Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Soft skin/Archive

21 July 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Technically, the IPs predate the accounts. The IPs created threads promoting Holocaust revisionism, and when those threads were closed under WP:DFTT, Holocaust_was_faked_by_allies restored one of them, Shutitdownstopthegoy threw a hissy-fit, Theeggsucker333 continued it, as did the aptly named Fuckfuck_dodohead, and (the less aptly named) Stop_the_leftwing_censorship. Then Almightyman244 tried to suggest that Jews were actually trying to wipe out Europeans. After that, Jungle_bell_rock and The_canadian_man both made asinine threads to promote antisemitic conspiracy theories about 9/11. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:48, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Added 199.7.159.70 because of below comment. Might as well be a confession.


 * added for the same reason.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  07:33, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * This just goes to reflect the leftist bias here at Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.7.159.70 (talk • contribs)
 * Perhaps the simplest definition of delusion is assuming that reality is biased. Ian.thomson (talk) 05:52, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
 * You're the one whose delusional. You believe in all the lies you are told by big media companies, most of which are controlled by zionist jews. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.7.159.92 (talk) 06:51, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - Those two last IPs (199.7.159.70 and 199.7.159.92) should be blocked for three days immediately. A possibility of range block should be reviewed. I'm endorsing the CU to compare those named accounts and to check for possible sleepers based on the provided evidence.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  07:36, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Two rangeblocks implemented to stop abuse. All accounts ✅ to NativeForeigner Talk 14:00, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Not tagging per WP:DNR. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  21:03, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

03 September 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

The accounts listed here are not all inclusive of this sock farm, and Soft Skin is likely not the first account. This always happens the same. A new editor or IP in the same mobile range appears and asks either a completely innocuous question, or a completely antisemitic question. If the question was innocuous, the editor waits for the question to be answered and then becomes progressively more antisemitic. Someguy1221 (talk) 03:25, 3 September 2015 (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
✅
 * Someguy1221 (talk) 03:26, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
 * -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 04:37, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

08 September 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Like the other accounts, brand new users starts by asking a racially charged question at the ref desk.. Asking here because this one actually isn't directed at Jewish people. I feel CU is worth it since the previous CU found many more accounts than I was aware of, including several sleepers. Someguy1221 (talk) 03:39, 8 September 2015 (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

 * Someguy1221 (talk) 03:39, 8 September 2015 (UTC)
 * is ✅. . Blocked and tagged. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 04:32, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

06 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

More antisemitic ref-desk trolling. Someguy1221 (talk) 03:35, 6 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

 * Someguy1221 (talk) 03:35, 6 February 2016 (UTC)




 * Mike V • Talk 04:08, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

07 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Another troll. Blocked now, but given the history of this troll, a sleeper check would be nice. GABHello! 16:51, 7 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Adding suspects above. All blocked, but it's the same kind of thing. It's barely possible they may have a separate master, though I think that's unlikely. An LTA may be in order, too. GABHello! 17:20, 7 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

 * All accounts are ✅. No additional (unblocked) accounts found. Mike V • Talk 03:46, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

14 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Blocked accounts, reporting for the record only. GABHello! 03:58, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Adding another -- . Not as clear cut, though, and unblocked. GABHello! 15:52, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I don't think Musu is blocked. But then, it may not be the same troll. Thanks. GABHello! 20:27, 14 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

 * All accounts are already blocked. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  19:55, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

18 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Duck, and blocked. GABHello! 21:02, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * This may need to be moved over here. Thank you, GABHello! 00:27, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Closing the case.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:33, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

18 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

This user is posting the exact same neo-Nazi bullshit - - as the previous one -  - who was in turn blocked as a sock of someone else (I don't know who). AlexTiefling (talk) 22:53, 18 February 2016 (UTC)


