Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sudafedfiend8/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets




Evidence submitted by MikeWazowski
These accounts all have an affinity for a small range of articles - mainly WMMS (one even used that station's callsigns as his username) or articles related to it, and have all tended to edit in succession, suggesting an editor constantly creating new accounts to give the illusion of multiple editors. The initial creation or disposition of each of their userpages is remarkably similar. The more recent accounts share a pattern on Ohio Junior Classical League, Stow-Munroe Falls High School, Darth Vader and Palpatine, with two of the accounts (71.64.103.117 and Wmmswxtmwenz01) sharing identical edit-warring patterns on the last two articles mentioned. MikeWazowski (talk) 22:05, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

and bingo was his name-o

I do not plead the 5th

ironically, most of my contributions (I would argue) have been constructive, all in good faith... but I do understand (reluctantly) your/Wikipedia's need to police such action. adieu

b. i. n. g. o. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.64.103.117 (talk) 05:43, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Comments by other users
I strongly agree with this and have noticed this pattern myself. The accounts have many habits in common. Ridernyc (talk) 23:04, 28 February 2010 (UTC)
 * This anonymous user already has a history of sockpuppetry by creating multiple accounts and using each one for a very short time. See Sockpuppet investigations/Smfhs photographer/Archive.  There are some others that could probably be added including User:Itsalwayssunnyinstow, User:Jokepoet302, User:Dutytrial30, User:Smileyousonofa75, User:STFUn00b333, and possibly others at the Stow-Munroe Falls High School page.  All of them have the same user page and talk page appearance with just one line or blanked. --JonRidinger (talk) 23:52, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
All registered accounts so far indefinitely blocked and tagged. The two IPs have been AO blocked 6 months each. –MuZemike 03:19, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Self-endorsing for CheckUser attention. I count 11 blocked socks so far and 2 IPs. There are likely more where that came from. –MuZemike 03:19, 3 March 2010 (UTC)


 * ✅ - the following;


 * - oldest account


 * - per policy. Nothing but abuse here.


 * - A l is o n  ❤ 06:18, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets






Evidence submitted by Quantpole
The first group of accounts are self declared alternatives/retired (see User talk:MisterE2123Five5). I do not understand why someone would need to keep starting up different accounts, and cannot see how it could meet WP:SOCK. I also believe these to be linked to the user behind the User:Sudafedfiend8 account and sockpuppets. This is due to the extensive crossover between articles edited such as Ohio Junior Classical League, Stow-Munroe Falls High School, WMMS, WKRK-FM and other radio stations. With the history of sockpuppeting I am convinced that they are the same user.

In addition to the disclosed accounts there are also a few others I have listed which all seem to be contributing to the same articles in a similar way and I believe a checkuser is required to ascertain if they are indeed the same user. The majority of the edits do seem to be constructive, but if they are indeed the same user they really need to stick to the one account. There is some disruption caused by the use of alternative accounts as they are reverting other users (e.g. this edit by User:Reywas92 reverted by an IP, and other reversions with edit summary accusing others of vandalism).

I do not want to stop this user from contributing as I believe they can be a benefit to the encyclopaedia but their use of alternative accounts is disruptive, particularly with the history of sockpuppets. Quantpole (talk) 11:13, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Requested by Quantpole (talk) 11:13, 20 May 2010 (UTC)

– see the previous CU on the /Archive page to see the previous sockfarm uncovered there. There's likelihood of another one right here. –MuZemike 00:06, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

✅

appears to be ❌. J.delanoy gabs adds 06:49, 24 May 2010 (UTC)


 * All blocked. Someone else can tag if they feel it is necessary. Tiptoety  talk 00:34, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Quantpole
Matches same pattern of editing interests as previous accounts, and similar name constructions. looks pretty obvious, but wanting checkuser as previous check brought out some sleepers. Quantpole (talk) 19:47, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
for a sleeper check. Previous checks have also resulted in lots of socks being found.  E lockid  ( Talk ) 03:14, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

The following are ✅ to have been controlled by the same person: Mostly abandoned, and I add that many or most edits appear to be constructive. If the person behind those accounts would just limit himself to one account I'm sure we'd all win. Amalthea 15:04, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

All blocked & tagged. Tiptoety talk 19:31, 10 July 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Quantpole
Same as previous check requests, checkuser in case I've picked on an innocent account and for sleepers. Could an IP block be looked at? Quantpole (talk) 10:52, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * - Looks good. Sleeper check would be good idea. -- &#47; DeltaQuad &#124; Notify Me  &#92; 23:16, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

While the overlap is on ostensibly public ranges (State University ranges and public library ranges for example), technical and behavioral evidence indicates the following observations may be made: -- Avi (talk) 02:56, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Geolocation is similar and timing does not preclude the account below from being separate from the above; behavioral evidence must determine.
 * Geolocation is similar and timing does not preclude the account below from being separate from the above; behavioral evidence must determine.
 * Geolocation is similar and timing does not preclude the account below from being separate from the above; behavioral evidence must determine.
 * Geolocation is similar and timing does not preclude the account below from being separate from the above; behavioral evidence must determine.
 * Geolocation is similar and timing does not preclude the account below from being separate from the above; behavioral evidence must determine.
 * Geolocation is similar and timing does not preclude the account below from being separate from the above; behavioral evidence must determine.
 * Geolocation is similar and timing does not preclude the account below from being separate from the above; behavioral evidence must determine.
 * Geolocation is similar and timing does not preclude the account below from being separate from the above; behavioral evidence must determine.
 * Geolocation is similar and timing does not preclude the account below from being separate from the above; behavioral evidence must determine.
 * Geolocation is similar and timing does not preclude the account below from being separate from the above; behavioral evidence must determine.
 * Geolocation is similar and timing does not preclude the account below from being separate from the above; behavioral evidence must determine.
 * all blocked and tagged NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 03:08, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by MikeWazowski
Continued pattern of editing identical to previous sockpuppets. MikeWazowski (talk) 01:05, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
✅:

A bunch of articles have been semi-protected for a long time due to excessive socking. –MuZemike 01:34, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
 * All blocked, marking for close. TN X Man  02:22, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

06 January 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every six hours.

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

Pattern of editing of Ohio radio and television articles is consistent with previous pattern by oh so many of Sudafedfiend8's blocked socks. Brand new editor quoting policy, editing templates, and making page move requests something of a red flag. Dravecky (talk) 11:16, 6 January 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

 * - Activity is similar to past socks, but not enough to block now. ( X! ·  talk )  · @538  · 11:55, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ the following are the same:
 * TN X Man 15:04, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * All confirmed socks have been blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 16:14, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * TN X Man 15:04, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * All confirmed socks have been blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 16:14, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * TN X Man 15:04, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * All confirmed socks have been blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 16:14, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * All confirmed socks have been blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 16:14, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

17 January 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

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

Another brand new user who jumps right in to uploading images for Ohio radio stations, using fair use template language identical to User:Blcklght8 and other socks. Plus, drawn like a moth to a flame, began substantial edits to WMMS as is typical of socks (User:Downtown22, User:Rrt101288, User:JoeCE4243, and many more) of this banned user. Dravecky (talk) 07:43, 17 January 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

 * - Seems likely. CU to confirm, and also to check for sleepers (a bunch were found last time, for example.) —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 14:05, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅, no sleepers. TN X Man  15:41, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 15:49, 17 January 2011 (UTC)