Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Y26Z3/Archive

07 June 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Y26Z3 was recently blocked for edit-warring, and after being unblocked made a nearly-identical edit at Lusitanic. Instead of Y26Z3 reverting again, two IPs that geolocate to the same city reverted the content in the editor's place. No other IP editor has shown any interest in the article or the talk page in over a month, so it strikes me as odd that an IP editor would suddenly come along and support an editor, especially if it means that Y26Z3 isn't accused of edit warring again.

The article is currently protected, but the part that is currently an issue is the talk page, where the IPs, if they are connected to Y26Z3, would be using the talk page to create an illusion of support. SudoGhost 19:34, 7 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Added a third IP from the same area making pretty much the same edit as the previous IP. - SudoGhost 01:16, 8 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

 * The same IP was listed twice, now corrected. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 20:54, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
 * All three are ducks, static IPs, geolocate to same area, 74* is a known proxy server. Dennis Brown  -  2&cent;   &copy;  01:26, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * User:Y26Z3 has been indef blocked for a WP:NLT violation by TParis after this  WP:ANI report.  Watching IPs.  Dennis Brown  -  2&cent;   &copy;  14:10, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * There is clear evidence that these are the same person, by location, behavior and other technical data. Blocked all three IPs for one month.  Dennis Brown  -  2&cent;   &copy;  01:06, 9 June 2012 (UTC)

03 July 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

User Y26Z3 was blocked indefinitely from editing. The reason for the block was his disruptive behavior (including revert wars on the Hispanic and Latino Americans and on Lusitanic, personal attacks, and by making legal threats) and was eventually blocked from editing his own talk page because of his repeated belligerent behavior. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Y26Z3. The final block on his talk page was done on June 11, 2012.

On June 16, 2012 (within days of the block on Y26Z3's privileges to edit his talk page), the user account for UnbiasedObjective was created. UnbiasedObjective has been making similarly disruptive edits on Hispanic and Latino Americans to the same sections of the article that Y26Z3 found offensive, and has refused to acknowledge well-sourced text and has continually deleted the same text without justification:


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hispanic_and_Latino_Americans&action=historysubmit&diff=500220147&oldid=499775519


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hispanic_and_Latino_Americans&action=historysubmit&diff=499710512&oldid=499618659


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hispanic_and_Latino_Americans&action=historysubmit&diff=499515690&oldid=499324880


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hispanic_and_Latino_Americans&action=historysubmit&diff=499198861&oldid=499121659

Nearly identical changes were made by Y26Z3 (two examples among many):


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hispanic_and_Latino_Americans&action=historysubmit&diff=495842560&oldid=495840166


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hispanic_and_Latino_Americans&action=historysubmit&diff=495545096&oldid=495532580

UnbiasedObjective's justifications for his deletions are not well-supported and have not received any support from any other editors on the article:


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Goodsdrew


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Hispanic_and_Latino_Americans#Y26Z3_.27s_Edits


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Hispanic_and_Latino_Americans#Corrections

Also, Y26Z3's hobby horse has been a campaign to get the article Lusitanic deleted (because he interprets the term as being a combination of the words "Lucifer" and "Satanic" and thus demeaning to persons of Portuguese descent):


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ALusitanic&action=historysubmit&diff=497233606&oldid=492823234


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Y26Z3

Similarly, UnbiasedObjective has also begun lobbying for Lusitanic to be deleted:


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ACristiano_Tom%C3%A1s&action=historysubmit&diff=500461935&oldid=500246597

UnbiasedObjective's first move in his lobbying effort was to contact a user (Cristiano Tomás) with whom Y26Z3 has had contact in the past:


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ACristiano_Tom%C3%A1s&action=historysubmit&diff=495536975&oldid=495396936
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AY26Z3&action=historysubmit&diff=495240038&oldid=492888606

Y26Z3 has been found to be associated with the following sockpuppet IPs (mostly in Conroe, Texas):


 * 216.227.247.2
 * 207.70.152.4
 * 74.124.35.214
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Y26Z3/Archive

Y26Z3 was blocked for making legal threats, personal threats, and engaging in disruptive behavior, and this block has never been resolved. If UnbiasedObjective is a sockpuppet of Y26Z3, UnbiasedObjective should be blocked until Y26Z3 has resolved his issues and until he ceases the same disruptive behavior under his new account for which he was previously blocked.Goodsdrew (talk) 16:54, 3 July 2012 (UTC) Goodsdrew (talk) 16:54, 3 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
— Berean Hunter   (talk)  17:13, 3 July 2012 (UTC)
 * - to check for block evasion and sleepers.