 * New one:  Might need a sleeper check/IP block on that one.  -- Jayron 32 17:21, 19 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Also see list here It's pretty obvious, ending at 18:44, February 19, 2016‎  and going back.  -- Jayron 32 18:49, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * This is the good 'ol refdesk troll, and the SPI for that case is under Soft skin. I've added some more of these fools, and I would support a CU to root out any sleepers. All are blocked, but they just keep coming. GABHello! 00:25, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ Cases are merged now.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  00:30, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Pictured: GAB responding to Soft skin socking. . GABHello! 00:36, 19 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Also probably relevant for patrolling checkusers, see This edit filter and Long-term abuse/Ref Desk Antisemitic Troll. -- Jayron 32 01:18, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * The questions emanating from User:Simonschaim (apparently Simons Chaim is the name of a published rabbi). He's been contributing a long time but I have no idea if its the actual guy or a Doppelganger pretending to be. --Modocc (talk) 01:31, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * They've been around since 2006, and (most of) their contributions look fine to me. The questions don't seem too odd. GABHello! 01:40, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * As dicey as this editor's last few edits seemed, I have to agree with your assessment, and he may very well be unrelated to that rabbi. Modocc (talk) 02:57, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * There are a bunch more of these imbeciles over in this SPI. They just never stop. How can we preclude this from happening in the future? Thanks, GABHello! 20:24, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Could you please move the cases from the SPI mentioned above? Thanks, GABHello! 21:12, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - It's time for a sleepers check. The last one was performed 11 days ago, and lot of accounts appeared since then.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  00:32, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * due to use of proxies. . Reaper Eternal (talk) 15:26, 19 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Well, we can't. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:39, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

19 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

they all vandalized Reference desk/Science the same way. After one account got blocked, another one would emerge and do the exact same thing, and I am afraid this user will create more sock puppets and vandalize another page. What I want is for the checkuser to look for any sleeper accounts and to block this user's IP address. CLCStudent (talk) 18:53, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Could you please move to the Soft skin SPI? Thanks, GABHello! 20:22, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:17, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The following accounts are ✅ to Soft_skin:


 * Mike V • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 22:53, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Closing the case.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:17, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

20 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Pretty obvious. Really just filing to ask a CU to pick up any sleepers. Ian.thomson (talk) 04:51, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

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

Wikipedia project pages, Rd troll. 69.163.34.169 (talk) 06:18, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * UPDATE: The page is now protected indefinitely. Exempted (talk) 06:25, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm fairly sure that the other SPI (Holocaust) is the same guy. By the way, I found a couple dozen or so older socks... Should I add these, or not? GABHello! 16:38, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Question to CUs: is this the same person as the one at Sockpuppet investigations/Holocaust was faked by allies? Is a range block feasible? Are we still dealing with the ranges 199.119.235.* and 199.7.159.*? Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:39, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * . The technical data of the Holocaust accounts are so I can't compare them. A range block is not feasible here. It's best to just RBI at this point. . <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 17:59, 20 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I merged Sockpuppet investigations/Holocaust was faked by allies here. Although Holocaust is older, I decided to leave Soft_skin as a master because I don't think it is a good idea to have such a prominent case titled "Holocaust was faked by allies".  Vanjagenije  (talk)  09:52, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

20 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

 Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 20:17, 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

 * Those are all already blocked. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  22:19, 20 February 2016 (UTC)

21 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked
 * -- Unblocked


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

Quack. Perhaps a sleeper check?  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 06:07, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Added some pretty old socks, mostly blocked. GABHello! 14:55, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * All blocked. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  15:45, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

23 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

The usual ref dest trolling. Note the editor has been blocked so this is just to confirm whether they are a sock of SS or to find out if this is a new problem editor MarnetteD&#124;Talk 15:51, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

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


 * Added . I blocked this editor for the same behavior.  -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:57, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * too. -- Ed (Edgar181) 15:59, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I just added as well. RickinBaltimore (talk) 16:07, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Added another . I would like a CU to confirm if it's the same master. Historically there was an IP editor who used to make racist comments on the RD about blacks. The recent focus of Softskin seems to have mostly been on anti-semitic comments rather than on blacks. (There are 1 or 2 racist comments about blacks I recall, but I'm not sure they were linked to Softskin.) Softskin's IP info doesn't seem to coincide with that of the editor who use to make racist comments about blacks and there was some overlap that I found. While I understand checkusers can't comment on the IP stuff, there's nothing stopping them linking these accounts to Softskin AFAIK. Of course this doesn't mean the other editor is definitely the same editor, it could be Softskin is simply trolling in a different way (their comments often support Nazism so it isn't surprising even if their focus has tended to be anti-semitism). Still it would IMO be useful to confirm. Nil Einne (talk) 17:15, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Added seven more. This particular miscreant has, in the past, used sleepers to edit elsewhere to get past semi-protection. It would be nice to catch these if any exist. Also, if there is a different master (which I doubt, although imitation happens) it could prove helpful. But no, I doubt it's really absolutely necessary. GABHello! 17:19, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * (EC) I've added the about 12 day old . That's actually the one I really feel a CU would be best as it's the classic sort of thing the troll I'm referring to would do and was also before I mentioned the IP troll I'm referring to on WT:RD. As the recent spate postdate my comment, for all I know I unfortunately did WP:Beans Nil Einne (talk) 17:22, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Skimming the archive, past CUs have uncovered numerous sleepers for this user. I'd think a sleeper check would be appropriate given that history and the nature of this user.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 17:43, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I'll be extremely blunt. Would it be completely out of the question to contact Globalive and see if they could look into this? I don't know what Canada's hate speech laws are, but it doesn't seem too far off, if this keeps on going... GABHello! 20:35, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I saw the dentist a week ago -- imagine that! GABHello! 21:47, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
The only way to "confirm" this is SS is to run a CU; yet none was requested. Is there any reason why you suspect another master? Is there any reason why there would be sleepers given this person's somewhat limited focus? I'm tempted to close it, but I'll wait a bit for a response.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:17, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * My apologies . I forgot to type yes in the proper field when I was filing this report this morning - my time. Please do perform a CU if you can. If I am too late in requesting this I will certainly remember to do so next time as, sadly, this person is likely to return. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 19:00, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Additional apologies to all of the editors who have posted above about a CU. I was in too much of a hurry getting this report done before heading to the dentist. I am very sorry for the delay especially if it allowed this person to do more even more trolling then they would have. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 19:04, 23 February 2016 (UTC)


