Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Yattum/Archive

Evidence submitted by Vedant

 * Yattum, Space25689 and the user from the 88.106.xxx.xxx range have very similar editing interests and editing styles. Aside from all being interested in combating acts of "Indian nationalism". One such accusation was made by User:Yattum here, where he claimed that my account existed only to further Indian nationalism and engage in edit-wars, a claim parroted by 88.106.73.119 and 88.106.124.243 on the talk page for Frigate. This dispute was actually associated with the addition of an Indian frigate over a German frigate which the IP opposed on grounds that it furthered Indian nationalism. After consensus on WT:SHIPS and the talk page, the IP accused all party to the discussion of furthering Indian nationalism (even those of non-Indian origin curiously). The IP then attempted to canvass for support on Talk:Pakistan, Talk:Germany, Talk:Bundeswehr and on a known POV-pusher's talk though curiously not on Talk:India.


 * Yattum has also taken objection to the inclusion of such imagery on this article. In these two difference pages, it should be noted that this edit by Yattum resulted in the image of the HAL Tejas being removed with the Mitsubishi F-2. When I explained that the page tried to present as diverse a listing as possible (picture wise), an anononymous IP from the range attempted to twice change the same image that Yattum did with an identical rationale (that the aircraft was not in service and thus it should be replaced).


 * Similar behaviour has occurred on London. On May 25, 2010, User:Space25689 began editing this article and made the claim that London alongside New York City had the highest GDP of any city in the world. Over the next few days, this user began edit warring with User:Eraserhead1 and User:Thmc1 (who is currently serving an indefinite block for Sockpuppetry) in an attempt to keep the section as is. On June 5, 2010 an anonymous IP edited the same section as Space25689 and made the same claim. The edit was quickly reverted although, the following day, the anonymous IP again tried to make the same claim. 88.106.97.245 began editing the London article as per this diff page. 9 minutes later, User:Yattum started editing the same page and the same section.


 * The dispute above is also linked to City of London. On June 1, 2010, Thmc1 edited the article. About 5 hours later, Yattum reverted his edit (although the reason for doing so seems valid enough). Then, 12 minutes after, 88.106.127.28 started editing the article - again, in the same section that Yattum was editing a few minutes ago. Over the next two days, Yattum engages in an edit war with this user. Unsurprisingly, an IP from the 88.106.xxx.xxx range also proceeds to join Yattum in this revert war and on June 3, 88.106.118.63 reverts Thmc1's changes to the article.


 * Another dispute regarding Yattum, Space25689 and the anonymous IP occurred on Royal Navy when said user reverts an edit made by User:Buckshot06. Unsurprisingly, User:Yattum joins in on this and on June 7, 2010, Yattum starts reverting edits made by User:BilCat and User:Buckshot06. Two days ago, I reverted edits made by the anonymous IP primarily because I had doubts he was acting in good faith and because I believed he was a disruption. Within 16 minutes of my reverting the article, User:Space25689 reverted my edit (though his reasons were valid). On a substantive level, I have no issues with his revert or his rationale for it and as such I will not contest the edit unless this SPI case proves he is a sockpuppet (as I have stated on his talk page).


 * The last piece of the puzzle is Trillion dollar club. In this edit, Yattum claimed to be removing Mexico from the list because its GDP is less than $1 trillion. Most curiously though, in the same edit, Yattum re-positions India on the list but provides no rationale for this. When another user, User:AlexCovarrubias re-adds Mexico to the list, Yattum reverts his edit which Alex again reverts. A few days later, 88.106.73.240 reverts Alex's edit and then this IP proceeds to edit war with Alex regarding Mexico's inclusion into the list. When Alex provides a source that affirms Mexico should be in the list, the IP accuses him of cherrypicking facts and not being impartial.


 * On a somewhat related note, I would also like to point out the hateful comments left by 88.106.66.146 suggesting that I am an Indian nationalist and that I should shut up. He then proceeded to wikistalk me and began reverting all my recent edits without providing any rationale. Within hours of filing this request, atleast two other IPs from the mentioned range have begun rapidly removing/reverting edits.

