Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Scott19982/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Scott19982 has been making multiple edits over a long period of time to South Coast Rail. Most are not supported by verifiable sources, there is never an edit summary and the edit summary reads "Mobile edit, Mobile web edit". User:Pi.1415926535 has also been involved in a small scale edit war with this user per. Yesterday I reverted multiple edits, and then a new user, created yesterday, shows up to revert the edits in the form of User:Jeanfscrp2019. I reverted this as an obvious sock per, but it was subsequently reverted back by four edits of which the last one was this. This user has been engaged in a an edit war, but now it is using an obvious sock-puppet. It needs to stop.

If someone runs the Editor Interaction Utility, then I think this is a slam-dunk, so I think we can get this cleared up quickly. Morphenniel (talk) 11:46, 13 July 2017 (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

 * - It does seem apparent. Please indef the sock and block the master for 3-7 days. Thanks, GABgab 11:58, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Heh, just kidding. Blocked, tagged, closing. GABgab 19:54, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

This user appears right as Scott19982 submits a series of UTRS unblock requests, after Scott was silent for 9 days following their block. First two edits are a pair of odd talk page messages with the same sort of odd grammar and incorrect capitalization as Scott, mentioning a page that Scott edited frequently to a user who never touched them. Then a message on Scott's talk page and on the talk page of the user who blocked him, claiming to be a new user but somehow convinced of Scott being unfairly blocked. Finally, an edit to a page Scott frequently edited, rather similar to edits made by Scott and his previous sock. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 17:42, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
 * And now he's not even being subtle about it. Exact same pattern of no-comment soft reverts and misuse of template parameters as Scott19982. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 20:51, 17 September 2017 (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

 * - . Please indef the sockpuppet. Sro23 (talk) 23:45, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅. GABgab 00:22, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
 * For the record, these are ✅ to the sock above:
 * This user filed a (now deleted) retaliatory SPI
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:45, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
 * ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:45, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Very similar to Scott19982 and previous socks: same articles, same name style, no edit summaries, creates broken drafts, doesn't bullet lists, and their user page has similar wording and lack of punctuation to Scott's user page. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:29, 22 September 2017 (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
Already blocked by Alex Shih. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:49, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Same editing patterns as Scott19982 and his previous socks: Primary interest in railroad stations in southeast Massachusetts, multiple successive edits with no edit summaries, obsession with station opening and closing dates (Factprover100, Scott19982), changing "proposed" to "planned" (Factprover100, Scott19982 sock), adding weird spaces and template parameters being put on the same line (Scott19982, Factprover100), etc. Factprover100's very first edit was adding an s-rail template to an infobox - not exactly typical first-time editor fare. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 08:00, 4 July 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

 * NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:49, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

I believe that the whole 2601:192:8702:5be2::/64 range, of which 2601:192:8702:5BE2:11AF:AA29:D82D:4FA3 is currently active, has been used by Scott19982 for the past year. The range started making contributions on July 10, 2018 - less than 72 hours after the most recent sock account was blocked. All the edits from the IP range have exactly the same behavior as Scott19982 and socks: interest in railroad stations in Southeastern Massachusetts, changing "proposed" to "planned", changing dates, etc.

The /64 range has been active on and off for a year now, and a long block of the range would have no little to no collateral damage (no unrelated edits from that range have been made). Additionally, it would stop the use of copy-paste edit summaries taken from news articles, which I believe require revision deletion. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:31, 9 July 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
Range blocked. I'll delete the edit summaries, though it's probably going to take a while. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:55, 9 July 2019 (UTC)