Home • Search • Translate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Factsonlyplease39

Factsonlyplease39 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
03 June 2015
Suspected sockpuppets


Identical {{ helpme}} messages filed today made me suspicious - the userpages are similar, and while there's very little actual crossover in edits, it's very clear that all three accounts' interests are the same. I'm bringing this here because, frankly, I'm not sure what's going on. I'll be running a checkuser momentarily and will file the results below, but I'd like a second opinion on whether there's a breach of WP:SOCK going on before handing out any blocks. Yunshui  雲 水 09:57, 3 June 2015 (UTC) reply

The large sockfarm below all share similar editing habits, writing styles and userpages; I'm fairly convinced this is the same user assuming multiple personas. However, a second opinion would still be appreciated before I take any action. Yunshui  雲 水 10:09, 3 June 2015 (UTC) reply
Regarding Weentim68, I've just realised that editor's sole mainspace edit was to add a link to a page created by one of the other accounts listed below - which makes me pretty sure it's the same person again. Yunshui  雲 水 10:45, 3 June 2015 (UTC) reply
The more I look into this, the more it looks like some sort of concerted effort by a PR company... the technical data is also leading me in that direction. Yunshui  雲 水 11:02, 3 June 2015 (UTC) reply
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
  • Oh boy. The following are all  Confirmed:
Readingwritingrithmatic ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Fashionsforward ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
EmmaJoanne ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
ADDgrammar ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
ReachingtheStars ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
WildWorldOutThere ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Brightideas191 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Michellebrainstorming ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Tescotea ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Factsforus ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
GettingFactsRight ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Azmazaz ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Eeyorematters ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Jiminycricket55 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Editingright ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Factsonlyplease39 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Simplysavvy ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Mindfulrmatters ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Donna Helene ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Weentim68 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki) is  Possible but the behaviours and technical data don't closely match. Yunshui  雲 水 10:09, 3 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Actually, yes they do. Yunshui  雲 水 11:00, 3 June 2015 (UTC) reply
  • There's more: also  Confirmed:
Jackson665 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Secretsources ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Feelingfancyfree ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Weentim68 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Brightideas191 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Somethingforeveryone ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Quietandpeace ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Yunshui  雲 水 11:00, 3 June 2015 (UTC) reply
Actually, screw it; I'm sufficiently convinced now. Second opinions still welcome, but I'm going to block and tag this lot. Yunshui  雲 水 11:19, 3 June 2015 (UTC) reply

09 August 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Recreated article Charles Szews that was created by a sock ADDgrammar. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:00, 9 August 2016 (UTC) reply

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

20 January 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Paid editing, mostly undisclosed.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 17:38, 20 January 2020 (UTC) reply

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

06 September 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Alanapjohnson has popped up to edit and submit Draft:Lilia Buckingham, which is one of the articles that was being edited by the Changingguardsatbuckinghampalace sock farm. This looks like a case where the duck is flying to the original duck pond. CheckUser will probably not be useful because the data from the original socks has expired, and a sockmaster knows how long the CheckUser data lasts and can lie low for a while. Robert McClenon ( talk) 00:09, 6 September 2020 (UTC) reply

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

  • CheckUser requested and endorsed by clerk - agreed that a new editor finding a draft only edited by one of this sock farm's socks is darn suspicious. I'm reasonably convinced they're related and I've blocked Alanapjohnson as suspected, but given the number of socks that showed up in the original case I'm self-endorsing for a sleeper check. GeneralNotability ( talk) 00:55, 6 September 2020 (UTC) reply
  •  No sleepers immediately visible, closing. Mz7 ( talk) 06:35, 6 September 2020 (UTC) reply
  • @ Mz7: is Alanapjohnson confirmed? If so, could you please override the block and template as such? TheSandDoctor Talk 15:51, 6 September 2020 (UTC) reply
    TheSandDoctor, previous socks are  Stale, so I don't think CU can say much at this time. I think the current block is sufficient. Mz7 ( talk) 17:20, 6 September 2020 (UTC) reply
    That was something I probably should've checked, my bad. Thanks, Mz7 -- TheSandDoctor Talk 22:23, 6 September 2020 (UTC) reply

