Behavioral evidence is clear enough, as far as I'm concerned; I'll ask Crisco 1492 to contribute some technical details about technical details.
In short, Coat was blocked for three months on 15 October, after disrupting various processes including FP, and for harassing Crisco and Hafspajen. Well, that's sort of my reading: the close by Euryalus of an ANI thread cited battleground mentality and disruption, here. Note also that Euryalus doubted that Coat was a new account.
Well, here we are, with a new editor, whose account was begun on 15 October, and whose first edits pertain to the sex industry in Indonesia--nothing special until you see that Coat started accusing Crisco, an editor who lives in Indonesia, of attempting to redeem the reputation of a supposed pedophile via the FP process. Note that Marinka then jumps right into the FP process, which was Coat's favorite area as well, but I will let Crisco speak, if necessary, to the comparisons between the two editors, and I'll let him collect some diffs as well, for your viewing pleasure.
One more thing: I would like CU run. It may not provide conclusive evidence; Coat already indicated traveling. They used some IPs as well; I do not have those details at my disposal right now, but I think one IP's edit is linked on Coat's talk page. Drmies ( talk) 00:42, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
Another one: User:64.9.157.141 all but identifies themselves at [1]; they also edited at [2]. Seriously, they've gone from a three-month block to indef, what next? IP blocks? Adam Cuerden ( talk) 09:26, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Clerk endorsed. Marisa's primary focuses are pedophilia in Indonesia (Crisco is from Indonesia) and WP:FPC (she is commenting/voting on a lot of candidates). She's obviously not a new editor. After being blocked, Coat said they (she?) would not be returning. On that same day, Marinka started an account. Coat was not blocked on October 15 (Drmies's error) but on October 5. However, she made contributions post-block through October 15 (last edit: [3]).-- Bbb23 ( talk) 01:39, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Clerk note: Based on the outstanding diffs left by Crisco, I've indeffed and tagged Sextet based on duck. I'll leave the endorse, and the CU may either run the CU for confirmation or, if they prefer, decline it. I should note that Marinka, in their last post on their talk page post-block, threatened to continue socking with a work account here.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 14:26, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
User name indicates a familiarity with both WP:DUCK (regarding sockpuppetry) and technical matters ( 404 error reference); Coat has formerly shown an interest in such technical matters. Also of note is a focus on WP:FPC. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 20:51, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
It pains me to be back here again. I believe C1cada is yet another sock of Coat; I have no doubt that CU will reveal the same proxy use.
Coat had a track record of following Hafspajen around, and that's what C1cada is doing as well, with 152 edits to Houses at Auvers, an article Hafspajen started and edited extensively. In general, the interest in Van Gogh is typical for Coat and their socks. The overlap between Coat and C1cada has, of course, Van Gogh but, more significantly for those who know Coat, Revenge porn, an old favorite. Note also their edits on Paul Gauguin--Coat always had an interest in, shall we say, underage human sexuality, and it's evident here as well: here is a reference they added to that issue, and the edit beforehand has them editwarring with Modernist over using a website as a reliable source (see their condescending comments at Talk:Paul Gauguin#Blog).
There's some other behavioral evidence as well, which I will not share here, though I'll gladly post it in Marinka van Dam's thread on Wikipediocracy, haha. Other editors have noticed the similarities as well, and I'd like to know if Xanthomelanoussprog has anything to add. Drmies ( talk) 02:30, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
Account comes out of the blue to follow Hafspajen editing an article on a 17th-century painting. No doubt in my mind, and I've already blocked. I'd like Ponyo and Bbb23 to look at the technical evidence--thanks. Drmies ( talk) 14:06, 3 August 2015 (UTC) Drmies ( talk) 14:06, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
We are convinced that this is yet another sock of Coat, who likes to pride themselves on speaking in the plural and having lots of legitimate accounts. This account is a longtime sleeper which became active a few days after the last Coat sock got blocked and, guess what, got involved with FP nominations, arguing against Hafspajen. We blocked it as a duck, given the obvious quacking. Drmies ( talk) 22:47, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
Obvious sock(s) of Coat, with FBF (meaning "vaginal play" or something like that, hinting at sexual desire spilling over into online activity) having been renamed JaniB. If you put your admin glasses on you can compare [User:Coat of Many Colours/sandbox 4]] with User:JaniB/sandbox--and next up you can look at P v S and Cornwall County Council, started by Coat sock C1cada. JaniB, like C1cada, has a fondness for editing Suicide of Amanda Todd.