Based on the evidence above I believe I have sufficient reason to accuse these user(s) of engaging in sockpuppetry and disruptive editing. I have also notified the relevant accounts of this investigation and will continue to assume their good faith unless this investigation turns up anything untoward. Vedant (talk) 23:34, 2 July 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Could you please specify what the IP is that you are listing for User:88.106.xxx.xxx. Without a correct link, I am unable to know what else is going on here. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 14:28, 3 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I can, though the list will be somewhat lengthy as the user's IP is dynamic and it changes frequently. I have also posted some IPs in the evidence section for additional reference. Vedant (talk) 16:00, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

–MuZemike 20:33, 3 July 2010 (UTC) And likely more. See Sockpuppet investigations/Vedant/Archive; I think there's an overlap. --jpgordon:==( o ) 15:49, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Checked by Jpgordon as part of Sockpuppet investigations/Chanakyathegreat:✅ that Australisian is also the following:
 * All accounts blocked and tagged as socks of, though perhaps we want to designate Yattum as the sockmaster? T. Canens (talk) 18:05, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅ –MuZemike 17:19, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Vedant

 * The account was created one day after Yattum and his sockpuppet accounts were indefinitely blocked from editing
 * The newly created account follows the trend of creating User and User_talk pages with either a simple period or a signature and then blanking the page immediately after
 * His first non-Userspace edit was this where he removed the higher tonnage figure stating that there were no plans to purchase a Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carrier. This thoroughly non-sensical/irrelevant edit-summary seems indicative of Yattum's behaviour in the past and is in line with his nationalist biases and prejudices.

The previous CheckUser case against him affirmed that he was editing from the 88.106.xxx.xxx range thus to avoid further account creation perhaps a temporary range block is in order? Vedant (talk) 03:03, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
. Quacks to me. We already know the IP range, so there's really not much a CU can do here.  E lockid  ( Talk ) 03:24, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Blocked and tagged. I'm not sure on blocking 88.106.0.0/16. Would appreciate a second admin opinion.  E lockid  ( Talk ) 03:24, 7 July 2010 (UTC)


 * No block. I think there are other unrelated edits in there after looking here, such as football-related edits, which don't IIRC fall under his modus operandi. –MuZemike 16:26, 7 July 2010 (UTC)
 * What about 88.106.0.0/17? T. Canens (talk) 17:36, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Vedant

 * Both are recently created accounts that seem to echo Yattum's sentiments.
 * Usage of very similar terms such as Indian POV-Pushing and Indian Nationalism
 * Mentioned specific users and IP ranges, all of which, have been targets of SPIs by one of Yattum's numerous socks

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Blocked and tagged, including who tried to remove the case from the WP:SPI page (which won't help anything, BTW). –MuZemike 02:34, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Vedant

 * Newly created account (July 10, 2010) and the first edit was to revert an addition by Bcs09 here.
 * Making unsubstantiated allegations of cherrypicking which are similar to the ones made by 88.106.64.109 here.
 * Recommend a block per WP:DUCK although it is likely that Yattum has created/will create additional accounts in the future. Vedant (talk) 00:08, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Blocked and tagged.  E lockid  ( Talk ) 12:41, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Vedant

 * Account appears to have been created during the brief edit war Yattum engaged in here
 * Following the past trends, the first edits were Userspace related
 * Like other socks of Yattum, has attempted to remove a picture of the HAL Tejas here. (Behaviour repeated by another sock of his as well as by Yattum himself here - for nearly identical reasons) Vedant (talk) 06:48, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * Rangeblock applied to 88.106.0.0/16 for one week. This has been going on long enough...  Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 00:27, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Viper 265 blocked and tagged as another sleeper sock. –MuZemike 01:13, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Georgewilliamherbert
Behavioral similarity to prior aviation related massive copyright violation cases noted in ANI posting by Angus McClellan. Very focused on single airline - Adria Airways - but the behavior of aviation focused plus webscraping images and claiming that they're the photographer is consistent with prior cases. If this is not related to the ongoing cases we need to explain this to the user nicely; if they're back, it's probably time for a rangeblock of significant duration. Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 20:27, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
 * As an aside - we've had person(s) doing this at least since last year.  There seems to be some sign the cases are really all the same group or individual...  Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 20:28, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
✅ However, is ❌. TN X Man 02:19, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * - I added some more accounts from SPI. Yattum is stale, but i'd like to know viper/chanakythegreat/verybluesky and check for sleepers. NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 02:03, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Will see that Verybluesky gets the copyright policy politely explained, and not ton-of-bricks.  Georgewilliamherbert (talk) 02:40, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Not much else to do here, so I'm marking this for close. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 03:20, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Is it me, or was missed? (Reopening to checked status). --  DQ  (t)  (e)  12:11, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * That account doesn't exist. T. Canens (talk) 12:28, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The account is actually, whose SPI case mentions Yattum. TN X Man  13:05, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Fry1989
(hope I'm doing this right) I suspect that Mr A is a sockpuppet of  Yattum , because he recently made edits to the page  Military Aircraft Insignia  that are similar in pattern to(and also bring back) changes made by one of Yattum's sockpuppets called "Vega61"(This includes brining back incorrect roundels uploaded to Wiki-En BY Vega61). I had alot of problems with Vega61 removing roundels, inserting wrong ones, and not allowing others to alter the page. I am therefore requesting that Mr. A be investigated as a possible sockpuppet of Yattum. Fry1989 (talk) 22:36, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * is ❌
 * is . TN X Man  03:01, 26 October 2010 (UTC)
 * only blocked. Magog the Ogre (talk) 01:01, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