01 November 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

General behaviour consistent with the farm; similar edit summary usage to EveryoneLoves ET ( talk · contribs), specifically with regard to pages created through translation: Compare [1] and [2]; whereas EveryoneLoves ET used ‎created this page with help from this one: https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungria_Hip_Hop, Shootin Starz used ‎ created page with help from here: https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krzysztof_Stanek. Requesting CU for sleeper check. Best, Blablubbs ( talk • contribs) 15:02, 1 November 2020 (UTC) reply

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

  •  Clerk endorsed - concur with the filer that they look a lot like EveryoneLoves ET. Endorse for comparison to Alanapjohnson + sleeper check, recommend sleeper check even if they don't come back with a strong match to Alanapjohnson. GeneralNotability ( talk) 17:10, 2 November 2020 (UTC) reply
  • I'm not going to engage the CU results as most of the original accounts found that are now stale are by proxy and these edits seem to be non-proxies. I'm going to block DUCK based on edit summaries. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 07:52, 4 November 2020 (UTC) reply

11 August 2021

Suspected sockpuppets

Creating articles on UPE-prone subjects. Similar edit summaries to this farm ( [3] [4] [5]/ [6] [7] [8] [9]) and shared habit of translating articles from other wikis ( [10] [11]/ [12] [13] [14]). I know the previous accounts are stale but I'm requesting Checkuser for a sleeper check because it has been helpful in the past. Thanks, Spicy ( talk) 19:55, 11 August 2021 (UTC) reply

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

04 October 2021

Suspected sockpuppets


Recreated Philipp Kircher and Hudson Hoagland G5ed in August as creations of WalkingInHisShoes ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki). Also created Rina Fukushi previously deleted due to this.

Asking for CU as it uncovered accounts in this case in the past. Eostrix ( 🦉 hoot hoot🦉) 05:23, 4 October 2021 (UTC) reply

@ Mcampany: who patrolled both of the creations above, FYI.-- Eostrix ( 🦉 hoot hoot🦉) 05:24, 4 October 2021 (UTC) reply
Oh my! Thanks for the head's up. Mcampany ( talk) 06:19, 4 October 2021 (UTC) reply

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 case is being reviewed by Spicy as part of the clerk training process. Please allow him to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on his talk page or on this page if more appropriate.

  • The article recreations are definitely cause for suspicion... but besides that, I'm not seeing any of the typical behaviour of Changingguardsatbuckinghampalace. This account actually looks like a Slowking4 sock to me (see filter hits, plus various other BEANSy things). CU will be worthwhile in either case, though, so  Clerk endorsed - please compare against Slowking4 as well as Changingguards. I will hold off moving the case until the CU results are in. Thanks, Spicy ( talk) 09:25, 4 October 2021 (UTC) reply
  •  In progress - ~ TNT (she/her • talk) 16:25, 6 October 2021 (UTC) reply
  • In absence of a non-stale confirmed sock, I compared to WalkingInHisShoes. They appear Red X Unrelated. Rely on behavioural evidence only ~ TNT (she/her • talk) 16:27, 6 October 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Thanks, TNT. I find the latter result kind of surprising, but it is what it is. FWIW, I had an admin friend send me copies of the deleted articles by WalkingInHisShoes, and they are not really similar to the current versions. Both subjects clearly pass WP:NPROF, so it's not totally inconceivable that two different people might have the idea to create articles on them. In light of this and the CU results, I'm closing the case without action. Thanks, Spicy ( talk) 17:14, 6 October 2021 (UTC) reply

01 November 2021

Suspected sockpuppets

Same characteristic timecard and editing style. See MiguelR26 [15] [16] [17]. Ping me for more notes. MarioGom ( talk) 22:03, 1 November 2021 (UTC) reply

Added some more accounts after finding an interesting tell. Same timecard and style too. MarioGom ( talk) 22:59, 1 November 2021 (UTC) reply
Added Raisin2Love: same editing style, similar timecard (mostly the same, this account has a few more edits in the afternoon than others, but it's otherwise pretty consistent), same focus on BLP creation. MarioGom ( talk) 13:08, 3 November 2021 (UTC) reply
Added Tracey Milkenson, same hints. MarioGom ( talk) 14:30, 5 November 2021 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Hello, from the perspective of an admin who patrols CSD categories, when I read reports like this, I can see that the sockpuppets are confirmed to each other, but it's not clear from the info here that they are certain sockpuppets of Changingguardsatbuckinghampalace (Possilikely to past socks seems less than definite). I don't want to delete pages that are based on a faulty understanding of CSD G5 by page taggers and if these accounts are all the same person but NOT Changingguardsatbuckinghampalace, then articles shouldn't be tagged for deletion. If I'm not reading this report correctly, my apologies in advance. This question seems to come up regularly so I thought I'd pose it here. Liz Read! Talk! 00:31, 2 November 2021 (UTC) reply
@ Liz: "Possilikely" is just the technical determination – behavioural evidence seems clear and GN has tagged as proven sockpuppets of Changingguardsatbuckinhampalace. As a general rule, if a clerk or administrator was confident enough to tag as a sock of a specific master, and said master was blocked at the time of page creation, G5ing should be fine. -- Blablubbs ( talk) 09:51, 2 November 2021 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