✅ and. --MuZemike 17:32, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

10 July 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

User Y26Z3 was blocked indefinitely from editing. The reason for the block was his disruptive behavior (including revert wars on Hispanic and Latino Americans and on Lusitanic, personal attacks, and by making legal threats) and was eventually blocked from editing his own talk page because of his repeated belligerent behavior. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Y26Z3. The final block on his talk page was done on June 11, 2012. He was recently blocked for using a sockpuppet user called UnbiasedObjective (see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Y26Z3/Archive#03_July_2012 )

Both of these IPs, 83.61.20.30 and 213.98.51.34, have been making contentious edits in a manner similar to Y26Z3 on topics in which Y26Z3 has previously demonstrated interest (Hispanic and on topics related to Portugal and the Portuguese, this time on the article Theory of Portuguese discovery of Australia):


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hispanic&action=historysubmit&diff=501534500&oldid=501510901


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hispanic&action=historysubmit&diff=501401969&oldid=500109229


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ATheory_of_Portuguese_discovery_of_Australia&action=historysubmit&diff=500651047&oldid=498798252


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ATheory_of_Portuguese_discovery_of_Australia&action=historysubmit&diff=498695012&oldid=498409967


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ATheory_of_Portuguese_discovery_of_Australia&action=historysubmit&diff=498355137&oldid=492641032


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Theory_of_Portuguese_discovery_of_Australia&action=historysubmit&diff=501568008&oldid=500660397


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Theory_of_Portuguese_discovery_of_Australia&action=historysubmit&diff=500659710&oldid=500621229


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Theory_of_Portuguese_discovery_of_Australia&action=historysubmit&diff=498307688&oldid=498242767


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Theory_of_Portuguese_discovery_of_Australia&action=historysubmit&diff=498205583&oldid=497805999


 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Theory_of_Portuguese_discovery_of_Australia&action=historysubmit&diff=497747013&oldid=496073516

When you type each of the IPs in a browser, each IP serves up an identical login page which appears to be a login page for a proxy server. I suspect that Y26Z3 / UnbiasedObjective is using these two IPs as proxies to continue his combative and abusive editing.Goodsdrew (talk) 15:46, 10 July 2012 (UTC) Goodsdrew (talk) 15:46, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Comments by other users
Im not able to comment on whether the users are a sockpuppet of Y26Z3, but the two IP addresses listed above are certainly the one user. I was under the impression he was editing from Spain? Perhaps the user will just create an account and login normally to remove any uncertainty. There is no doubt the user is familiar with WikipediaNickm57 (talk) 05:55, 11 July 2012 (UTC) ''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - No new accounts, behavoir needs to determine this. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  00:03, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't think these are the droids you are looking for. The last set of IPs were centered around the greater Houston area, and unless he is vacationing in Madrid, this is likely someone else.  Both IPs may very well be the same person, but I don't think they belong to this master.   Page protection a WP:RFPP might be the better option.  In this case, I did see clear evidence of meatpuppetry and as such have short term blocked the IPs. Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;  18:28, 14 July 2012 (UTC)

23 July 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

User Y26Z3 was blocked indefinitely from editing. The reason for the block was his disruptive behavior (including revert wars on Hispanic and Latino Americans and on Lusitanic, personal attacks, and by making legal threats) and was eventually blocked from editing his own talk page because of his repeated belligerent behavior. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Y26Z3. The final block on his talk page was done on June 11, 2012. He was recently blocked for using a sockpuppet user called UnbiasedObjective (see here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Y26Z3/Archive#03_July_2012 )

