Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Singopo/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets


Following comments by Singopo adding the following :



Also added :

Evidence submitted by Codf1977
Both Singopo and Purple Watermelon both edit and comment on matters of Debating (Purple Watermelon almost the only thing he or she edits on) during a heated discussion on the the content and layout of European Universities Debating Championship both users took up positions contra to mine.

During the discussion on Talk:European Universities Debating Championship this morning Singopo commenting (with this edit] about a clarification placed on the article by Purple Watermelon (with this edit) said "The clarification that Singopo put in the text is useful" - why would you claim you made a comment using your user name when it was in fact another user - unless you and that other user were one in the same. Codf1977 (talk) 11:37, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

If it is the case that these accounts are Scocks then they have been used to bypass the WP:3RR rule with these edits :
 * dif1
 * dif2
 * dif3
 * dif4

Codf1977 (talk) 09:45, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

I also belive s/he has been using 116.88.12.108 judging by this diff and the Contributions not necessarily deliberate - most likely of a 'forgot to log in' but thought I would add it to the mix. Codf1977 (talk) 15:57, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

This accusation seems to be based on the fact that I made one typo while typing up something quickly earlier today. Singopo (talk) 13:01, 14 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I am not sure it is possible to mean to type "Purple Watermelon" and end up typing your own username "Singopo" - may be if you had been cutting and pasting and did not check what you had pasted, but since you say you were typing that can't be the case.Codf1977 (talk) 13:19, 14 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I honestly don't remember if I was typing or cutting and pasting. I definately typed at least most of the message. I may have cut and pasted bits of it and then failed to amend it properly. Singopo (talk) 13:56, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * That does not explain why "Singopo" was in your cut & paste buffer. Codf1977 (talk) 17:26, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

'''I see no reason to continue any pretence. I admit to sockpuppetry. I apologise for abusing Wikipedia's procedures. I got carried away in defending my views on debate-related pages about which I had some strong opinions. It was a stupid thing to do and I was wrong to do it. I regeret my actions.''' Singopo (talk) 14:52, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

I will come clean. I have used the following accounts to vote multiple times in debate-related AfDs: User:Singopo, User:Purple Watermelon, User:Dorange, User:Hammersville and User:Boboba. I am very sorry for abusing Wikipedia process in the way. I have a couple of other accounts too, but have used them only for editing different areas and have not used those accounts abusively. I got carried away with debate-related articles, and it was wrong of me to do so. I apologise sincerely. Singopo (talk) 15:23, 15 February 2010 (UTC)


 * One of the accunts has never voted on an Afd which is odd.Slatersteven (talk) 15:42, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Which one ? Codf1977 (talk) 15:50, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I must admit to being totality shocked by this revelation - If what Singopo has said is ture - it seems like a well thought out and executed plan going back over many years to influence WP and to distort the importance of university debating - only being found out by a single slip up.Codf1977 (talk) 15:50, 15 February 2010 (UTC)


 * User:Boboba appears to have never "vote multiple times in debate-related AfDs" (to quote the accused), or even once [] the user has voted in one Afd in 2007 []. As did User:Dorange, so it would appear that this is not restricted to just debating. Assuming that this admision is true, I think that the IP needs checking. If this is true thyen all the Afd's have been riged (that passed) what is the procedure there?Slatersteven (talk) 15:59, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I also think that Singopo needs to come clean about all his accounts as I suspect an editing ban is all but inevitable. Codf1977 (talk) 16:18, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Socks indefinitely blocked and tagged, ABD. Singopo will be directed to disclose all alternate accounts used. That or we have ways of finding out. –MuZemike 18:32, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Self-endorsing for CheckUser attention to find out if there are any other undisclosed socks present. –MuZemike 17:15, 19 February 2010 (UTC)


 * ✅ matches for each other:
 * matches with the above:
 * – Luna Santin  (talk) 01:06, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
 * matches with the above:
 * – Luna Santin  (talk) 01:06, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
 * matches with the above:
 * – Luna Santin  (talk) 01:06, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
 * matches with the above:
 * – Luna Santin  (talk) 01:06, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
 * matches with the above:
 * – Luna Santin  (talk) 01:06, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
 * – Luna Santin  (talk) 01:06, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
 * – Luna Santin  (talk) 01:06, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Other socks blocked (with ABD) and tagged. My recommendation right now is that we leave Singopo unblocked, as he well knows and has admitted to the sock puppetry; blocking him at this point may seem more punitive than preventative. I'll leave it open to any other suggestions. –MuZemike 17:32, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I have mixed feelings on the issue - he only admitted it after it became likely a CU would be run, he did not respond to your request to list his other accounts and explain his reason for doing it. He did use the accounts to vote on the same AfD more than once over a period of nearly 2.5 years - in his defence I don't think that he was successful in changing the outcome of any, though in one he came close. On balance, though I do think a enforced wikibrake may do him some good - I think you are probably right in that it would be more punitive than preventative. The thing I will learn is to be a little more suspicious - as before the slip up I had absolutely no inclination. Codf1977 (talk) 19:17, 21 February 2010 (UTC)