 * The accounts listed are ✅ to each other and to the master (I could trace it all the way back). There are some anomalies that I will not explain, but they are of no practical consequence. The anti-semitic accounts belong to the same person as the anti-black accounts, i.e., there is only one master. I did find other accounts but they are all blocked, so I am not bothering to list them. As I suspected, these accounts are blocked fairly quickly without the need for an SPI because they are limited in scope. BTW,, no need to apologize. In the future you can change the status of the case at almost any point in time before it's closed with a short explanation as to why. I just got back from the dentist. Ain't it a small world? To all those great administrators out there who are blocking these accounts as they pop up: thanks! My dentist says I now have to close.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:39, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

25 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

trolling on the ref desk after protection has expired. Hopefully a block will have taken place but filing this on the off chance that it doesn't MarnetteD&#124;Talk 23:10, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Good grief... GABHello! 23:15, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * A quick question - should we still be reporting Soft skin's activity here? The archived list only contains a very small percentage of their accounts. Tevildo (talk) 23:18, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry, was looking at the LTA archive, not the SPI archive. The SPI archive seems comprehensive enough. Tevildo (talk) 23:21, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Added another probable sock. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization  Talk   23:23, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * And another. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization  Talk   23:34, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Good grief indeed. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization  Talk   00:02, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * So this user pretty much just goes around vandalizing various Ref Desk pages? Wow... Talk about whacking the trolls... AeroAuxiliary (talk) 00:08, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * They will now pick a different Reference Desk now that the Science Desk has been semi-d for 48 hours. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:10, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Ugh... AeroAuxiliary (talk) 00:12, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * You may want to see this thread. GABHello! 00:29, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Adding 86.187.166.218... trolling across multiple ref desk boards.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 03:58, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if 86.187.166.218 is related to the rest; also, the IP doesn't seem to be active as of now. This IP (Soft skin) would most likley be posting the same topics that the other accounts have posted too... AeroAuxiliary (talk) 04:14, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it's not 100% clear cut. But trolling boards and mentioning racism seems to be close enough to warrant a closer look imho. I know CUs cannot comment on IPs though.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 04:25, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * That IP is probably unrelated. When this troll used to edit using IP addresses, their IPs usually geolocated to Alberta.  This one geolocates to England.  -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 14:46, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I blocked 86.187.166.218. Troll or sock?  I don't give a damn.  The only useful thing CU showed me was some proxies, and blocking those (which I did) is unlikely to actually fix the problem. Courcelles (talk) 07:06, 26 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Closing. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 00:29, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

27 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Usual trolling at Reference Desks, this time "Questioning the Holocaust hoax" at Reference desk/Science. <span style="font-family: Gill Sans MT, Arial, Helvetica; font-weight:140;"> General Ization  Talk   01:09, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I'm shocked to find that they would break their promise! GABHello! 01:53, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * No additional accounts. Your best bet is to block the accounts and/or semi-protect the pages affected. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 17:22, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

29 February 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Returned after reference desk semi-protection expired diff Tevildo (talk) 00:04, 29 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

 * Blocked and tagged. Closing. TDL (talk) 05:40, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

06 March 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Ref desk troll asking racist questions. WP:DUCK. clpo13(talk) 05:10, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I've added more. A really fun project for when I retire (yeah, right) will be to comb back through the refdesk history and find even more undiscovered socks. I was able to find about 30 last time I spent some time looking. GABHello! 14:53, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
 * A new one has just turned up at the RefDesk/Humanities. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 21:40, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Fixed the tags. Users already blocked, so closing. Sam Walton (talk) 23:43, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