92.250.106.206 has been making contentious edits in a manner similar to Y26Z3 on topics in which Y26Z3 has previously demonstrated interest in the article Hispanic and has been engaging in a revert war in Hispanic:    Goodsdrew (talk) 15:47, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

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

IP user 92.250.60.247 also appears to be a sockpuppet of Y26Z3 (or at the very least is a meat puppet of 92.250.106.206). The new ip, 92.250.60.247, has started making similar edits to 92.250.106.206, as seen here: .Goodsdrew (talk) 22:11, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - It definitely looks like the same guy to me. I've dealt with them both on numerous occasions, and they both seem to have the same problems with discussing their contentious additions with others and with sourcing their statements. I've been wrong before, but I don't think I am, in this case. Evanh2008 (talk&#124;contribs) 00:27, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

I have created the sections: 1.1 Definitions in ancient Rome 1.2 Definitions in Portugal and Spain and made major edits to the terminology, all fully sourced.
 * I just say these guys are just playing games. They just use any excuse to delete whatever does not please them even if it is sourced.

As for user Evanh2008 comments,I never had the displeasure of dealing with him/her before or ever discussing with such a person, or any of those other guys. An advantage of being an dynamic IP is that I can ignore anyone who has the same kind of behaviour these guys have, they just revert sourced edits have no respect for others and make accusations. From the attempt to connect me with the user Y26Z3 to the lies with the clear intention to block my editing, implying "the same problems ....", (a very funny comment by the way) they just use any tricks to get their way. I edit wikipedia as an IP for the past 9 years, and it is the first time I see someone actually collecting dynamic IPs and call them sockpuppet and meat puppet. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.140.108.92 (talk) 00:30, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Checkusers can't publicly comment on IP addresses. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:20, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
 * obvious ducks, match previous patterns. Blocked, closing. Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 01:52, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

07 November 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

User Y26Z3 was blocked indefinitely from editing. The reason for the block was his disruptive behavior (including revert wars on Hispanic and Latino Americans and on Lusitanic, personal attacks, and by making legal threats) and was eventually blocked from editing his own talk page because of his repeated belligerent behavior. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Y26Z3. The final block on his talk page was done on June 11, 2012. He has also been blocked for using a sockpuppet user called UnbiasedObjective (see here: )

Both of these users, Bowlfisher and ThePortuguese, have been making similarly disruptive edits and contentious edits in a manner similar to Y26Z3 on topics in which Y26Z3 has previously demonstrated interest, such as Lusitanic and on topics related to Portugal and the Portuguese. Both of these users have refused to acknowledge the consensus of other editors of these articles, and have continually made the same contentious edits and then reverted the edits of anyone who removes his changes. The two users appear to be working in concert, and appear to be controlled by the same person:



Goodsdrew (talk) 15:09, 7 November 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
— Berean Hunter   (talk)  22:28, 7 November 2012 (UTC) — Berean Hunter   (talk)  02:10, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
 * - to confirm socking between named sock accounts (master's contribs are stale). As the SPI archive was blanked as a courtesy, Please use last version prior. IP ranges listed in the archive may help determine a connection to the master.
 * ✅; with to add to the mixer.  &mdash; Coren (talk) 00:10, 8 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Closing.


 * Admin note: Blocked and tagged. It's interesting to look at Y2's various socks, including these recent ones, and then read 2012080910010159. Someguy1221 (talk) 00:47, 8 November 2012 (UTC)

12 November 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

The user's only edit has been to continue making the same arguments as previously blocked sockpuppets of Y26Z3. Y26Z3 has been the only editor who has ever put forth any reasoning that the word "only applies to Portuguese people". - SudoGhost 02:27, 12 November 2012 (UTC) SudoGhost 02:27, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

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

I was coming here to report Knoxkill as being a likely sockpuppet, but SudoGhost beat me to it. Knoxkill's activities perfectly fit Y26Z3's MO -- it seems likely to me that Knoxkill is just a sockpuppet for Y26Z3.Goodsdrew (talk) 16:24, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Obvious sock is ✅ to be obvious. Also  crawls under the same furniture.  Some hardblocking has been done, given the low collateral of the range.  &mdash; Coren (talk) 16:57, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Overlap exists, bagged, tagged and closed. Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 17:01, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

