Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TVNEWS11/Archive

11 January 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

All only edit Latif Yahia, deleting any adverse text however referenced and attracting many warnings including 3RR. Lately, after TVNEWS11 was briefly blocked, 81.83.157.57 appeared and was eventually blocked. By that time the block on TVNEWS11 had expired so s/he returned to deleting and was blocked for 7 days. AMA2010 is now deleting. I've not noticed any attempt to differentiate the behaviour of the 2 accounts or the IP. NebY (talk) 20:39, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

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

I agree with the above complaint. User:TVNEWS11 has made edits only at. In doing so, this user has repeatedly blanked article content ( to name a few) as well as talk page content without explanation, earning two blocks already. The IP above displays the same editing behavior during the 48-hour block (article: ; talk, including refactoring others' comments: ). Since User:TVNEWS11's latest one week block, User:AMA2010, apparently a previously dormant WP:SPA, has resumed editing in the exact same way. I also think this behavior indicates either WP:SOCK or WP:MEAT. JFHJr (㊟) 23:15, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * AMA2010 indefinitely blocked, and block of TVNEWS11 extended to two weeks. Amalthea  14:39, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

20 January 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

WP:DUCK – repeated removal of sourced material critical of the subject, and addition of unsupported material at : This is similar to previous edits by blocked TVNEWS11  and blocked sock AMA2010. TVNEWS previously created AMA2010 to evade the block (see archive); while both were blocked, Perrynio was created. Note Perrynio claims to be the subject's literary agent. Note also another SPA editor in the edit history apparently connected to the subject's publisher, now also blocked, User:Arcanumpublishing2011:. JFHJr (㊟) 01:14, 20 January 2012 (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

 * - Perrynio has employed a very different tactic (if they are the same) in 'removing' material. Also I'm not seeing what corresponds here in the text that they are trying to get removed. -- DQ  (t)   (e)  01:51, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Non-admin: Fair enough. Thank you. FWIW, this user has been temporarily blocked under WP:LEGAL. For now, self-identification as the subject's literary agent seems to correlate mostly with the stale account, apparently the publisher (blocked under WP:UN). While a new account name after a WP:UN vio probably should not be taken as a block evasion or sock, might WP:MEAT be applicable to the manner in which multiple WP:SPA, and in this case very clearly WP:COI accounts delete criticism of the subject? JFHJr (㊟) 08:46, 21 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Aforementioned alphabet soup aside, both of these socks are indef blocked right now. If it is meatpuppetry then I'm mildly disinclined to reset the master's block. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 14:51, 21 January 2012 (UTC)