09 March 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

New account bus same Refdesk/Humanities trolling MarnetteD&#124;Talk 01:14, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Blocked. Does this guy typically create sleepers? It seems that each account is usually throw-away. GABHello! 01:26, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I think that is usually the case but, if you remember, when I didn't ask for one back on this date Sockpuppet investigations/Soft skin/Archive it caused a delay in getting those socks stopped so I hope I erred on the side of caution here. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 01:34, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah, I guess I was wrong. He did used to play around in the sandbox before vandalizing, but I haven't seen that much anymore. GABHello! 01:39, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * but I didn't dig very far either. -- Amanda  (aka DQ) 08:49, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Closing the case.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:43, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

12 March 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Guess who? GABHello! 14:50, 12 March 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

 * Already blocked. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  00:52, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

13 March 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Exact or near exact copy of his previous text about the predictions of the protocols of the elders of zion "coming true". Same M.O. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 07:57, 13 March 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

 * Already blocked. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  00:53, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

15 March 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

The usual. Already blocked Refdesk04011, but leaving open since there'll probably be more coming. Ian.thomson (talk) 16:14, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Rest of them were blocked for the usual. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:40, 16 March 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
That seems to be it for now. Ian.thomson (talk) 03:40, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

17 March 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

WP:DUCK: the usual baiting questions on the reference desk. clpo13(talk) 05:12, 17 March 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
Thanks. Blocked. Yawn. Drmies (talk) 05:16, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

17 March 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Looks like a bit of a (short term) sleeper account. This post takes us back to their usual rants. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 20:41, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

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

I think it's more likely this is another sock of Sockpuppet investigations/Bowei Huang 2. Quite a few of their questions are similar to the stuff BWH2 normally asks. Although the earlier stuff about languages isn't something I remember from Bowei Huang 2 and there's also something about their tone in some of their questions which is slightly different. However Bowei Huang 2 is or was from Australia and I don't think Soft skin is or has shown a particular interest in Australia before and [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities&diff=prev&oldid=710098214] specifically mentioned Australia. This sort of silly additions or changes to articles about social issues or religions is another hallmark of Bowei Huang 2 [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=War_tax&diff=prev&oldid=709986136] Nil Einne (talk) 21:10, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the input If this should be moved to that persons SPI let me know or feel free to move it yourself. MarnetteD&#124;Talk 21:17, 17 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree, I don't think this looks like Soft skin's typical gig. GABHello! 00:06, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Speak of the devil, I've added a bunch of Soft skin socks. Please do not check these, as it is obvious as it is. GABHello! 21:04, 19 March 2016 (UTC) Never mind, I will just move them below. GABHello! 22:08, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Can we have this one checked against Bowei Huang 2 socks before deciding how to proceed?  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:36, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
 * These three accounts are ✅:
 * Technically, it doesn't look like Soft skin. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 22:29, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Tagging the three as Bowei Huang 2 and closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:22, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Technically, it doesn't look like Soft skin. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 22:29, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Tagging the three as Bowei Huang 2 and closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:22, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Tagging the three as Bowei Huang 2 and closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:22, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

20 March 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

More racist stuff at a ref desk MarnetteD&#124;Talk 00:42, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Interesting, I don't recall them using edit summaries when trolling. GABHello! 00:51, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
 * This is the first one I can remember seeing . They did get my gender wrong though :-) MarnetteD&#124;Talk 02:10, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * . <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 22:30, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

20 March 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

The usual reference desk trolling with baiting, anti-Semitic questions. clpo13(talk) 17:13, 20 March 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

 * . All of the above accounts are ✅, except and . Those two belong to ItsLassieTime. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 22:26, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

26 March 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

WP:DUCK. The usual ref desk trolling. (compare this edit from a known sockpuppet). clpo13(talk) 16:01, 26 March 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

 * Already blocked and tagged. Closing. TDL (talk) 18:36, 26 March 2016 (UTC)

02 April 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Racist questions at reference desk. . An a similar baiting question here. clpo13(talk) 07:54, 2 April 2016 (UTC)