Pink clock Awaiting administrative action - please indef BumakinBeauty, BellaCiao2021, and Allister Channing. (The stale accounts in the filing are very likely them also, but not worth blocking now, IMO. They can be re-reported if they start editing again). Thanks, Spicy ( talk) 10:02, 2 November 2021 (UTC) reply

29 November 2021

Suspected sockpuppets


The usual (quite unique) timecard [18], edit summaries ( [19] [20], [21] [22], [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29], [30] [31]), focus on biographies. Requesting checkuser for a sleeper check, since it was successful last time. MarioGom ( talk) 22:00, 29 November 2021 (UTC) reply

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

18 December 2021

Suspected sockpuppets


Same Israeli office hours timecard. Overlap with previous socks on Millennium Management, LLC, which Daisydeedle created in German ( de:Millennium Management) and French ( fr:Millennium Management, LLC). Chickpies123 also edited the French article and uploaded File:New Millennium Logo.png to Commons. Both share the same edit summary style with previous socks. Daisydeedle also added the logo to Legatum, which seems to be a customer of this sockfarm through older IP socking (see 173.241.48.0/20). MarioGom ( talk) 23:45, 18 December 2021 (UTC) reply

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

16 April 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Timecard has changed [32] and it is not so clearly Israeli office hours, but it resembles it a bit. Same modus operandi as before: creating a lot of non-UPE biographies, presumably to later hide who the clients are. Very characteristic edit summaries. Since this sockfarm is the same as Factsonlyplease39, I'll also reference diffs from its socks: [33] [34] [35] [36] [37], [38] [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44], [45] [46] [47], [48] [49] [50] [51] [52] [53] [54], [55] [56] [57], [58] [59] [60] [61] [62], [63] [64] [65] [66]. MarioGom ( talk) 15:59, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

@ MarioGom: Could you please show where the connection between this case and the Factsonlyplease39 case was made?-- Bbb23 ( talk) 13:24, 18 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Bbb23: It seems I never reported on this connection before (I thought I did!). Here's a behavior comparison of both groups:
  • Both used to have a very narrow timecard in Israeli office hours. See, for example, Factsonlyplease39: [67] [68] [69] [70], and Changingguardsatbuckinghampalace: [71] [72] [73] [74] [75] [76].
  • Both have been remarkably consistent at using the same edit summaries over the years like added many details and references or added information and references. These can often be seen opening any two accounts side by side, but let me know if you'd prefer to see a full list of diffs.
  • Both have frequently added WikiProject ratings manually with assessment as an edit summary.
  • Both overlap on Sara Blakely, Lev Binzumovich Leviev, Lindsay Lohan, Kerry King. Some of them are possibly just coincidence while gnoming though. I give more weight to everything else above.
MarioGom ( talk) 14:20, 18 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • I've been reviewing the diffs and other evidence for a good while now, and, frankly, I'm dizzy. Bottom line is I'm not convinced that the user is a sock sufficiently to block on that basis. However, I am convinced that the user is an undisclosed paid editor and have blocked accordingly. I'll leave this open in case someone else wants to evaluate the evidence of socking. If not, at some point it should be closed.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 15:16, 18 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • LuvReading08 is very  Possible to this farm from a technical perspective. behavioural perspective. Given behaviour, I'm convinced they're related. @ MarioGom: I'd say merge this case with Factsonlyplease39, and tag LuvReading08 as proven? -- Blablubbs ( talk) 17:26, 18 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  •  Clerk assistance requested: agreed. Let's merge this case to Factsonlyplease39. I think a subset of confirmed accounts should preserve dual tags. MarioGom ( talk) 19:11, 18 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Done. Re-tagged, with dual tags where appropriate. That was a lot of socks... Closing. Spicy ( talk) 19:20, 13 May 2023 (UTC) reply