28 November 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

User Y26Z3 was blocked indefinitely from editing. The reason for the block was his disruptive behavior (including revert wars on Hispanic and Latino Americans and on Lusitanic, personal attacks, and by making legal threats) and was eventually blocked from editing his own talk page because of his repeated belligerent behavior. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Y26Z3. The final block on his talk page was done on June 11, 2012. He has also been blocked for using the following sockpuppets: UnbiasedObjective (see here: ), Bowlfisher and ThePortuguese (see here: ), and Knoxkill (see here: ).

The IP at issue here, 188.140.10.36, resolves to Portugal, where previous IPs associated with Y26Z3 have come from. The IP has also engaged in disruptive, unproductive behavior on articles and issues that Y26Z3 has been involved with before, this time on the article [Hispanic] by removing sourced material and by adding numerous tags at the introduction of the article without giving any explanation on the talk page (see here:  )Goodsdrew (talk) 01:22, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments by other users
This anon user appears to be quite familiar with WP, suggesting some previous experiences.Nickm57 (talk) 07:57, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

This IP has started posting abusive comments about me in the Hispanic talk page:. The IP user's comments demonstrate a strong familiarity with the many sockpuppet investigations against Y26Z3, and the IP user's comments demonstrate the same belligerent, unreasonable tone that is Y26Z3's MO.Goodsdrew (talk) 15:08, 28 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Hi Someguy1221. I request that the tags be mantained the article is USA centered. I also ask you if you can leave on this page the geographic location(s) you have of Y2 . The edit I reverted had no sources, two souces were added, can you please copy past where on those references says that "The Spanish and Portuguese languages are the main cultural element shared by Hispanic peoples", english is not my mother tongue. Did I miss it or is not there?

I request also a portuguese patrolling admin from portuguse wikipedia as a consultative observer. Thanks.188.140.46.217 (talk) 22:31, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Patrolling admin comment: Blocked for obvious sockpuppetry/evasion. Regarding the IP address, how sure are we that this is Y2? The IP addresses that were clearly Y2 were proxies. The other addresses were obviously disruptive, but a quick perusal of their edits and I didn't find a smoking gun that screamed "Y2!". I wonder if we have actually lumped two disruptive editors together in the archive to this case. Perhaps a checkuser can shed some light, considering the registered accounts are all obviously Y2. Someguy1221 (talk) 02:01, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I've also just blocked the IP above for block evasion. Closed, since Someguy1221 already blocked the first IP. Reaper Eternal (talk) 22:38, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

13 February 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Pretty loud duck, this latest sockpuppet is continuing his odd "anti-Lusitanic" crusade (the original discussion can be seen at Talk:Lusitanic). Looking at the contribs revealed this attempt at an SPI report, which appears to be an attempt at creating a retaliatory SPI, as Gooddrew and I have previously filed SPI reports that resulted in suspected sockpuppets of Y26Z3 being blocked. It is very unlikely that the editor is just a new editor that happened to open a retaliatory SPI on behalf of someone else by somehow finding their way to Suspected sock puppets instead of Sockpuppet investigations, and I don't know many new editors that would immediately know how to speedy delete articles, but a sockpuppeter with a history of creating sockpuppets to continue a pattern of editing would know how. - SudoGhost 19:33, 13 February 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

 * Blocked and tagged, and the malicious SPI has been deleted. Someguy1221 (talk) 20:15, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

20 February 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

User Y26Z3 was blocked indefinitely from editing. The reason for the block was his disruptive behavior (including revert wars on Hispanic, Hispanic and Latino Americans and on Lusitanic, personal attacks, and by making legal threats) and was eventually blocked from editing his own talk page because of his repeated belligerent behavior. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Y26Z3. The final block on his talk page was done on June 11, 2012. He has also been blocked for using the following sockpuppets: UnbiasedObjective (see here: ), Bowlfisher and ThePortuguese (see here: ), Knoxkill (see here: ), and Afirmative (see here: ).

