Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Southern jew/Archive

23 October 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

These users/IPs are responsible for a tangled web of hoaxes and misinformation - see WP:Articles for deletion/Baron Cruse-Cohen for the tip of the iceberg. The three user-account socks are throwaway accounts which each edit only on one day - 14 May, 15 May, 24 July respectively - so I do not expect any results for them. The master last edited 20 September and the two IPs 25 Oct and 17 Oct. CU might find some sleepers, but in view of the dates I will not complain if you don't think it's worth it. The contribution history makes them all DUCKs. I am posting here partly to establish a base if we find more socks as we go on, and also to ask advice about blocking the IPs. They are involved in the hoaxes and are clearly static, as their only edits are to the same set of articles. I am minded to block them both for three months - is that too long? JohnCD (talk) 21:32, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

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

Based upon the discussion at the AfD here Articles_for_deletion/Baron_Cruse-Cohen about a series of sophisticated hoax articles, which is further detailed discussion here User:Vivisel/cohen_cruse_ruse it appears these are a series of related accounts with overlapping editing patterns described in those links, and notably all three accounts appear on editing histories like this one:  among others. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 01:37, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

P.S. I didn't see there was a similar request yesterday before filing this. Can this be deleted/merged with the other check so as not to duplicate efforts? I don't know how to accomplish that. Sorry! ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 01:38, 24 October 2011 (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

 * - Sorry John, but all of these accounts except the master are stale. We'll have to go based on behavior. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 23:34, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Some of the accounts were blocked based on loud quacking sounds by myself. I'm not sure about the ones I haven't blocked, though. m.o.p  05:50, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * MoP blocked all the accounts except Medoc Wine. I'll hold off on that one until it's clear whether Sephardic Temple Adat David, another suspect article, is a hoax. On reflection, I have blocked the two IPs for three months since all their edits are to the same set of articles as the accounts, so it is clear they are static. Since this is such a nasty mess of false information and these hoaxers use throwaway accounts, I have checked the "Prevent logged-in users from editing from this IP address" option: I have never done that before and invite comments on whether it is too extreme. JohnCD (talk) 09:08, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I've checked out Sephardic Temple Adat David and determined that it's also fake. Mangoe (talk) 23:17, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Medoc Wine has been indef'd as a WP:GIANTDUCK. - The Bushranger One ping only 18:01, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

24 October 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Based upon editing patterns I'm adding this older account to the record as it appears to be part of the same sock, just in case some of the editing history helps track down any still active accounts involved in the sock or other hoax damage. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 15:50, 24 October 2011 (UTC)



Four more added on the same basis - for reference only, all stale, no action required. Wine france is the earliest of these (edited April/May 2009 only) and has no actual suspect edits, but a peculiarity of editing style which suggests a connection. JohnCD (talk) 11:37, 25 October 2011 (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 for recording those accounts. Closing and archiving: submissions were for the record, with no action required. AGK  [&bull; ] 12:27, 26 October 2011 (UTC)