03 August 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Signed up one month and half after the last block, it has the same Israeli office hours timecard [77] [78] that is very common in this sockfarm, similar edit summary style, similar interests (varied contributions, often biographies, then spam). Also compare user name: Reach4stars (new), ReachingtheStars (old). MarioGom ( talk) 17:53, 3 August 2023 (UTC) reply

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

  • information Administrator note I looked at the behavior connection, and I find it strong enough to block, which I have done. @ MarioGom: AFAICS every previous iteration of this SPI has found sleepers; was there a reason you didn't ask for a CU? Regards, Vanamonde ( Talk) 22:44, 5 August 2023 (UTC) reply
  • CheckUser requested and endorsed by clerk - Vanamonde93: Not really. I generally inhibit myself from most clerking actions when I intitiate a report. But given that you confirmed that you see what I see, I self-endorse a check for sleepers. MarioGom ( talk) 00:01, 6 August 2023 (UTC) reply
  •  Checkuser note:  No sleepers immediately visible. Closing since the account is blocked. Reaper Eternal ( talk) 15:33, 6 August 2023 (UTC) reply
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Factsonlyplease39/Archive&oldid=1169177581"
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Factsonlyplease39

Factsonlyplease39 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
03 June 2015
Suspected sockpuppets


Identical {{ helpme}} messages filed today made me suspicious - the userpages are similar, and while there's very little actual crossover in edits, it's very clear that all three accounts' interests are the same. I'm bringing this here because, frankly, I'm not sure what's going on. I'll be running a checkuser momentarily and will file the results below, but I'd like a second opinion on whether there's a breach of WP:SOCK going on before handing out any blocks. Yunshui  雲 水 09:57, 3 June 2015 (UTC) reply

The large sockfarm below all share similar editing habits, writing styles and userpages; I'm fairly convinced this is the same user assuming multiple personas. However, a second opinion would still be appreciated before I take any action. Yunshui  雲 水 10:09, 3 June 2015 (UTC) reply
Regarding Weentim68, I've just realised that editor's sole mainspace edit was to add a link to a page created by one of the other accounts listed below - which makes me pretty sure it's the same person again. Yunshui  雲 水 10:45, 3 June 2015 (UTC) reply
The more I look into this, the more it looks like some sort of concerted effort by a PR company... the technical data is also leading me in that direction. Yunshui  雲 水 11:02, 3 June 2015 (UTC) reply
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
  • Oh boy. The following are all  Confirmed:
Readingwritingrithmatic ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Fashionsforward ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
EmmaJoanne ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
ADDgrammar ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
ReachingtheStars ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
WildWorldOutThere ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Brightideas191 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Michellebrainstorming ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Tescotea ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Factsforus ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
GettingFactsRight ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Azmazaz ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Eeyorematters ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Jiminycricket55 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Editingright ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Factsonlyplease39 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Simplysavvy ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Mindfulrmatters ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Donna Helene ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Weentim68 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki) is  Possible but the behaviours and technical data don't closely match. Yunshui  雲 水 10:09, 3 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Actually, yes they do. Yunshui  雲 水 11:00, 3 June 2015 (UTC) reply
  • There's more: also  Confirmed:
Jackson665 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Secretsources ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Feelingfancyfree ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Weentim68 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Brightideas191 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Somethingforeveryone ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Quietandpeace ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Yunshui  雲 水 11:00, 3 June 2015 (UTC) reply
Actually, screw it; I'm sufficiently convinced now. Second opinions still welcome, but I'm going to block and tag this lot. Yunshui  雲 水 11:19, 3 June 2015 (UTC) reply

09 August 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Recreated article Charles Szews that was created by a sock ADDgrammar. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:00, 9 August 2016 (UTC) reply

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

20 January 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Paid editing, mostly undisclosed.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 17:38, 20 January 2020 (UTC) reply

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

06 September 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Alanapjohnson has popped up to edit and submit Draft:Lilia Buckingham, which is one of the articles that was being edited by the Changingguardsatbuckinghampalace sock farm. This looks like a case where the duck is flying to the original duck pond. CheckUser will probably not be useful because the data from the original socks has expired, and a sockmaster knows how long the CheckUser data lasts and can lie low for a while. Robert McClenon ( talk) 00:09, 6 September 2020 (UTC) reply

