

This accusation is nonsense and based on only assumptions. I am not responsible for another person's edits. First of all, unfortunately I don't understand the Cyrillic script, as Robibroni does it (I have checked his/her user page recently). Omen, when are you going to stop these personal attacks against me? --Norden1990 (talk) 17:11, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree with Norden1990, this is getting ridiculous. Fakirbakir (talk) 20:11, 6 June 2013 (UTC)


 * This investigation makes me laugh, i don't have any sock puppets, but let's investigate, if you have so much free time:).--Rovibroni (talk) 00:27, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * To be frank, nobody's going to look at 39 diffs to make the determination to run a check. Can you please condense? --Rschen7754 06:45, 7 June 2013 (UTC)
 * I looked at the evidence and I suppose it is possible based on the 2nd and 3rd blocks of diffs on the condensed statement, but I'm too tired to make the call to endorse or not. I do look at and wonder what's going on, seems that there were already some socks banned out of here. --Rschen7754 09:52, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * . The lack of response indicates that the checkusers do not have time to review the abundance of evidence for the case. The minimum that is required for a check is one diff per account; often, providing more only confuses the matter and puts people off handling things. Consider raising the request again with more concise evidence. --(ʞɿɐʇ) ɐuɐʞsǝp 09:54, 18 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Closing. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 15:59, 23 June 2013 (UTC)