Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Stylized as "stylized" currently; formerly "stylizeD"/Archive

20 March 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

This edit continues the editing done by the blocked IP earlier and is spoofing the username of User:ChristensenMJ who opposed his edits. User also edited as User:Stylized as "stylized" currently; formerly "stylizeD", as far as I can tell the first registered account. Bahooka (talk) 15:02, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * False report:
 * - Just because I made an edit without logging in does not constitute "sock-puppeteering," for TWO reasons:
 * 1. Forgetting to log in is not an intent to deceive people that you are a different person, especially if you log in and then say you are that person who edited without being logged in, which I did.
 * 2. Even the SPI rules say that you do not need to log in every time you edit just to not be considered as a so-called "sock puppet."
 * - "ChristensenMC" was not an intent to look like another person. I formed the "-MA" account once I realized that I typed the wrong letter to represent my middle name. You can kill the "-MC" account for all I care. Therefore, that was not so-called "sock-puppeting," either.
 * - The SPI rules say that you can even have more than one account as long as you are not intending to deceive people that you are another person (e.g.: trying to create a situation that looks like a "consensus" of 2 or more people even though it's really just one person).
 * Therefore, bahooka is just sore because he doesn't like my attempt at a good-faith edit at one of his friend's cherished WP:owned articles.
 * ChristensenMA (talk) 18:09, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Sudipop looks like it could be an impersonation of User:Supdiop - a community banned editor with two failed RFAs. --Ches (talk) (contribs) 19:01, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * How do you know that is connected to the rest? Explain it, provide some diffs.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  23:41, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
 * See User talk:75.162.211.81 where he states that the IP is the same account as . Please let me know if you need more. Thanks, Bahooka (talk) 00:26, 21 March 2016 (UTC)


 * - Please, compare those three accounts.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  01:30, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
 * Following a complaint at WP:AIV, I have hard-blocked the ChristensenMA and ChristensenMC accounts for impersonation/disruption. See also Sockpuppet investigations/ChristensenMC. BencherliteTalk 18:08, 23 March 2016 (UTC)


 * ✅ match for ChristensenMC, "Stylized", and another:
 * The IPs are self-admitted as these this user too. --jpgordon:==( o ) 18:49, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I moved the case to the name of the oldest account. All are now blocked and tagged. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:01, 23 March 2016 (UTC)
 * I moved the case to the name of the oldest account. All are now blocked and tagged. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:01, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

22 May 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Editing under new username after being blocked for edit warring 331dot (talk) 10:19, 22 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

 * Both accounts blocked. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 10:29, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

23 May 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Same MOS edit warring. Same style of shouting. Same style of editong and even refers to old edits the now blocked user did. Yeah. Clubjustin Talkosphere  08:05, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Also same style of debating through talk page summaries. -- ‖ Ebyabe talk - Inspector General  ‖ 13:03, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah! and here, he said You think you can revert edits to those pages just because you think you're un-editing something that a socker did. You don't really know that an edit is being done by the same person just because it's a similar edit. What if Who R U? has a consensus just like some of you think you do? before anyone else asked if he was Who R U? Invisible ( Talk ) 16:14, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

This might be too early, but I've added new account Newname0001 because their first edit was a revert back to the master's revision of Brad Garrett. Sro23 (talk) 21:21, 23 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Not too early: already disptached. Favonian (talk) 21:25, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Added another:Newname0002 Sro23 (talk) 21:35, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Obvious by behavior. Also discussed on ANI.   Toddst1 (talk)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
I've declined the CU request. We rarely publicly disclose the IP(s) of named accounts.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:15, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Same ISP, same location, same behavior. Probably too late to block, but I'll keep an eye open. Nothing more to do here, so closing. Favonian (talk) 16:15, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
 * blocked with an expiration time of 31 hours (account creation blocked) (Block evasion: Who R U?)