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

  • CheckUser requested and endorsed by clerk - agreed that a new editor finding a draft only edited by one of this sock farm's socks is darn suspicious. I'm reasonably convinced they're related and I've blocked Alanapjohnson as suspected, but given the number of socks that showed up in the original case I'm self-endorsing for a sleeper check. GeneralNotability ( talk) 00:55, 6 September 2020 (UTC) reply
  •  No sleepers immediately visible, closing. Mz7 ( talk) 06:35, 6 September 2020 (UTC) reply
  • @ Mz7: is Alanapjohnson confirmed? If so, could you please override the block and template as such? TheSandDoctor Talk 15:51, 6 September 2020 (UTC) reply
    TheSandDoctor, previous socks are  Stale, so I don't think CU can say much at this time. I think the current block is sufficient. Mz7 ( talk) 17:20, 6 September 2020 (UTC) reply
    That was something I probably should've checked, my bad. Thanks, Mz7 -- TheSandDoctor Talk 22:23, 6 September 2020 (UTC) reply

01 November 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

General behaviour consistent with the farm; similar edit summary usage to EveryoneLoves ET ( talk · contribs), specifically with regard to pages created through translation: Compare [1] and [2]; whereas EveryoneLoves ET used ‎created this page with help from this one: https://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hungria_Hip_Hop, Shootin Starz used ‎ created page with help from here: https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Krzysztof_Stanek. Requesting CU for sleeper check. Best, Blablubbs ( talk • contribs) 15:02, 1 November 2020 (UTC) reply

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

  •  Clerk endorsed - concur with the filer that they look a lot like EveryoneLoves ET. Endorse for comparison to Alanapjohnson + sleeper check, recommend sleeper check even if they don't come back with a strong match to Alanapjohnson. GeneralNotability ( talk) 17:10, 2 November 2020 (UTC) reply
  • I'm not going to engage the CU results as most of the original accounts found that are now stale are by proxy and these edits seem to be non-proxies. I'm going to block DUCK based on edit summaries. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 07:52, 4 November 2020 (UTC) reply

11 August 2021

Suspected sockpuppets

Creating articles on UPE-prone subjects. Similar edit summaries to this farm ( [3] [4] [5]/ [6] [7] [8] [9]) and shared habit of translating articles from other wikis ( [10] [11]/ [12] [13] [14]). I know the previous accounts are stale but I'm requesting Checkuser for a sleeper check because it has been helpful in the past. Thanks, Spicy ( talk) 19:55, 11 August 2021 (UTC) reply

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

04 October 2021

Suspected sockpuppets


Recreated Philipp Kircher and Hudson Hoagland G5ed in August as creations of WalkingInHisShoes ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki). Also created Rina Fukushi previously deleted due to this.

Asking for CU as it uncovered accounts in this case in the past. Eostrix ( 🦉 hoot hoot🦉) 05:23, 4 October 2021 (UTC) reply

@ Mcampany: who patrolled both of the creations above, FYI.-- Eostrix ( 🦉 hoot hoot🦉) 05:24, 4 October 2021 (UTC) reply
Oh my! Thanks for the head's up. Mcampany ( talk) 06:19, 4 October 2021 (UTC) reply

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 case is being reviewed by Spicy as part of the clerk training process. Please allow him to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on his talk page or on this page if more appropriate.

  • The article recreations are definitely cause for suspicion... but besides that, I'm not seeing any of the typical behaviour of Changingguardsatbuckinghampalace. This account actually looks like a Slowking4 sock to me (see filter hits, plus various other BEANSy things). CU will be worthwhile in either case, though, so  Clerk endorsed - please compare against Slowking4 as well as Changingguards. I will hold off moving the case until the CU results are in. Thanks, Spicy ( talk) 09:25, 4 October 2021 (UTC) reply
  •  In progress - ~ TNT (she/her • talk) 16:25, 6 October 2021 (UTC) reply
  • In absence of a non-stale confirmed sock, I compared to WalkingInHisShoes. They appear Red X Unrelated. Rely on behavioural evidence only ~ TNT (she/her • talk) 16:27, 6 October 2021 (UTC) reply
  • Thanks, TNT. I find the latter result kind of surprising, but it is what it is. FWIW, I had an admin friend send me copies of the deleted articles by WalkingInHisShoes, and they are not really similar to the current versions. Both subjects clearly pass WP:NPROF, so it's not totally inconceivable that two different people might have the idea to create articles on them. In light of this and the CU results, I'm closing the case without action. Thanks, Spicy ( talk) 17:14, 6 October 2021 (UTC) reply

