Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Viii007/Archive

21 September 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

This is most possibly not a newbie as his/her edits suggest but with little or no knowledge of Sock puppetry policy. Starts editing by adding Ref improve tags followed by addition of Wikiproject talk page banners. And then rushing to AfDs, specially Articles for deletion/IDonate Pakistan, where already some newbies have shown lack of understanding of Wikipedia's guideline and policies. Requesting CU to probe the master. S M S  Talk 19:24, 21 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Editing time match of the two users
 * {| class="wikitable"


 * || 11 Sept || 21 Sept
 * Enlightinggemini || 09:47 – 10:03 || 17:13 – 17:30
 * Viii007 || 10:05 – 22:08 || 17:05 – 17:08     17:35 – 21:50
 * }
 * Viii007 || 10:05 – 22:08 || 17:05 – 17:08     17:35 – 21:50
 * }
 * }


 * Enlightinggemini starts editing by adding Ref improve and adds tags to 2-4 articles in a minute that suggests that the pages were probably already opened in multiple tabs from Category:Pakistan organisation stubs (this category is also visited by Vii007). Adding tag to 13 articles in 4 minutes is too fast for a newbie. In short the stage was set to launch this account. And it can be seen that Vii007 do the tagging with a similar speed.


 * Similar rationales at AfDs:
 * Enlightinggemini
 * Viii007


 * Intersecting edits at AfDs:
 * Articles for deletion/IDonate Pakistan
 * Articles for deletion/MyBank
 * Enlightinggemini seems to be created for commenting at these AfDs. With the speed of ! voting at deletion discussions it seems the user didn't do any research and just stacked votes in favor of Viii007.


 * Both the users copy other users rationales who already have commented at deletion discussions, though partially but word to word:
 * At Articles for deletion/Chadhar Enlightinggemini copied Anupammehra's comment. ("Needs expansion not deletion")
 * At Articles for deletion/Gender and Mine Action Programme (GMAP) Viii007 copied Green Cardamom's comment. ("I'd prefer to vote Keep as this is a worthy group and")


 * Note: Though I have added Viii007 as a puppet but actually I believe he/she is the master. -- S M S  Talk 08:51, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Switched the two users — Viii007 is now the master. —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 01:47, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

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

Comment jeez are you guys suspecting me as a master for 10 different account I do not even know about? Have you guys ever heard about functionality of Dynamic Vs Static Ip's? Enlighten your IT knowledge before jumping to conclusion. 007 ( talk ) 15:33, 23 September 2013 (UTC)


 * @DQ Sorry to budge in admin matters but the oldest account I see is "Pakithedjay". And it was "Pakithedjay" who got blocked for creating/using Khalibali inappropriately. -- S M S  Talk 17:54, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Report is missing a suspected sockpuppet. I will leave a note on the reporter's talk page.  —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 05:25, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Reporter has added a suspected sockpuppet. It might be appropriate here to flip master and puppet.  —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 14:17, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Switched users to make oldest account (Viii007) the master. —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 01:47, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * - --  DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  11:53, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * There is also a fair amount of logged out editing which can not be rangeblocked at this time. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  12:05, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I've blocked the socks indef and blocked the master for one month. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:52, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * @Mark Arsten, who has been previously blocked for sockpuppetry is actually the master. --  DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  17:40, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * My mistake, sorry about that. Is there anything I should do to fix that now? Mark Arsten (talk) 17:50, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * There is also a fair amount of logged out editing which can not be rangeblocked at this time. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  12:05, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I've blocked the socks indef and blocked the master for one month. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:52, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * @Mark Arsten, who has been previously blocked for sockpuppetry is actually the master. --  DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  17:40, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * My mistake, sorry about that. Is there anything I should do to fix that now? Mark Arsten (talk) 17:50, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * There is also a fair amount of logged out editing which can not be rangeblocked at this time. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  12:05, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I've blocked the socks indef and blocked the master for one month. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:52, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * @Mark Arsten, who has been previously blocked for sockpuppetry is actually the master. --  DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  17:40, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * My mistake, sorry about that. Is there anything I should do to fix that now? Mark Arsten (talk) 17:50, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I've blocked the socks indef and blocked the master for one month. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:52, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * @Mark Arsten, who has been previously blocked for sockpuppetry is actually the master. --  DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  17:40, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * My mistake, sorry about that. Is there anything I should do to fix that now? Mark Arsten (talk) 17:50, 23 September 2013 (UTC)


 * DeltaQuad - are you sure? was created four days before . Upon further review  appears to be the oldest account noted here, though I suspect the true sockmaster is likely still unknown. --Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots  21:58, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Ya my bad there, didn't look far enough. :P My main concern was if Mark Arsten considered the original socking in his block time. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  22:29, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok, good point. I've extended the block of Viii007 to indefinite. Mark Arsten (talk) 23:32, 23 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I think everything's resolved, so closing. --Rschen7754 17:51, 24 September 2013 (UTC)