26 May 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Keeps reverting articles back to the master's preferred revision:, , , etc. Sro23 (talk) 18:10, 26 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Added 75.162.232.124, they're reverting all my recent edits out of revenge. Please hurry and do another rangeblock or something like thatSro23 (talk) 18:26, 26 May 2016 (UTC)


 * Range block in place. Favonian (talk) 18:31, 26 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

 * . Prepare for more of the same. Favonian (talk) 18:13, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Who R U? is back at edit warring and also harassing an admin. Can we get another range block? Sro23 (talk) 00:46, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

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


 * The aggrieved tone does seem remarkably (and verbosely) similar; therefore I'm seconding (thirding?) the request for an investigation. -- Hoary (talk) 02:31, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note that they have since changed to another IP: Special:Contributions/174.23.183.101 HighInBC 04:37, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 07:11, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Made this edit to Snoop Dogg, again with the "stage name" thing, and just look at their talk page. Same angry style of edit warring. Sro23 (talk) 01:19, 5 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

 * The following accounts are ✅:
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 07:12, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 07:12, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 07:12, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 07:12, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 07:12, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 07:12, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Predictable M.O. and interests. Known IP range   Aloha27   talk  22:34, 16 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

 * IP blocked by HighInBC. Mike V • Talk 01:42, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Matches the actions of other socks. First edits are minor, such as removing hyphens from Business (WRU is known for arbitrarily removing/inserting hyphens and apostrophes). Compare to WRU?'s first edit. Today, the account defends 97.117.52.253, a likely IPsock. Sro23 (talk) 01:17, 30 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

 * The following accounts are ✅:
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:41, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:41, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:41, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:41, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:41, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:41, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

The username definitely fits with the others. Again, first edits are minor changes to grammar, with the same type of smug-style edit summaries. Has spent a lot of time editing REV (disk), which if you check that article's history, was last edited by IP 75.162.207.133, which is currently on a three month range block for being used by Who R U? WRU seems to also share an interest in computer hard drive/tech stuff, as their first edits were to Amiga related articles. Sro23 (talk) 06:52, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Added Here's a Thought..., who edited Helical scan right before What if I Use This One? did and has been making the same kind of minor edits, etc. Sro23 (talk) 16:41, 4 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

 * blocked per WP:DUCK. --Neil N  talk to me 17:30, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
 * and so is Favonian (talk) 17:39, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets







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

Quack. Same interests and editing style. Known IP range.  Aloha27   talk  13:32, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

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

I wonder how much collateral damage would blocking this range for a longer period cause? Sro23 (talk) 13:41, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Blocked, as was a moment ago. Closing. Favonian (talk) 13:38, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Quack?  Aloha27   talk  13:44, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

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

2600:1001:B00A:BF49:445A:1F70:BC5C:E1C8 is not WRU. Did you mean a different IP? Sro23 (talk) 13:50, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I'd bet the farm on this one I think. TOO much of a coincidence IMO. We shall see.   Aloha27   talk  13:55, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

I know CU isn't done for IP's but could a sleeper check be performed? The last time this spi was opened only two users were blocked. WRU? seems to create accounts in batches of more than just two, I'm sure we are missing some. Sro23 (talk) 15:49, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * No "sleeper" check based on IPs.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:19, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
 * There's not enough evidence of the second IP being WRU, in my opinion. I'm not seeing any of the behavioral issues or edit-warring characteristic of this user and the range is different than usual. In any event, IPv6s change rapidly and this one is no longer in use. A block wouldn't accomplish anything. ~ Rob 13 Talk 20:12, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Closing, as nothing more can or need be done. Favonian (talk) 08:01, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

IP 97.117.29.41 was not directly mentioned in this investigation but an unblock request was declined for being a sockpuppet of Who R U? here. IP 97.117.29.41 made the same "stage name" edits as Who R U? and BusyWork4U, see diff1, diff2, diff3.

IP 97.117.19.67 admitted to being the same user as 97.117.29.41 in an edit summary here regarding a discussion started by 97.117.29.41. Subsequently 97.117.19.67 admitted to being user Consistency is Key and user Consistency is Key (web coding login error) here.

IP 97.117.19.67 has the same habit of making off topic comments in edit summaries as other confirmed sockpuppets of Who R U?, see diff4, diff5, diff6.