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

RD trolling blocked the accounts. 2604:6600:0:10:216:3CFF:FE3E:3D91 (talk) 17:51, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Just some more blocked accounts for the record:
 * Every edit is revdelled, which is a bad sign. GABHello! 23:10, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Every edit is revdelled, which is a bad sign. GABHello! 23:10, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Every edit is revdelled, which is a bad sign. GABHello! 23:10, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Every edit is revdelled, which is a bad sign. GABHello! 23:10, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Every edit is revdelled, which is a bad sign. GABHello! 23:10, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Every edit is revdelled, which is a bad sign. GABHello! 23:10, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Every edit is revdelled, which is a bad sign. GABHello! 23:10, 3 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Every edit is revdelled, which is a bad sign. GABHello! 23:10, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * IP blocked one week for disruptive editing. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 19:51, 3 April 2016 (UTC)

08 April 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Ref desk trolling. clpo13(talk) 05:13, 8 April 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

 * Account blocked. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 20:48, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

08 April 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

WP:DUCK. See report immediately prior to this one. clpo13(talk) 05:35, 8 April 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

 * Account blocked. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 20:48, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

08 April 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

As above. clpo13(talk) 05:38, 8 April 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

 * Account blocked. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 20:48, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

23 April 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

More baiting questions on the ref desk clpo13(talk) 18:06, 23 April 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

 * Blocked a few minutes after case was reopened. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 22:04, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

04 May 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Both were vandalizing Reference desk/Humanities with same message so check for sleeper accounts. CLCStudent (talk) 17:55, 4 May 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 above accounts are ✅, plus:
 * <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 18:47, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 18:47, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 18:47, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

DUCK - trolling ref desks with racism  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 05:27, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
 * fyi  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 05:29, 14 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

 * <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 20:12, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

DUCK. See edit filter and suppressed edits.

Mostly a formality, but it's been a while since we had a report here and this one seems super obvious. Given LTA, night be useful for future CU comparisons  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) 07:27, 25 May 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
Checkuser is rarely needed for this person, their MO is hardly subtle, and the blocks come within seconds of posting. If you want someone to back you up, hell yeah, this is them. But I'm not sure we need anything extra here. -- Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 12:55, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Compare to behavior of prior Soft skin accounts, also check Long-term abuse/Ref Desk Antisemitic Troll. Telling is that this is a brand new account, showing up at the reference desk, asking a question about a Jewish-related topic as a means to set up a second question or statement that allows him to spread gross anti-semitic screed; given that the his prior MO of simply making gross antisemitic pronouncements tended to get quashed very quickly, he's learning and adapting by asking seemingly innocent questions as a "set up" to allow his posts to stick around longer, a behavior that's been going on several years. This earlier SPI describes exactly what this new user is doing. The username matches some of the patterns noted at "Username Analysis" in the LTA page noted above, especially the "eclectic phrases" section. I would have just blocked, but some users complained at WT:RD and demanded an SPI/checkuser confirmation. If we can get someone on that, that'd be great. Jayron <b style="color:#090">32</b> 12:42, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' Look, to be clear, I'm not here necessarily defending Happy soul, I figure the odds are about 55/45 guilty based on what I see. I am definitely questioning whether we should continue the habit of blocking people on such "evidence" as we saw in that thread. As I've said elsewhere, even if this particular SPI is positive, we have no clue how many of the past blocks of this kind have been good ones - we haven't done SPIs on them, nor have we allowed the threads to play out long enough to allow the user to supply clearer evidence. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  07:21, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Please beware of a false positive based on behavior alone. In Happy soul's case, they did not "spread gross anti-semitic screed", but multiple editors assumed that they would because (1) the account was recently registered and used only for that thread, and (2) they had asked two Jews-related questions in the same thread. The thread was removed against my objection before we had a chance to find out whether they would give us some actual incriminating behavioral evidence. &#8213; Mandruss  &#9742;  18:49, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Hold on. If anybody with "some knowledge of this LTA" can "confirm that this appears to be his MO", resulting in a close of the SPI, who needs SPI? I was under the impression SPI has access to information that the rest of us do not; am I mistaken?

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I have some knowledge of this LTA, and can confirm that this appears to be his MO. Since they're already blocked (and sleepers haven't generally been used), I think it's safe to close this. Thanks for keeping the paper trail going. GABgab 00:51, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * To Mandruss: SPIs can get closed either on behavioral or on CU grounds. In this case, an SPI clerk declined a CU request because they found the behavioral evidence strong enough on its own. You might disagree, but you seem to be alone in that. It doesn't take much effort to verify that "If the Wilkomirki book was a hoax, let's claim Anne Frank was a hoax too" is a standard neonazi meme spread via websites like "National Vanguard". The "clearer evidence" you asked for was there all along, with this posting . There's nothing innocuous or potentially legitimate in making this connection. Fut.Perf. ☼ 10:11, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Noting before archiving that a sleeper check was futile this time. Courcelles (talk) 20:53, 3 August 2017 (UTC)