15 December 2010

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every six hours.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

A while ago you enforced a permanent block for dozens of sockpuppets against a user called  User:Vega61 (overall, a sock of Yattum). I was wondering if it would be possible to do an investigation on  User:E_Bilko . Vega61 made numerous edits to the page  Military Aircraft Insignia , replacing valid SVG roundels and markings with inferior and often incorrect PNGs and SVGs of his own work, often with minimal sources. He was pushy, rude, and did not accept proof from others when he was wrong. User: E Bilko is now in a similar pattern, so similar infact that I would bet very much that he is indeed another sock of Yattum. I've been watching for over a month, and am now absolutely certain. His behaviour, his wording, his work, all are almost identical. This includes the uploading of the exact same file by   Vega61, and    by E Bilko. The way he names his files are also extremely similar, and I can give alot of evidence towards this. He appears to only wish to promote and force his work on here against valid files. IDK how to start an investigation myself, but I felt you would be the best person to contact, considering your enforcing the block on Vega61. Fry1989 (talk) 03:30, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Copied from my talk page NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 03:42, 15 December 2010 (UTC) NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 03:42, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

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


 * I am the User who requested this investigation. In the case that it is reviewed(as Bilko has requested on his talk page), I can give plenty of evidence towards my claim and suspicion that E Bilko is infact the same person who operated Vega61(fromthe same behaviour, to the same style of naming files that are uploaded). Please contact and request any information if needed. Fry1989 (talk) 20:21, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Seemingly likely sleepers. Please confirm, then check. NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 03:44, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
 * A match.  TN X Man  14:28, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll call it. Blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 14:34, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

21 February 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''


 * Made an identical modification to a page that previous socks of Yattum have made.
 * Similar trend of creating a user page and then blanking it (seen by other socks of this user).

On another note, since this user has been indefinitely banned by community decisions, perhaps it's a good idea to run a CU and ban other sockpuppet accounts that this user has no doubt created. Vedant (talk) 22:08, 21 February 2011 (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
Can you provide an idea of which previous socks this behavior is similar to? I see the comment above making the claim but I don't immediately see any previously blocked socks editing on Anti-satellite weapon. I'm not saying the activity isn't there; just that it didn't jump out at me. I'm looking for a link that suggests this is plausible. Frank &#124;  talk  18:10, 22 February 2011 (UTC) Looked sufficiently possible that I checked, however they are ❌ on technical grounds. Frank &#124;  talk  20:38, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Endorsing for a check against . —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 04:07, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Fandanga's edit here essentially removes the India section from the Anti-satellite weapon page. Previous examples of Yattum (and company) doing this are shown here and here. is cited as the most recently confirmed Yattum sock. Kind regards, SpitfireTally-ho! 20:18, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm getting slightly different behaviors from Yattum and this account. That, along with the CU results, is keeping me from taking any further action. Someone else can if they want, but I'm closing with no action taken. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 13:16, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

20 August 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

This goes back a long way, so I suspect that checkuser won't be much help as the older socks would all be stale by now, but the behavioural evidence seems strong enough to warrant bringing here. Back in December 2010, was blocked as a sock of, based on similarities with ,  and. The four users were all focused on editing Military aircraft insignia, Aircraft in fiction and List of air forces, with a strong interest in creating roundels as png/svg files. In particular, both E Bilko and Vega61 were both identified by uploading the same image  of the Oman airforce roundel.

started editing about four weeks after E Bilko was blocked. His third edit was to replace a png on Kenya Air Force with an svg, which was one of the behaviours raised in regard to the previous accounts. His fourth was to add a new roundel to Royal Air Force of Oman, as per the issues raised with Vega61 and E Bilko, which seems like an odd early edit. I can't tell if it was the same file, though. Then he moved to start editing on Military aircraft insignia,, again replacing files with svgs, and has continued to be one of the major editors on both Military aircraft insignia and Aircraft in fiction. - Bilby (talk) 02:48, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