All of these accounts are inclined to argue incessantly over blocks even when the blocked IP is admittedly dynamic or when the block is a simple username issue, just to waste administrators' time. This user first began editing disruptively over the highly contentious "the/The" issue and continues to stir the pot on that issue. Piriczki (talk) 14:25, 12 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
The listed accounts are ✅ plus. Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:53, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Known range, interest and style Quack?  Aloha27   talk  21:20, 15 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

 * No CUs for IPs.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:40, 15 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked 31 hours for block evasion. IPv6s usually change so fast that they're not really worth reporting unless one sticks around for awhile or a range without much collateral damage can be identified, though. ~ Rob 13 Talk 22:07, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Quack? Known range and usual edit summary. (i.e.- None)   Aloha27   talk  18:20, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

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

Aloha27, I'm glad you reverted the IP since the content was unsourced/unencyclopedic, however, I really don't think it's WRU?. WRU? has never shown interest in the article before, and actually he usually DOES include an (often snarky) edit summary. Example: Here's a likely IPsock I discovered today:. It appears not everyone in the 2600 range is Who R U?. Sro23 (talk) 18:38, 17 July 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Do you know of any comparable edits by proven socks? This edit doesn't seem to fit his usual style/MO and the edit summary is a canned edit summary from the mobile app. ~ Rob 13 Talk 18:37, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
 * - In order to facilitate and expedite your request, please provide diffs to support your case. Please give two or more diffs meeting the following format:
 * 1) At least one diff is from the sockmaster (or an account already blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet of the sockmaster), showing the behaviour characteristic of the sockmaster.
 * 2) At least one diff per suspected sockpuppet, showing the suspected sockpuppet emulating the behaviour of the sockmaster given in the first diff.
 * 3) In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided. Around one sentence is enough for this.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  10:26, 22 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I do not think this IP is Who R U? --Neil N  talk to me</i> 01:52, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
 * As the IP hasn't made an edit since and I don't see any other edits to the article from IPs in the range, I'm closing this with no action taken. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 02:38, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

WP:DUCK what with the predictable name and the restoring edits made by another suspected sock:,, , , etc. Sro23 (talk) 01:41, 25 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

 * Blocked. --<b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 01:49, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

The silly name and minor edits made me suspicious. Who R U? has shown interest in this topic before, and as seen in the article's history, it has in the past been edited by IP's known to be in the range WRU? has used. Sro23 (talk) 16:39, 1 August 2016 (UTC)


 * I didn't edit automatic transmission, though, but that shouldn't matter. Silly name, really? What does your silly user name mean? How about you not use personal attacks, huh, or do you believe you're immune to that rule? So to you, everyone with what you believe has a silly user name who's interested in one of those subjects (although I'm actually not interested in automatics, so you've pegged me wrong right there) must be this guy? It&#39;s a Stick! (talk) 19:31, 1 August 2016 (UTC)


 * . Regards,   Aloha27   talk  19:34, 1 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Not duck. Everyone makes minor edits sooner or later. It&#39;s a Stick! (talk)


 * Riiiiight. Have a nice day.   Aloha27   talk  19:44, 1 August 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

 * WHOever they are, they're not a new editor. Blocked indef. --<b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 19:54, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

 Aloha27   talk  20:09, 1 August 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. --<b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 20:15, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Reinstating edits from past socks. is same as and. Same geolocation as previously blocked IP (see second diff above)  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) 15:38, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Just want to say there's been a lot of confusion lately, but this IP is NOT Who R U?, it's probably Никита-Родин-2002. I have tried to sort things out on BU Rob13's talk page. Sro23 (talk) 15:43, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Blocked. ~ Rob 13 <sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">Talk 15:41, 2 August 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Yet another account named after the primary article he wants to edit, compare to past socks User:It's a Stick! and User:Too Small a Fish to Fry, who mainly edited Manual transmission and Fish. As always, first edits are minor typing corrections. As always, engages in edit warring. Here, they claim to be 174.23.161.49, which is known to be in the range WRU? uses. Request CU because WRU? usually creates several accounts in batches. Sro23 (talk) 15:34, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

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

What's all this about? I didn't create accounts in batches; just this one. And what's wrong with naming yourself after the subject you like talking about? I talk about alcolic drinks, so my name's like that. So what?

