Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Truckeckhart2009/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets

 * ( original case name)


 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

I originally noticed a strange pattern in which Hedgeswayd would make a series of very small edits, then immediately revert all of these edits. In particular, this user would seem to switch between whether or not bulleted lists had spaces following the bullets – in other words, from  to   or vice versa. Examples of these edits can be seen here, here, here, and here. (Note that there are no changes since the pattern leaves no changes at the end; however, these do show that there are multiple intermediate edits being made and then removed.) I left a comment about this on the user's talk page seeking to clarify why this was happening, since even though the edits don't really change the page and are relatively inconsequential, they flood the page history unnecessarily and therefore may constitute vandalism.

As I searched through Hedgeswayd's past contributions, I noticed other accounts on some pages making very similar edits. For example, Daybreakers has been edited by Hedgeswayd, Murphyzoner, and Truckmacarthur2009 in the same way over the last four days. (There has also been similar editing by IP addresses on that page; while I suspect the same person is behind this and I've listed some of those IP addresses above, I won't focus on this too much in my discussion.) There are other pages with overlap between users, such as 2012 (film) and Avatar (2009 film), both of which have seen recent edits by Hedgeswayd and Truckmacarthur2009. The latter in particular shows why this quickly became concerning to me – there are probably 150 edits over the last few weeks that have flooded the page history and pushed other revisions much farther down. To me, this constitutes vandalism and deliberate non-constructive editing. For examples from these other users, here is an example from Murphyzoner (the spaces here have been added, but not yet removed) and an example from Truckmacarthur2009.

There are other factors that lead me to suspect sockpuppetry. For one thing, these three users all seem to focus very specifically on films from 2009. All three of the aforementioned films are from that year, as are Sorority Row, Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, Up in the Air (2009 film), Observe and Report, and Inglourious Basterds, just to name a few of the pages I've seen in their contributions. Another factor is that the three users do not leave edit summaries (aside from any auto-generated summaries). Additionally, none of these three users have created user pages, which isn't inherently suspicious on its own, but it does show further similarities. These factors imply a nearly identical pattern of editing. The final clue for me is that other users seem to have noticed sockpuppetry by Hedgeswayd, so it must be pretty obvious that something is going on.

Given how easily I found these patterns, I would not be surprised if there were additional accounts out there that I have overlooked, but this is the evidence I currently have. I have named Truckmacarthur2009 as the main account since it was created first, but again, I wouldn't be surprised if this isn't the case. RunningTiger123 (talk) 22:39, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I came here from their user talk seeing this notice b/c I was going to ask them about their behavior. They are absolutely and clearly trying to game this account around the 500 edit ECP requirements by making 1 byte edits on the same articles.--Jorm (talk) 18:16, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I've noticed this too. I've found
 * so far (I have blocked some of these). Behavioral evidence is the large amount of tiny pointless edits to film articles. The more I look the more I find. We need a checkuser - there are likely other accounts.— Diannaa (talk) 14:24, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * so far (I have blocked some of these). Behavioral evidence is the large amount of tiny pointless edits to film articles. The more I look the more I find. We need a checkuser - there are likely other accounts.— Diannaa (talk) 14:24, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * so far (I have blocked some of these). Behavioral evidence is the large amount of tiny pointless edits to film articles. The more I look the more I find. We need a checkuser - there are likely other accounts.— Diannaa (talk) 14:24, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * so far (I have blocked some of these). Behavioral evidence is the large amount of tiny pointless edits to film articles. The more I look the more I find. We need a checkuser - there are likely other accounts.— Diannaa (talk) 14:24, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * so far (I have blocked some of these). Behavioral evidence is the large amount of tiny pointless edits to film articles. The more I look the more I find. We need a checkuser - there are likely other accounts.— Diannaa (talk) 14:24, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * so far (I have blocked some of these). Behavioral evidence is the large amount of tiny pointless edits to film articles. The more I look the more I find. We need a checkuser - there are likely other accounts.— Diannaa (talk) 14:24, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - let's see if these are all the same person and if there are any more out there. Even if they aren't related, several of these accounts will probably need WP:DE blocks. GeneralNotability (talk) 15:05, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Also found and ✅:
 * Bagging and tagging all accounts. . Moving SPI report to new master, then closing...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   21:43, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Bagging and tagging all accounts. . Moving SPI report to new master, then closing...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   21:43, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Bagging and tagging all accounts. . Moving SPI report to new master, then closing...  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   21:43, 18 January 2021 (UTC)