In regards to behavioural connection other than the identical interests, edit summaries are very similar, with the same use of "/" occurring across the editors, (for example, "replaced w/ wikimedia coms image" from Jetijonez, and "Cleared background/ added w/ ref tags" from E Bilko), and I felt that the writing styles were very similar between the users. But it was the editing similarities on content that caught my eye. - Bilby (talk) 10:48, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

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

Could I suggest also looking at User:Ghost rider14 for similar edits in terms of topics and style? Logical Cowboy (talk) 18:29, 23 August 2012 (UTC)


 * First off I came over from  commons , I don't see one file from any of these socks (on commons). I don't even see the connection between Yattum and these other socks. The IP range  88.106.74.159  for yattum puts him in the UK seen  here . I reside in the US. The only thing I have in common with these socks is editing Military aircraft insignia and List of air forces which pretty much go hand in hand. you could make the same claim on   Fry1989   eh?  or NiD.29 (talk) (which I'm not suggesting)  Style? What style that is. Bottom line is this is a witch-hunt Logical Cowboy (talk) and Bilby (talk) have been on me ever since I started writing articles,  which they have tagged deletion after deletion  for reasons I don't understand- Disappointed -- ‎Jetijonez   Fire!  02:03, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Regarding the the Oman RAF roundel: the file uploaded by Jetijonez depicts the same symbol (obviously), but is not the same file. The shades are different and has less detail than the one uploaded by both Vega61 and E Bilko. Jafeluv (talk) 12:14, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

The account registration dates do seem fairly suspicious: E Bilko is [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User%3AE%20Bilko blocked] on Wikipedia on 15 December 2010; on 16 December they [//commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:ListUsers/E_Bilko&offset=&limit=1&username=E+Bilko create a Commons account]; and later on the same day, Jetijones [//commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=newusers&user=Jetijones creates an account on Commons]. Jafeluv (talk) 12:29, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Further evidence: It's starting to look like a pretty clear WP:DUCK case to me. Jafeluv (talk) 12:51, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
 * 14 December 2010: E Bilko [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_air_forces&diff=prev&oldid=402290517 adds] a roundel image for Mauritius Coast Guard in List of air forces. The account is indefinitely blocked the next day.
 * 16 December 2010: Jetijonez uploads the exact same image on Commons. This was Jetijones's first-ever edit on Commons, one day after E Bilko's indefinite block on Wikipedia.

Not even the same file name! And not even from commons, which look like the Bilko never did anything on commons. So no it's NOT to clear -- ‎Jetijonez  Fire! 13:29, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Regarding Ghost rider14: The account does support Jetijonez in discussions such as Talk:Military aircraft insignia (opened by E Bilko) and Talk:Business process as a service. Ghost rider14 has also participated on edit warring on Jetijonez's side on a couple of occasions.


 * Edit warring on Business process as a service: [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=479613048][//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=next&oldid=479613048][//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=next&oldid=479664604][//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=next&oldid=479677855][//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=next&oldid=480066004][//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=next&oldid=480086260][//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=next&oldid=480101800][//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=next&oldid=480174897]
 * Edit warring on Coca-Cola: [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=425508163&oldid=425353579][//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=next&oldid=425508163][//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=next&oldid=425594510][//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=next&oldid=425710968][//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=next&oldid=425775479][//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=next&oldid=429079954][//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=next&oldid=429164982]
 * Reverting to Jetijonez's version on Fin flash: [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=474648589][//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=next&oldid=474648589][//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=next&oldid=475037113]