Also, my edits at the alcohol articles aren't minor; I just marked them as such while reverting to them, as you guys obviously can't make up your minds whether to say that non-grape "wines" are really wines or not. Drunken Kindness (talk) 16:11, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The following accounts are ✅:
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:49, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:49, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:49, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:49, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:49, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:49, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:49, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Today I was going through some of Who R U?'s sock contributions and have discovered that Who R U? is not the oldest account. Comparing Stylized as "stylized" currently; formerly "stylizeD"'s sock edits with Who R U?'s sock edits, it is clear this is all the same person with the same interests. ,, ,. If this is unnecessary or the incorrect way to request a merge, I apologize in advance. I just thought that the Who R U? SPI case page should be moved to the oldest known username. Sro23 (talk) 19:48, 4 August 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

 * I've looked at the behavior and the geolocation from previous checks. I think you are quite right that it is the same user. I've merged the case history. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 21:41, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
 * You merged the cases, yes, but all socks should be re-tagged as  socks (example). I often see that checkusers merge cases, but forget to re-tag. That can be very confusing later.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  22:37, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
 * All taken care of. :) <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 02:39, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Known interests, same minor edit M.O. to start. Could not get the oldest sockpuppeteer to load up for some reason. DUCK IMO.  Aloha27   talk  19:43, 12 August 2016 (UTC) Older sockpuppeteer reports are here: Regards,    Aloha27   talk  19:46, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Yeah, it's definitely him, but should this be moved to Sockpuppet investigations/Stylized as "stylized" currently; formerly "stylizeD"? Is that where future cases should go? Sro23 (talk) 19:45, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Please don't file new reports under the old master's name. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:15, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * The following accounts are ✅:
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:38, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:38, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:38, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:38, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:38, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:38, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Restored sock edits to Brigham Young University: &. Sro23 (talk) 11:07, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Adding 97.117.50.38: Sro23 (talk) 11:09, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * And 174.23.161.97, who restores sock edits to Long Beach, California. Sro23 (talk) 11:37, 13 August 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

 * I've found the following accounts to be ✅ to the master account:
 * <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 20:19, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 20:19, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
 * <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 20:19, 13 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  22:36, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

On Teahouse, the user made this edit essentially complaining about how the lead in Pink (singer) and (other articles) contains "known professionally as" instead of "better known by the stage name", which is the same as what socks of this user have been complaining about for so long. Sro23 (talk) 17:42, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

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

Sure, the only person in the world who would have that MoS concern, right? Shirts and Banners (talk) 18:48, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The following accounts are ✅:
 * Blocked without tags. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:05, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked without tags. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:05, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked without tags. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:05, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked without tags. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:05, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

 Aloha27   talk  23:44, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

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

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Minor edits + MOS. Compare contributions to sock User:Bigger Fish to Fry, who made similar minor edits to a similar topic:. Today he leaves a message for me asking for a more in-depth version version of the manual of style and suggestions for more articles to make minor edits to. No one is more MOS obsessed than socks of this master. Sro23 (talk) 22:28, 2 September 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 following accounts are ✅:
 * Blocked, no tags, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:44, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, no tags, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:44, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, no tags, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:44, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, no tags, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:44, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, no tags, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:44, 3 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked, no tags, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:44, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Quacking loudly with this edit Sro23 (talk) 11:29, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

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

Quacking loudly, sro? Have you not seen the IP editors and Fish there, making the similar edit? Are we all from the same location? Or even if we are, just because we agreed at one time must we be the same person? What about consensuses? How do you suspect they form, sro? Any time you see one of those must all those accounts be from the same person just because they agreed? If every editor had a different opinion then how do you think the wiki would have survived for anywhere near this long?

Besides that, I already conceded to EEng, while the other editors kept pushing it. We're not the same people. Ginminx (talk) 07:53, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

To clerk (at least it looks like that's what you guys are called): I'm not sure what "checkuser" is, but it sounds like it might be some kind of tool for determining the IP addresses and locations of registered users. What more? If it is what I think, then checkuser us as you will, but just because edits from the same location agree doesn't mean they're from the same person. More than one person from the same location might be editing here, and they don't have to have unique beliefs. Compare to 116.212.233.96 and 49.196.168.147 and see if we're not dissimilar. Ginminx (talk) 10:12, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
✅, blocked, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:46, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Very soon after I undid a sock edit, new user Hiltine restores it. Has also been making the same minor edits as other sockpuppets in the archive. Sro23 (talk) 20:39, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' The edit summaries say it all I think. Regards,   Aloha27   talk  00:40, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * CU requested. ~ Rob 13 <sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">Talk 23:06, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
 * I'll run the check,, but in the future please explain why you're making the request.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:40, 12 September 2016 (UTC)


 * The following accounts are ✅:
 * Blocked and tagged.
 * is but .--Bbb23 (talk) 00:59, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
 * That's a behavioral match to me. I've blocked and tagged the account. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 01:54, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged.
 * is but .--Bbb23 (talk) 00:59, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
 * That's a behavioral match to me. I've blocked and tagged the account. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 01:54, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Created immediately after last sock User:Broganisms was blocked and filed UTRS appeal, with nearly identical name. First edit was to restore an edit made by Broganisms. Second edit was to remove the sock tag from Broganisms' page while admitting that he was a user who had been blocked. . Third edit was to recreate the identical userpage as Broganisms, again with an edit summary admitting he had been blocked. Meters (talk) 07:18, 13 September 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. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 10:37, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Brand-new account, same M.O. same interests. Quack?  Aloha27   talk  16:51, 13 September 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> 18:48, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Brand-new account, one edit at Imgur with same edit summary style he's known for,   Aloha27   talk  12:11, 14 September 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
Behavioral block. Close.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:22, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

All socks would be stale at this point, I think. But this new user suddenly appeared to restore the sockmaster's edit to their most cherished article, EBay. Sro23 (talk) 18:29, 1 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
✅, blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:50, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets

 * (though this may be the sockpuppet of a different master)
 * (removed my comments linking to this page from WP:ANEW —Guanaco 12:09, 25 June 2017 (UTC))
 * (though this may be the sockpuppet of a different master)
 * (removed my comments linking to this page from WP:ANEW —Guanaco 12:09, 25 June 2017 (UTC))
 * (though this may be the sockpuppet of a different master)
 * (removed my comments linking to this page from WP:ANEW —Guanaco 12:09, 25 June 2017 (UTC))
 * (though this may be the sockpuppet of a different master)
 * (removed my comments linking to this page from WP:ANEW —Guanaco 12:09, 25 June 2017 (UTC))
 * (though this may be the sockpuppet of a different master)
 * (removed my comments linking to this page from WP:ANEW —Guanaco 12:09, 25 June 2017 (UTC))
 * (though this may be the sockpuppet of a different master)
 * (removed my comments linking to this page from WP:ANEW —Guanaco 12:09, 25 June 2017 (UTC))


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

Same geolocation (Utah), same edit-warring MOS disruption as before. . Requesting rangeblock if possible. Sro23 (talk) 05:43, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

It's not disruption; it's conformation. And in reply to an edit summary, also not vandalism or disruptive to follow the format that wikipedia wants: "Louis Bert Lindley Jr. (June 29, 1919 – December 8, 1983), better known by the stage name Slim Pickens ..." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.23.179.36 (talk • contribs)
 * Thank you for your contribution to this report. Any other IPs you want to use so they can be added too? Cheers. -- ‖ Ebyabe talk - Inspector General  ‖ 06:08, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
 * 5.133.12.62 is a different master (User:The abominable Wiki troll). Sro23 (talk) 06:23, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. So many sockpuppets, sometimes it's hard to keep them all straight. -- ‖ Ebyabe talk - Inspector General  ‖ 07:41, 25 June 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

 * Range 174.23.0.0/16 blocked for two weeks. Closing. Favonian (talk) 12:17, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Sigh. A new day, a new IP range. Sro23 (talk) 22:23, 25 June 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