Finally, we have 1d6507f9, who restored comments made by IP socks on Talk:September Morn, a longtime favorite of Sock's to comment on, and who intersects with JaniB in a left-hand/right-hand kind of way in Wikipedia:Peer review/Metock case/archive1. I'm not blocking them yet because I'm at my quota for blocks this morning, but I am very interested in CU-- Ponyo, Bbb23, is there anything there? Drmies ( talk) 16:07, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
C1cada ( talk · contribs) has been topic banned and eventually indefinitely blocked for sockpuppetry as per this SPI thread: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Coat_of_Many_Colours/Archive.
He has long
wanted to edit at
Perinçek v. Switzerland and even after he has been blocked, he has said specifically that: "I shall certainly want to edit there if the judgment goes the way I expect it shall."
In fact, right after he got topic-banned
he asked the sanction imposing admin: "Does that include Perinçek v. Switzerland where I had planned a significant edit once the judgment is in?".
Well, the judgement happened recently, on October 15, and ten minutes after C1cada made this at his own TP, edits from an IP address started pouring in at Perinçek v. Switzerland. The edit-summaries and personal attacks are strikingly similar to the master C1cada. Examples:
Note: employs the word 'semi-literate': [15] and [16]
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
Account made from 86.147.21.40, a Coat IP, used to follow someone around in an article. Marked as CU block. Already blocked: this is pro forma. Drmies ( talk) 06:00, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
Same kind of edits, same kind of interests: Flemish and Dutch artists, women's topics. CU can confirm and perhaps uncover more. Drmies ( talk) 15:48, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
These three accounts are Confirmed to each other:
Behavioral evidence is clear enough, as far as I'm concerned; I'll ask Crisco 1492 to contribute some technical details about technical details.
In short, Coat was blocked for three months on 15 October, after disrupting various processes including FP, and for harassing Crisco and Hafspajen. Well, that's sort of my reading: the close by Euryalus of an ANI thread cited battleground mentality and disruption, here. Note also that Euryalus doubted that Coat was a new account.
Well, here we are, with a new editor, whose account was begun on 15 October, and whose first edits pertain to the sex industry in Indonesia--nothing special until you see that Coat started accusing Crisco, an editor who lives in Indonesia, of attempting to redeem the reputation of a supposed pedophile via the FP process. Note that Marinka then jumps right into the FP process, which was Coat's favorite area as well, but I will let Crisco speak, if necessary, to the comparisons between the two editors, and I'll let him collect some diffs as well, for your viewing pleasure.
One more thing: I would like CU run. It may not provide conclusive evidence; Coat already indicated traveling. They used some IPs as well; I do not have those details at my disposal right now, but I think one IP's edit is linked on Coat's talk page. Drmies ( talk) 00:42, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
Another one: User:64.9.157.141 all but identifies themselves at [1]; they also edited at [2]. Seriously, they've gone from a three-month block to indef, what next? IP blocks? Adam Cuerden ( talk) 09:26, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Clerk endorsed. Marisa's primary focuses are pedophilia in Indonesia (Crisco is from Indonesia) and WP:FPC (she is commenting/voting on a lot of candidates). She's obviously not a new editor. After being blocked, Coat said they (she?) would not be returning. On that same day, Marinka started an account. Coat was not blocked on October 15 (Drmies's error) but on October 5. However, she made contributions post-block through October 15 (last edit: [3]).-- Bbb23 ( talk) 01:39, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Clerk note: Based on the outstanding diffs left by Crisco, I've indeffed and tagged Sextet based on duck. I'll leave the endorse, and the CU may either run the CU for confirmation or, if they prefer, decline it. I should note that Marinka, in their last post on their talk page post-block, threatened to continue socking with a work account here.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 14:26, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
User name indicates a familiarity with both WP:DUCK (regarding sockpuppetry) and technical matters ( 404 error reference); Coat has formerly shown an interest in such technical matters. Also of note is a focus on WP:FPC. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 20:51, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
It pains me to be back here again. I believe C1cada is yet another sock of Coat; I have no doubt that CU will reveal the same proxy use.