All that said, I'm not totally convinced that they're necessarily the same person. Will notify Ghost rider14 about this investigation. Jafeluv (talk) 10:31, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Jafeluv I thank you for these information. I hope I did not brake any law. I have been request from jetijonez for help as this you see here [] these to []. I regret to inform you I have not time here and will not finish here on Wikipedia. My education takes the time now. I wish you fortune in thes investigation. Thank you Ghost rider14 (talk) 23:07, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Requesting checkuser to look at the possible connection between Jetijonez and Ghost rider14. The edits do look suspicious and this would certainly be abuse if they are the same person, but I don't think the behavioural evidence is strong enough for a WP:DUCK case here. Jafeluv (talk) 06:02, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - Not sure about the master, but the two alleged socks have enough curious intersects and similar POV that a CU is likely to bear fruit here. Dennis Brown - 2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 21:25, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
 * that these two users are related, and I will say the behavoiral evidence points towards not socking, so this could be a friend. I will note I could only check 3 edits on Ghost rider14. Behavoiral evidence will have to determine any connection to the master as he's . -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  23:09, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Blocked Jetijonez as a sock per the evidence above. I'll leave Ghost rider14 unblocked as there's no clear indication of socking. (If anyone is convinced by the behavioural evidence on closer inspection, feel free to take action of course.) Jafeluv (talk) 23:21, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * There seems to be some chance of the master and Jet being related more so on behavior, but need some time to do more detailed comparisons on behavior. Based on the vagueness of the CU, there is a reasonable chance they might know each other, but as to if they are coordinating or not (meatpuppetry), that takes time to establish. Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 23:16, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Looks like an admin already took care of the paperwork, closing. Dennis Brown - 2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 14:50, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

10 November 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Appears to be same editor as blocked User:Jetijonez. Most of the articles edited by Ghost rider14 were also edited by Jetijonez. Ghost rider14's edits to Petroleum Helicopters International, Inc. are highly similar in content to Jetijonez. They "retired" from WP at similar times, September 2 for Ghost rider14 and August 24 for Jetijonez. Ghost rider14 shows a similar pattern of WP:IDHT response as Jetijonez, in this case on copyvio. Logical Cowboy (talk) 02:01, 10 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
Holding block for one week for the obvious User:Garrybalarry sock while relationship to any other accounts is sorted out. Dpmuk (talk) 06:10, 10 November 2012 (UTC)


 * It's, based on a few factors, but there's not enough evidence to confirm here, sorry - A l is o n  ❤ 06:23, 10 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Behavior makes it more than possible, enough to indef the user as a behavioral/contribs confirmed sock. Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 15:39, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

10 November 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Appears to be same editor as User:Ghost rider14. "New" editor's first edit was to blank Ghost rider14's Talk page--rather unusual. Next edits were to address copyvio issues raised re Ghost rider14's edits. Please also check IP editor 71.118.251.235 who seems to be adding the same material as Ghost rider14 and blocked sock Jetijonez. Logical Cowboy (talk) 04:53, 10 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
Indef blocked as a clear sock of User:Ghost rider14. Dpmuk (talk) 06:06, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
 * ✅ - picking this case up via AN/I - A l is o n  ❤ 06:09, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

26 December 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Appears to be IP sock of blocked User:Jetijonez, back for another visit. Had previously deleted maintenance templates from Petroleum Helicopters International, Inc., one of Jetijonez's articles, but that edit has been deleted. Logical Cowboy (talk) 02:33, 26 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Unusual edits on sockpuppets of Yattum and also in this sock investigation page. Mediran  ( t  •  c ) 02:57, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Rather unusual edit on WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Yattum. Logical Cowboy (talk) 02:47, 26 December 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

 * - ( X!  ·  talk )  · @234  · 04:36, 26 December 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) We don't link IPs to accounts via CheckUser. 2) In this case, it appears to be a "forgot to sign in" problem versus an active socking problem. 3) Capt january is quacking into a megaphone, but he's blocked anyway for disruption, so it's mood. Closing. ( X! ·  talk )  · @234  · 04:36, 26 December 2012 (UTC)

12 August 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

"New" account makes first edits to edit user pages of two previous socks and. Similar pattern of edits to another sock. Also re-created sock's previously deleted article. Some similarity to name of previous sock Garrybalarry. Logical Cowboy (talk) 02:19, 12 August 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 tagged. NativeForeigner Talk 17:26, 12 August 2013 (UTC)

10 January 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Similar behavior to other socks of banned user.

 

 

Also created this in sandbox, same article had been created by socks Logical Cowboy (talk) 23:08, 10 January 2014 (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

 * This was pretty blatant, so I've blocked per the duck test without waiting for CU findings. Closing case now. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:59, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

18 May 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

"New" editor's first edits are recreating deleted article Petroleum Helicopters International, Inc. that had been previously created/edited by other Yattum socks such as Jetijonez, Ghost rider14, and Capt january, and subsequently deleted by admins. I can't see the deleted version of the article, however a copy with similar text appears here / Logical Cowboy (talk) 22:03, 18 May 2014 (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

 * , and blocked accordingly. - The Bushranger One ping only 22:16, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Closing. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 00:00, 22 May 2014 (UTC)