 * A total duck. I have blocked the IP range 75.162.216.0/23 for a month, after checking all edits from the range over the last couple of months, and determining that the risk of collateral damage is very small. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 00:14, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Known interest Commodore CDTV and has only edited this article and talk page, quacks loudly IMO.  Aloha27   talk  16:52, 9 September 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

 * Same location, same obsession. Blocked. GABgab 17:44, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
Admin recently short-term blocked at least the following as socks of this user:

User is still actively editing, in the same disruptive manner. Commodore CDTV, the locus of the dispute I'm aware of, had to be autoconfirmed-protected, and the user has been canvassing for support in this dispute. See User talk:Corinne, and same-named threads at User talk:SMcCandlish, User talk:EEng, User talk:Iridescent, User talk:Peter_coxhead, and others.
 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Additional IP addresses used during this time include but are probably not limited to: That's just from a couple of pages over the last day or so. Range blocks may be warranted. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  00:10, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Also, checking the SPI archives of this user shows them using the same 174.23.* and 75.162.* ranges for over a year now. This isn't even news. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  02:59, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Could we get some rangeblocks please? Sro23 (talk) 00:27, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Of a /12? That would be counterproductive. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 06:49, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Please do not make blocks indefinite. The editor is clearly trying to make a positive difference, but they are going about it in completely the wrong way. An indefinite ban would stop them from recognising their wrongdoings. As for range blocks, I have to oppose them. They should only be used in extraordinary circumstances. In the grand scheme of things, this editor's mistakes are pretty insignificant. Of course, they should be monitored, to ensure that no more disruptive contributions are made. – Sb2001 talk page 00:47, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
 * This user was community banned for harassment and endless disruption. You don't want them to come back. Sro23 (talk) 00:50, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Sb2001, have you even SEEN the list of socks launched by this banned user? [here] Regards,   Aloha27   talk  01:29, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The range-block concern is blockading other editors. Might be worth looking to see whether any that aren't probably the same user are actually using these IP address ranges.  — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ᴥⱷʌ≼  02:53, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Actually, they have got worse. Get rid of them. I tried to give them a chance. – Sb2001 talk page 13:51, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I've blocked the two most recent IPs, but I'm not the admin to ask for a rangeblock, sorry. GABgab 15:05, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Known range and obsession.  Aloha27   talk  03:44, 13 September 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

 * All blocked, closing. GABgab 15:46, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Known range and obsession.  Aloha27   talk  12:16, 26 September 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

 * . GABgab 15:04, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Known range and obsession... again.  Aloha27   talk  17:43, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

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

Perhaps it is time that an edit filter be utilized as this individual obviously has no intention of ceasing to edit on their own accord. Regards,   Aloha27   talk  18:18, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Range blocked, closing. What kind of edit filter?  Vanjagenije   (talk)  20:38, 26 September 2017 (UTC)  Vanjagenije   (talk)  20:38, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Known range and obsession   Aloha27   talk  13:23, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Special:Contributions/2600:100e:b131:2dd4::/64 was blocked by User:Vanjagenije. EdJohnston (talk) 01:06, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * RAnge blocked. Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:46, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Known range and obsession. Again. Active now.  Aloha27   talk  00:47, 6 October 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

 * Range blocked. Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:05, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Three edits by IP account. All reinstated edits which were removed as sock edits by this banned user.  Aloha27   talk  11:49, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * The edits being restored were by 31.52.216.116, which was blocked as a sockpuppet of User:Vote (X) for Change. Peter James (talk) 15:11, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * . GABgab 21:29, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

This user popped up on my watchlist and when I read their edit summaries, I immediately recognized them as Stylized. See also intersection with socks:. Requesting CU for sleepers. A non-stale sock would be User:SummerFunMan. Sro23 (talk) 03:26, 5 November 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

 * ✅. . ~ Rob 13 <sup style="margin-left:-1.0ex;">Talk 21:54, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
 * - Please indef sock. Sro23 (talk) 08:14, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Behavioural evidence seems good to me as well, so and marking for close; I assume this is the correct procedure. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:22, 12 November 2017 (UTC)