The user at issue here, Kyrel, has been making disruptive, non-productive edits to Hispanic (see here: ), and to my talk page (see here: ). This user fits Y26Z3's MO. He seems to come back in waves; he was recently blocked within the last few weeks, and this new activity from Kyrel appears to be part of this new wave of activity.Goodsdrew (talk) 21:28, 20 February 2013 (UTC) Goodsdrew (talk) 21:28, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

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

Hi, I don't really know how the wiki goes, so I don't know if I'm supposed to post here or not. But hey, my edits were not disruptive. I left peaceful comments on your talk page. You can fully investigate my IP. I'm both innocent and tranquil about your accusations

Have a nice day  Kyrel 02:54, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - What is suspicious is that not only is Kyrel making contentious edits on Hispanic topics, as is Y2's MO, but that's he's also citing the oxford dictionary, which Y2 and his many socks are quite fond of as well: example. It is a popular source to be sure, but Y2 is the only person I've seen using it in disputes on Hispanic topics. Otherwise, we don't have much to go on, which is why I'm requesting CU, as well as for the fact that this account is actually older than Y2 or any of his known socks. I should note that Y2 is fond of using open proxies, so I would consider it confirmed if that's what Kyrel is on. Someguy1221 (talk) 21:48, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
 * is ✅ by comparison to data in the CU logs, along with . It is bordering  that Kyrel and Afirmative are related. T. Canens (talk) 22:14, 20 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged Cypork as behaviorally and technically confirmed. I'm leaving Kyrel untouched, as both the technical and behavioral evidence are inconclusive. Someguy1221 (talk) 22:26, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

18 April 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

User Y26Z3 was blocked indefinitely from editing. The reason for the block was his disruptive behavior (including revert wars on Hispanic, Hispanic and Latino Americans and on Lusitanic, personal attacks, and by making legal threats) and was eventually blocked from editing his own talk page because of his repeated belligerent behavior. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Y26Z3. The final block on his talk page was done on June 11, 2012. He has also been blocked for using the following sockpuppets: UnbiasedObjective (see here: ), Bowlfisher and ThePortuguese (see here: ), Knoxkill (see here: ), and Afirmative (see here: ).

The IPs at issue here, have been making disruptive, non-productive edits to Hispanic and Portuguese people (see here:, , , , and see history page here, , for Portuguese people where the IPs have started a revert war). The activities of these IPs fit Y26Z3's MO.Goodsdrew (talk) 23:08, 18 April 2013 (UTC) Goodsdrew (talk) 23:08, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

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

Other IPs involved in the edit war in Portuguese people: 213.138.224.102, 213.138.224.248, 213.138.225.66. Goodsdrew (talk) 23:11, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

And the vandalism continues, including altering the language of quoted language so that it doesn't match the original source: []. Please help!Goodsdrew (talk) 14:38, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
. Although there may very possibly be sockpuppetry going on here, a CU check is impossible by policy, since CU cannot be used to link IP addresses to an account. Feel free to take any appropriate action based on behavioural (WP:DUCK) evidence or just plain disruptive editing. — Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 01:34, 19 April 2013 (UTC)


 * It's not impossible at all, both the privacy policy and checkuser policy absolutely allow connecting account with IP if necessary. In this case, I believe it would be appropriate -- and there certainly is sufficient history of disruption both with alternate accounts and anon edits to warrant using checkuser. ✅ sock of Y26Z3 is the new account
 * that had already been blocked for edit warring (and took another editor with him). Evasion with anon should also be reduced. The contributions of 69.181.219.15 are much more focused than the others, that and edit timings make me consider it uninvolved so I did not look into it. Amalthea  19:37, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
 * that had already been blocked for edit warring (and took another editor with him). Evasion with anon should also be reduced. The contributions of 69.181.219.15 are much more focused than the others, that and edit timings make me consider it uninvolved so I did not look into it. Amalthea  19:37, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