Coat had a track record of following Hafspajen around, and that's what C1cada is doing as well, with 152 edits to Houses at Auvers, an article Hafspajen started and edited extensively. In general, the interest in Van Gogh is typical for Coat and their socks. The overlap between Coat and C1cada has, of course, Van Gogh but, more significantly for those who know Coat, Revenge porn, an old favorite. Note also their edits on Paul Gauguin--Coat always had an interest in, shall we say, underage human sexuality, and it's evident here as well: here is a reference they added to that issue, and the edit beforehand has them editwarring with Modernist over using a website as a reliable source (see their condescending comments at Talk:Paul Gauguin#Blog).
There's some other behavioral evidence as well, which I will not share here, though I'll gladly post it in Marinka van Dam's thread on Wikipediocracy, haha. Other editors have noticed the similarities as well, and I'd like to know if Xanthomelanoussprog has anything to add. Drmies ( talk) 02:30, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
Account comes out of the blue to follow Hafspajen editing an article on a 17th-century painting. No doubt in my mind, and I've already blocked. I'd like Ponyo and Bbb23 to look at the technical evidence--thanks. Drmies ( talk) 14:06, 3 August 2015 (UTC) Drmies ( talk) 14:06, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
We are convinced that this is yet another sock of Coat, who likes to pride themselves on speaking in the plural and having lots of legitimate accounts. This account is a longtime sleeper which became active a few days after the last Coat sock got blocked and, guess what, got involved with FP nominations, arguing against Hafspajen. We blocked it as a duck, given the obvious quacking. Drmies ( talk) 22:47, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
Obvious sock(s) of Coat, with FBF (meaning "vaginal play" or something like that, hinting at sexual desire spilling over into online activity) having been renamed JaniB. If you put your admin glasses on you can compare [User:Coat of Many Colours/sandbox 4]] with User:JaniB/sandbox--and next up you can look at P v S and Cornwall County Council, started by Coat sock C1cada. JaniB, like C1cada, has a fondness for editing Suicide of Amanda Todd.
Finally, we have 1d6507f9, who restored comments made by IP socks on Talk:September Morn, a longtime favorite of Sock's to comment on, and who intersects with JaniB in a left-hand/right-hand kind of way in Wikipedia:Peer review/Metock case/archive1. I'm not blocking them yet because I'm at my quota for blocks this morning, but I am very interested in CU-- Ponyo, Bbb23, is there anything there? Drmies ( talk) 16:07, 17 September 2015 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
C1cada ( talk · contribs) has been topic banned and eventually indefinitely blocked for sockpuppetry as per this SPI thread: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Coat_of_Many_Colours/Archive.
He has long
wanted to edit at
Perinçek v. Switzerland and even after he has been blocked, he has said specifically that: "I shall certainly want to edit there if the judgment goes the way I expect it shall."
In fact, right after he got topic-banned
he asked the sanction imposing admin: "Does that include Perinçek v. Switzerland where I had planned a significant edit once the judgment is in?".
Well, the judgement happened recently, on October 15, and ten minutes after C1cada made this at his own TP, edits from an IP address started pouring in at Perinçek v. Switzerland. The edit-summaries and personal attacks are strikingly similar to the master C1cada. Examples:
Note: employs the word 'semi-literate': [15] and [16]
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
Account made from 86.147.21.40, a Coat IP, used to follow someone around in an article. Marked as CU block. Already blocked: this is pro forma. Drmies ( talk) 06:00, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
Same kind of edits, same kind of interests: Flemish and Dutch artists, women's topics. CU can confirm and perhaps uncover more. Drmies ( talk) 15:48, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
These three accounts are Confirmed to each other: