Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sgaran/Archive

Evidence submitted by Nuujinn
I was reverting apparent vandalism by user:64.85.252.225 on a series of article that have been marked for deletion. Basically, the ip was removing the AFD templates, see this history. The main AFD discussion is here, but note that other related articles are included. The ip was blocked after the edit made 22:09, 30 April 2010.

At 22:14, 30 April 2010, User:Sgaran began editing in the same space, see his contribs list.

As a specific example, please compare this edit by 64.85.252.225 to this edit by sgaran.

Also the ip seems to be in cali, FWIW, although it is a big state.

I hope this all makes sense, please forgive any mistakes as I am new to reporting possible sockpuppets. It just seems suspicious to me. -- Nuujinn (talk) 23:16, 30 April 2010 (UTC)


 * See also this edit by Sgaran in comparison to an earlier edit by the IP -- Nuujinn (talk) 00:23, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users
I have added User:12.149.202.41 to the list of suspected sockpuppets/meatpuppets based on the contrib record. Nsk92 (talk) 02:40, 1 May 2010 (UTC)
 * Note that has claimed to be  /   and to be    in three AfDs. In one of the three, he/she also signed a separate comment as the IP . None of these supposed users is actually registered. —David Eppstein (talk) 14:52, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
12.149.202.41 blocked 3 days for disruptive editing. The other IP has been blocked already for AFD disruption and has been heard from since, and I have doubts that the IPs are Sgaran. Looking at the behavioral patterns, it looks very unlikely. –MuZemike 18:14, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
 * In addition, the two IPs are from completely different parts of the U.S. –MuZemike 18:15, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Ditto Muzemike, no need for further action, especially as the IPs aren't editing. ~ Amory ( u •  t  •  c ) 15:48, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

24 December 2010

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every six hours.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

For further detail, see Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Shorter version: I blocked the IP for 72 hours for vandalism and edit warring at Paola S. Timiras on December 19. About 24 hours later, User:Bondiveres added this statement to my talk page, complaining about the IP's block.

The day the block of the IP was to expire, Bondiveres started plastering this diatribe on several user talk pages. When the IP's block did expire later that day, the IP added the same screed to the talk page of another user.

The first SPI did not request CheckUser as far as I can tell. There may be more socks still to find. Thanks.  K rakatoa    K atie   20:00, 24 December 2010 (UTC)


 * FYI - I proposed a topic ban but there's a full ban now being discussed, if that weighs at all in the yes/no decision to use CheckUser.  K rakatoa    K atie   21:18, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Been involved with this dispute with Bondivares for the past 5 days (which is still ongoing over at WP:AN/I. Can't narrow down additional evidence all that much, but here a user accuses Sgaran of creating a walled garden, and here Bondivares responds as if Sgaran=Bondivares.  Not a smoking gun, but given Sgaran's noted absence from the discussion, I believe it's as close as we get. -- Gnowor TC 20:13, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Sgaran's edits are way outside the check-user window, so I don't see what this is going to achieve that the ANI discussion isn't. Tijfo098 (talk) 20:46, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I think Sgaran stopped editing when his bio article was deleted at AFD in May. The Bondiveres account was registered later this summer. When I blocked the IP I blocked anon only, so Bondiveres could still log in as a registered user. They're related somehow. User:Crusio is being harassed and wikistalked by this/these person/people and we need to stop it. We need to know if they're related.  K rakatoa    K atie   20:52, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The IP 64.85.252.225 is clearly Bondiveres, but check-user doesn't work on IPs anyway. There's not CU data on Sgaran at this point, but based on the IP's edits, which stretch back to when Sgaran was editing, and the close overlap in articles edited, they are either him or someone working with him.  Tijfo098 (talk) 01:44, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

Gnowor, as I have stated over and over again, I have been asked to be an advocate and I can not imagine why this is an issue. I hope there are no wiki rules against advocate's, and if there is such a rule, please let me know. Bondiveres (talk) 20:51, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
The Sgaran account is and checkuser cannot disclose links between named accounts and IP addresses. TN X Man 15:09, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I find it rather likely that Sgaran and Bondiveres are the same person, and that the IP is theirs as well. However, what I'm not seeing here is an overlap in editing. Indeed, Sgaran's account hasn't been used in months. To that end, I'm going to leave the suspected master alone for now, or at least until it becomes active again. As to the two suspected socks, they haven't edited in nine days, so the incident is a little stale right now. Feel free to relist this case if they edit again, though. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 02:49, 5 January 2011 (UTC)