14 June 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

On behalf of User:Daufer, since I don't know if he'll do it or not - see contributions. I'll leave it up to Daufer to provide behavioural or other evidence. I personally have no stance on the matter, having arrived from Articles_for_deletion/African_admixture_in_Europe_(3rd_nomination). Ansh666 00:38, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * >>>User:GreekPost<<< Thats what its all about;After GreekPost was indefinitely blocked for being a sock puppet, SpaniHard pops up and started to vandalise the article in the same manner as GreekPost; Im not sure why its not possible to check whether SpaniHard is a sock puppet of GreekPost (and the other alter egos) but its been now over a month;Maybe im wrong ..... but what a coincidence: GreekPost/SpaniHard - same article - same behaviour etc. Daufer (talk) 01:37, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
 * GreekPost was a sock of Y26Z3, hence why I filed it here instead of GreekPost. I'll also leave this here. Ansh666 02:10, 14 June 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

 * - - Blocked per WP:DUCK, adding sleeper request. King of  &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 05:39, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Named user is a ✅ match to GreekPost, and I didn't see any sleepers. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:34, 15 June 2013 (UTC)
 * Closing. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 18:32, 15 June 2013 (UTC)

17 September 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

User Y26Z3 was blocked indefinitely from editing. The reason for the block was his disruptive behavior (including revert wars on Hispanic, Hispanic and Latino Americans and on Lusitanic, personal attacks, and by making legal threats) and was eventually blocked from editing his own talk page because of his repeated belligerent behavior. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Y26Z3. The final block on his talk page was done on June 11, 2012. He has also been blocked for using the following sockpuppets: UnbiasedObjective (see here: ), Bowlfisher and ThePortuguese (see here: ), Knoxkill (see here: ), Afirmative (see here: ), GreekPost, and SpaniHard.

The users at issue here have been making disruptive, POV, non-productive edits to Latino (demonym) with no citations, unjustified removal of previously-cited material, and edits that contradict the cited content in the article; see here:, , and see history page here,. The activities of these users fit Y26Z3's MO and the types of articles that he typically edits. At the very least, it is clear that these two users are sockpuppets of each other. Goodsdrew (talk) 15:21, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * It may be too late but just for the record, an IP editing at Theory of the Portuguese discovery of Australia has the hallmarks of this user.Nickm57 (talk) 21:04, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - L Faraone  17:47, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
 * The two users are ✅ to be the same. L Faraone  17:54, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
 * To be honest, I'm not sure these are Y2. To be even more honest, I'm not sure half the socks in the archives are Y2. But either way, these are abusive socks with no interest in collaborative editing, so they are both blocked indefinitely. Someguy1221 (talk) 05:04, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

23 October 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

User Y26Z3 was blocked indefinitely from editing. The reason for the block was his disruptive behavior (including revert wars on Hispanic, Hispanic and Latino Americans and on Lusitanic, personal attacks, and by making legal threats) and was eventually blocked from editing his own talk page because of his repeated belligerent behavior. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Y26Z3. The final block on his talk page was done on June 11, 2012. He has also been blocked for using the following sockpuppets: UnbiasedObjective (see here: ), Bowlfisher and ThePortuguese (see here: ), Knoxkill (see here: ), Afirmative (see here: ), GreekPost, and SpaniHard. Y26Z3 has shown particular interest in subjects related to the Portuguese language and people.

The user at issue here has been making disruptive, POV, non-productive edits to Hispanic and Latino Americans with no citations, unjustified removal of previously-cited material, and edits that contradict the cited content in the article; see here:, , , , and see history page here, , and the user's combative posts in the talk page here,. The activities of this user fits Y26Z3's MO and the types of articles that he typically edits. Goodsdrew (talk) 20:11, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

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

Did Y26Z3 and socks demonstrate User:Cau7ion's inability to indent comments on talk pages? Pinkbeast (talk) 01:28, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Very much so. They commonly made large, unformatted talk page posts. Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:19, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * However, the users are ❌. Closing. Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:25, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

22 November 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

User Y26Z3 was blocked indefinitely from editing. The reason for the block was his disruptive behavior (including revert wars on Hispanic, Hispanic and Latino Americans and on Lusitanic, personal attacks, and by making legal threats) and was eventually blocked from editing his own talk page because of his repeated belligerent behavior. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Y26Z3. The final block on his talk page was done on June 11, 2012. He has also been blocked for using the following sockpuppets: UnbiasedObjective (see here: ), Bowlfisher and ThePortuguese (see here: ), Knoxkill (see here: ), Afirmative (see here: ), GreekPost, and SpaniHard. Y26Z3 has shown particular interest in subjects related to the Portuguese language and people.

