Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sevcohaha/Archive

20 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Målfarlig! was blocked by on September 21, 2015  (See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive295) for edit warring and personal attacks. Målfarlig! has not edited since their block, but shortly thereafter (September 25, 2015) and  (September 26, 2015) were both created while Målfarlig! was still under a block. made by Målfarlig! a few weeks prior to their being blocked is quite similar both in content and tone to made by ServcoFraudster in February 2016. There are also similarities in content and tone between the two in these posts, , as well as the use of the word "spastic" in these edit sums ,. It's possible that Målfarlig! was aiming for WP:CLEANSTART, but SevcoFraudster and Sevcoteehee were created while there was an active block on Målfarlig! and both accounts are heavily involved in editing (women's) soccer (football) articles.

Rangers died, Sevco lied was created on February 14, 2016 and also began editing women's soccer articles. The fifth edit they make is to add a non-free use rationale to a non-free logo being used in Dundalk City L.F.C., an article they had never edited before and which had just been created earlier that very same day. A bit unusual for a new editor, but something ServcoFraudsters has done on a number of occasions. Rangers dies, Servco lied with has no history of editing at WP:FFD or cricket-related articles makes in an FFD discussion about non-free image use, using terms such as "Wikignome" and "systematic bias" and "bigotry" in a context which again seems unusual for a new editor, but is not too different from the posts referenced above for Målfarlig! and SevcoFraudsters. Also, Rangers dies, Sevco lied makes to add a template to Josephine Henning and  to the same article is made a couple minutes later by "SevcoFraudsters" to add the relevant content to the article.

Sevcoteehee has been active on Wikimedia Commons uploading various photos related to women's soccer, etc. since June 2014, but did not start editing on Wikipedia until September 2015. They have no history of editing at FFD or any cricket-related articles, yet they make to a FFD thread which is similar in tone and content to the aforementioned one made by Rangers died, Sevco lied to a different thread on the same page. Sevcoteehee has also re-added non-free images to, and citing Wikipedia talk:Non-free content/Archive 63 in their edit sums, despite these iamges being removed by the admins who closed Wikipedia:Non-free content review/Archive 55 and Wikipedia:Files for discussion/2016 February 6 respectively. They then resort to edit warring when reverted despite being advised to discuss with closing admin per WP:CLOSECHALLENGE, which is quite similar to what SevcoFraudsters was doing (as discussed at User talk:SevcoFraudsters) with, , , , , and. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:59, 20 February 2016 (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

 * . The master is, but I'll compare the three suspected puppets against each other.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:54, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The following accounts are ✅ and blocked:
 * I blocked Målfarlig! as suspected.
 * I will tag all accounts appropriately and close in a minute.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:09, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Tagged and closing. Bbb23 (talk) 18:11, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I blocked Målfarlig! as suspected.
 * I will tag all accounts appropriately and close in a minute.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:09, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Tagged and closing. Bbb23 (talk) 18:11, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I blocked Målfarlig! as suspected.
 * I will tag all accounts appropriately and close in a minute.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:09, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Tagged and closing. Bbb23 (talk) 18:11, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

IP 90.213.56.6 is a new account which started editing on June 11, 2016. Edits have been to articles related to women's soccer, particulary related to Sheffield F.C. Ladies (an article that Sevocohaha and their socks engaged in edit warring over the use of a non-free image removed as the result of an FFD discussion), except this post on a WT:FOOTY (a talk page Sevcohaha has been active on before) thread related to the use of non-free images in football article. The particular comment is similar to comments made by Sevocohaha (and their socks) in previous discussions related to use of non-free files in women's football team articles and other articles. It seems a bit unusual that the second edit an IP makes is to a WikiProject talk page discussion when the IP has no history of editing that page at all. It seems even more unusual that the IP makes reference to previous discussions on various talk pages and at WP:FFD which discuss the usage of non-free logos in women's soccer team article. In particular, the statement the same user removing women's team logos because – in his opinion – they are mere "child entities" of the male teams is equally dubious. seems to refer to the reason why the usage of non-free logos was determined to be non-free compliant in prior FFD discussion by the closing administrators; a close which Sevocohaha strongly disagreed with and tried to use sockpuppetry to engage in edit warring to circumvent.

Helenmitchell is also a newly created account, created about a week before IP 90.213.56.6 began editing. The first edit by Helenmitchell was to a recently created category page which seem a bit unsual for a new account. The category is for players of Sheffield F.C. Ladies and subsequent edits made by Helenmitchell also seem to be related to the Sheffield women's team. A series of edits made to Jodie Michalska were followed up by this major revision to the article made by IP 90.213.56.6. This was the very first edit made by IP 90.213.56.6 which again seems unsual for someone just editing Wikipedia for the first time, not only for the amount of content added but also for the knowledge of Wikipedia's syntax for adding sections, images and citations, etc. Sevocohaha has been caught using socks once before after their block requests were declined as seen by this discussion at User talk:Marchjuly/Archives/2016/April and I suspect the IP and Helenmitchell might be them at it again per WP:DUCK. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:52, 12 June 2016 (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 compare to, a sock confirmed via this discussion but not listed in the archive. Also note this user's pattern of using real names of football players: Helen Mitchell is a general manager of Sheffield F.C. Ladies, an article was blocked for being disruptive on. Ivanvector 🍁  (talk) 10:43, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
 * .--Bbb23 (talk) 13:51, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
 * The CU & behavioural conclusions of this SPI can't be used to adequately justify a sockpuppetry block of the named account (although I've blocked Helenmitchell for reasons unrelated to this SPI). The IP has been inactive since a 45mins session over a month ago. ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  20:43, 14 July 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

This IP's first edits were to comment on AfD's, showing pretty clearly that this is not a new user. The similarity between this comment from the IP and this comment from, a confirmed sock, is quite striking. Sir Sputnik (talk) 23:59, 16 July 2016 (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 not active any more. Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  22:13, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

The most obvious red flag here is the similarity in username to. This would not be the first time this editor has recycled usernames (note the numerous references to Sevco in the names of previous socks). Add to that an overlapping, almost exclusive interest in Women's football, and has expressed the concerns over the suitability of WP:NFOOTBALL for women's football. (Compare this to this) Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:44, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

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

But there is no 'abuse' or disruption here... the original (indefinite!) block was for "an in-your-face personality". My curiously obsessive pursuers appear uninterested in improving the encyclopedia but 'winning' content disputes related to deletionism and/or antipathy for women's football. I sat out approximately six months after the block, even though I thought it was grossly disproportionate (the recent SPIs for Helen Mitchell were... Helen Mitchell, not me). Since I came back I've kept my nose totally clean: sticking to one account, fighting vandalism and getting thankses and even barnstars for my work on a sorely underdeveloped area of the project. There's also evidence that I am a reformed character, in not reacting to the latest abuse from my detractors. I'd appreciate the chance to carry on with this account, keeping all my edits in one place and churning out more decent content to the benefit of the project.

Having reread the stuff from February I'm even more convinced that this was a bad block, but I also notice that upon my return I was supposed to bow and scrape before the blocking admin, instead of coming back unilaterally. Apologies for this oversight, but all the same I would now appreciate a 'fresh pair of eyes' from an uninvolved admin. Thanks, Bring back Daz Sampson (talk) 07:03, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * all accounts in the archive are . Besides, this is basically an admission. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 12:31, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I've blocked and tagged the account based on the admission. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:41, 19 October 2016 (UTC)