Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/WOLfan112/Archive

31 March 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Ok, I'll try this again. We've had two editors coming into the Teahouse and asking questions in a very similar style and asking very intense questions and leaving comments about why people get blocked, repeatedly. It starts here Teahouse/Questions and you can continue to scroll down to see the suspected two socks asking questions in a similar style and again, about similar subjects. Still hoping we can get checkuser on this. Thanks.

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

Vocednitore commented here that 20th shows some remarkable similarities to WBJB03, including asking for how-tos on formatting their signature, archiving their talk page, etc. Monareal's behavior *could* be good-hand/bad-hand, but I don't know that there's any real behavioral link between them. As an aside, how do I un-archive WBJB03's case to add 20thtryer as a sock? Writ Keeper &#9863;&#9812; 15:55, 31 March 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * . In order for any investigation to be completed, particularly checkuser, you need to provide at least one suspected sock and some evidence to support your assertions. . Hers fold  (t/a/c) 01:56, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
 * At User_talk:20thtryer edits are all too stalker close for this not to be a sock. Also and  where they are both "leaving" something. --  DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  07:53, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ that is using throwaway accounts to evade scrutiny. It was editing under  and is now using
 * check on barring new evidence, I don't think you have enough to warrant a check for now.
 * -- Luk  talk 11:02, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Master blocked one week. Socks Nuked. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  11:48, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

04 June 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

New user has the same article creation habits as Deathlaser. The new user joined the day after deathlaser retired. They both use(d) short, incomplete citations and references without a publisher and have the same ways of blanking comments off their talk page(s). Thine Antique Pen (talk • contributions) 17:46, 4 June 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

 * - No need. You found an improperly done Cleanstart, it seems.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  18:23, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * User confessed at WP:ANI... --Thine Antique Pen (talk • contributions) 18:25, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't see what he confessed, other than that he tried to clean-start. And even if this user was Deathlaser, it's still a WP:SOCK, and all that. → Σ τ  c . 18:51, 4 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Nothing to see here. Not even going to tag.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  18:59, 4 June 2012 (UTC)

20 June 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

I see similarities with User:Deathlasersonline, who was just blocked as a sock of WOLfan112. Both use "--" before the name in their signature. Both say "leave me alone" a lot. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:39, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Furthermore, Deathlasersonline and Democracy112 edits dovetail to the minute. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:56, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Furthermore, both mass-produced physics/chemistry and fauna stubs then walked away from them. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:58, 20 June 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

 * Pattern is as stated, same with previous socks, never touching the same articles, same type and manners as well. Can't produce diffs for these types of differences because they seldom edit the same article twice. Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;  01:04, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * User:Deathlaser had his name changed properly to User:Deathlasersonline via a bureaucrat. Not sure how we handles those, since you can still technically login through the old account, I do believe.  Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;  01:12, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅, blocked and tagged. Changing a username from A to B means that A no longer exists, but there's nothing stopping anyone from recreating A, which is what happened. WilliamH (talk) 01:59, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Someone may want to merge Sockpuppet investigations/Deathlaser/Archive into the archives for WOLfan112. Lady of  Shalott  02:45, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Ahh, I knew that Democracy112 sounded familar. Thanks for the reminder. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 02:51, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

14 July 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

http://internetprotocol.wikia.com/wiki/Special:RecentChanges basically speaks for itself. The general lack of maturity, and almost immediate use of tools such as Twinkle and adding template:copy to commons on articles made it quite obvious it was a sock, and WOLfan112/Deathlasers was my first though. Requesting CheckUser to look for sleepers. Frood! Ohai What did I break now? 17:30, 14 July 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

 * - Very ducky behavior. Enough to block without CU, but want to check for sleepers. Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;  17:37, 14 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I've indef blocked based purely on behavior, but still need to look for sleepers. Dennis Brown - 2&cent;    &copy;  17:46, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

Nothing else. Clearly a block-evading sock, though. --MuZemike 17:58, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

28 July 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

This and this make me believe it's the same user - Their behavior on IRC was often immature (Shouting in all caps frequently, demanding CSD tags be removed, etc.) A quick check of the IP TAU connected to IRC with, and an IP WOLfan112 connected to IRC with showed that it was the same ISP. Also, note, TAU's fourth edit on Simple Wikipedia was enabling Twinkle, as WOLfan/Deathlaser usually does with early edits. Frood! Ohai What did I break now? 20:23, 28 July 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
✅ plus:



--MuZemike 20:33, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

27 August 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Opened by CU request. — Berean Hunter   (talk)  03:19, 27 August 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


-- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  03:23, 27 August 2012 (UTC) — Berean Hunter   (talk)  03:30, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Tagged and closing.

27 August 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

The IP reverted back to this edit which had been made by User:HelloWorldTestAccount -- a confirmed sockpuppet. Geo Swan (talk) 10:30, 27 August 2012 (UTC) Geo Swan (talk) 10:30, 27 August 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

 * That geolocates to Toronto, and likely is him, but it is a cell phone IP so has likely rotated and no need to block for technical reasons. Kind of outed himself by doing that, as that is the first IP in the nest of socks that are WOLfan112.  Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 10:49, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

31 May 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

TheQuestionerPro was originally blocked as a sock of Technoquat but they protested to being labeled that way. After I ran some checks, it looked more like they were actually WOLfan112. TheQuestionerPro then admitted to GorillaWarfare that they previously edited as WOLfan112. Report submitted for the record. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:15, 31 May 2013 (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

 * With the CU data and the admission, it is very that all named accounts are WOLfan112. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:15, 31 May 2013 (UTC)