The user at issue here has been making disruptive, POV, non-productive edits to Luso-American, particularly the unjustified removal of large sections of the article without adequate justification; see here:, , , and and see history page here,. The user's ultimate justification for blanking sections was that they were offensive to his ethnicity (see here: ). The activities of this user fits Y26Z3's MO and the types of articles that he typically edits. Goodsdrew (talk) 17:10, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' The user in question has been making compulsive reverts/editions, under POV in the article entitled Luso-American. His editions strive in mendacity. Goodsdrew tries to boast such terminology to apply to non-Portuguese, and the-reheat to lump different groups of people in the same sackcloth. This is irresponsible and offensive both to the Portuguese and the other people in question. 'Luso' is the prefix that serves to identity a Portuguese person. Therefore, not a non-Portuguese Person.

If a Portuguese immigrates to America, he is called Luso-American. If a Portuguese person immigrates to Australia, he is called Luso-Australian. If a Portuguese person immigrates to Brazil, he is Luso-Brazilian.

Goodsdrew fails to recognize this, implying that Brazilians (an other ex-colonials) also fall under the 'Luso' identity.

A Brazilian, a Cape Verdean, and etc. is not 'Luso'. In the same way a Jamaican, a Surati and etc. is not 'Anglo'.

Please check back. Thank you.Virtualtyper (talk) 17:27, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Virtualtyper is wrong on the substance, but that is irrelevant here. This is a sockpuppet investigation, and the most telling thing is that Virtualtyper never denied that he is a sockpuppet of Y26Z3.Goodsdrew (talk) 17:29, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Goodsdrew offensively ignores the article on debate. It is also important to note that, Goodsdrew reverted the article multiple times, without giving any sort of fundamental intake for such action.

I am not a sock puppet of any kind. No need to make accusations to complete your lack of substance, when debating the article. Goodsdrew has neither denied if he himself a sockpuppet of not. Virtualtyper (talk) 17:39, 22 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Today I blocked both Virtualtyper and Goodsdrew (for edit warring on Luso-American and Portuguese people). Virtualtyper is blocked for 24 hours and Goodsdrew is blocked for 48 hours (2nd offence). TigerShark (talk) 18:48, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Virtualtyper continues his contentious edits, without discussing on the talk page. See these diffs and links to talk pages: (reverting edits on Portuguese people (that had been discussed on the talk page) without looking at or discussing on the talk page),  (talk page),  (reverting edits on Luso-American that had been discussed on the talk page) without looking at or discussing on the talk page),  (talk page).  This is all classic Y26Z3 behavior.Goodsdrew (talk) 18:23, 9 December 2013 (UTC) -- The user Goodsdrew exhibits a manipulative temperament, in trying to make certain pages to look a certain way. He refuses to open a Discussion tab, in the Talk page, by irresponsibly Reverting/Editing pages, without fundamental intake. Forthwith, he refuses to give any groundwork for his many actions.

It is very important to note that, there is already numerous topics regarding the Luso-American terminology, in which users have revoked Goodsdrew's mischievous content. He, Goodsdrew, ignores this.

-Goodsdrew insists that the 'Luso-American' identity applies to Ex-colonials (Brazilians, Cape Verdeans, Angolans, Mozambicans, etc.)

When in reality, the 'Luso-American' coat applies to Portuguese people and their descendants living in USA. Likewise, 'Anglo-American' applies to English people in USA and 'Italo-American' applies to Italians in USA, etc.

An ex-colonial of the British Empire (ex. Jamaican) is not Anglo-American, in the same way an ex-colonial of the Portuguese Empire (ex. Cape Verdean) is not Luso-American.

An 'Afro-Brazilian' cannot be irresponsibly be lumped in the 'Luso-American' ethnography, because if an 'Afro-American' immigrated to Brazil, eh would not fall in the 'Anglo-Brazilian' category.

Brazilians are not part of the same ethnicity as the Portuguese. Brazil & Brazilians are a Multi-ethnic society, whose identity manifolds about Luso-Brazilians, Italo-Brazilians, Afro-Brazilians, Sino-Brazilians, etc.-

My reverts on are the page, based on facts, that keeps being changed by Goodsdrew.

Several other Editors have secured and refereed to such parlance in the respective Talk page. Please check the Talk page. I repeat. Please, check the talk page.

Finally, Goodsdrew has also accused me of being a Sockpuppet, for the second time, just to take me out of the way, and continue his radical and misbegotten Editions.

Goodsdrew is a harmful Editor, who seeks to change the Wiki pages, for personal gain. There is a chance he might be a possible sock-puppet of Y26Z3, as he maintains close and similar edits on the same pages.

My Edits are based on the Identity of my people and my country, that is being falsely depicted by Goodsdrew. Virtualtyper (talk) 13:58, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Virtualtyper has taken his confrontational behavior to a new level. I've attempted to discuss issues on the talk page, but he has generally ignored my attempts. Today, he finally responded, but altered MY comments on the talk page (by removing one of my comments) to make it look like I hadn't waited over a week (which I did) to allow time for discussion before making any change. See diff here:. This is classic Y26Z3 behavior. Whether he is a sockpuppet or not, this user's obstreperous and confrontational conduct needs to be dealt with. My sockpuppet investigation and checkuser request has been pending for THREE weeks. Is someone going to deal with this at some point? Goodsdrew (talk) 18:15, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
 * I know that there's a backlog on SPI requests, and I thank the admins for taking the time to work through them. The only reason I brought up the delay is that cases that were opened AFTER this one have already been dealt with. Goodsdrew (talk) 18:18, 13 December 2013 (UTC)

I have respectfully addressed to you in the talk page. I removed your paragraph, because I was objecting to your discussion.

It makes no sense for you to open a tab, and then reach your own conclusions, when no one had given any feedback in the first place. In that case, I would open my own tab, wait a week and then make my own conclusions.

I didn't even know there was a discussion tab for the subject we are dealing with, until your last Edit, directing me to the Discussion page. (You should have called me in, through my talk page) This way, I would have responded you. I'm thinking you did not say a word, to drop your own conclusions.

Finally. You need to stop making accusations that I or anyone else is a sockpuppet. Just to get one out of your way, and continue your radical vandalism. Perhaps the people you accuse of being sockpuppets, are the people who try to correct the page that you keep trying to vandalize.

I'm willing to continue discussing Eusébio and his identity in regards to Portuguese people in the Talk page, if you had addressed me. Nonetheless, the outcome would be the same as the one in the EDIT war. Virtualtyper (talk) 18:43, 13 December 2013 (UTC)


 * The axes Virtualtyper is grinding, and their complete unwillingness to indent talk page comments (shades of User:Cau7ion, who also had a bee in their bonnet about race-related articles), do ring a bell; and the addition of User:Goodsdrew to the list of suspected socks purely malicious. I don't know if they are a sock of User:Y26Z3 but they don't appear to be acting in good faith. Pinkbeast (talk) 02:00, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Good God. Now I'm a sockpuppet of User:Cau7ion??? Who is next?

I'm opening a ticket for the user Pinkbeast, as I believe he is a sockpuppet of Goodsdrew. Both Goodsdrew and Pinkbeast mirror each other in character and activity. Where one supports the other, and thus, to make one's opinion valid in a counter argument.

To note. The user Goodsdrew has stopped his activity, and Pinkbeast started his. There is enough reason to believe Pinkbeast is indeed a sockpuppet of Goodsdrew, where one has gone absent and the other has come present. Both accounts seem to be working in conjunction, where Pinkbeast advocates Nepostism in favor of Goodsdrew. Virtualtyper (talk) 12:12, 16 December 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I'm going to AGF on Virtualtyper, though if further evidence comes to light please do re-report. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:50, 21 December 2013 (UTC)