01 November 2021

Suspected sockpuppets

Same characteristic timecard and editing style. See MiguelR26 [15] [16] [17]. Ping me for more notes. MarioGom ( talk) 22:03, 1 November 2021 (UTC) reply

Added some more accounts after finding an interesting tell. Same timecard and style too. MarioGom ( talk) 22:59, 1 November 2021 (UTC) reply
Added Raisin2Love: same editing style, similar timecard (mostly the same, this account has a few more edits in the afternoon than others, but it's otherwise pretty consistent), same focus on BLP creation. MarioGom ( talk) 13:08, 3 November 2021 (UTC) reply
Added Tracey Milkenson, same hints. MarioGom ( talk) 14:30, 5 November 2021 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Hello, from the perspective of an admin who patrols CSD categories, when I read reports like this, I can see that the sockpuppets are confirmed to each other, but it's not clear from the info here that they are certain sockpuppets of Changingguardsatbuckinghampalace (Possilikely to past socks seems less than definite). I don't want to delete pages that are based on a faulty understanding of CSD G5 by page taggers and if these accounts are all the same person but NOT Changingguardsatbuckinghampalace, then articles shouldn't be tagged for deletion. If I'm not reading this report correctly, my apologies in advance. This question seems to come up regularly so I thought I'd pose it here. Liz Read! Talk! 00:31, 2 November 2021 (UTC) reply
@ Liz: "Possilikely" is just the technical determination – behavioural evidence seems clear and GN has tagged as proven sockpuppets of Changingguardsatbuckinhampalace. As a general rule, if a clerk or administrator was confident enough to tag as a sock of a specific master, and said master was blocked at the time of page creation, G5ing should be fine. -- Blablubbs ( talk) 09:51, 2 November 2021 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

Pink clock Awaiting administrative action - please indef BumakinBeauty, BellaCiao2021, and Allister Channing. (The stale accounts in the filing are very likely them also, but not worth blocking now, IMO. They can be re-reported if they start editing again). Thanks, Spicy ( talk) 10:02, 2 November 2021 (UTC) reply

29 November 2021

Suspected sockpuppets


The usual (quite unique) timecard [18], edit summaries ( [19] [20], [21] [22], [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] [28] [29], [30] [31]), focus on biographies. Requesting checkuser for a sleeper check, since it was successful last time. MarioGom ( talk) 22:00, 29 November 2021 (UTC) reply

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

18 December 2021

Suspected sockpuppets


Same Israeli office hours timecard. Overlap with previous socks on Millennium Management, LLC, which Daisydeedle created in German ( de:Millennium Management) and French ( fr:Millennium Management, LLC). Chickpies123 also edited the French article and uploaded File:New Millennium Logo.png to Commons. Both share the same edit summary style with previous socks. Daisydeedle also added the logo to Legatum, which seems to be a customer of this sockfarm through older IP socking (see 173.241.48.0/20). MarioGom ( talk) 23:45, 18 December 2021 (UTC) reply

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

16 April 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Timecard has changed [32] and it is not so clearly Israeli office hours, but it resembles it a bit. Same modus operandi as before: creating a lot of non-UPE biographies, presumably to later hide who the clients are. Very characteristic edit summaries. Since this sockfarm is the same as Factsonlyplease39, I'll also reference diffs from its socks: [33] [34] [35] [36] [37], [38] [39] [40] [41] [42] [43] [44], [45] [46] [47], [48] [49] [50] [51] [52] [53] [54], [55] [56] [57], [58] [59] [60] [61] [62], [63] [64] [65] [66]. MarioGom ( talk) 15:59, 16 April 2023 (UTC) reply

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

@ MarioGom: Could you please show where the connection between this case and the Factsonlyplease39 case was made?-- Bbb23 ( talk) 13:24, 18 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Bbb23: It seems I never reported on this connection before (I thought I did!). Here's a behavior comparison of both groups:
  • Both used to have a very narrow timecard in Israeli office hours. See, for example, Factsonlyplease39: [67] [68] [69] [70], and Changingguardsatbuckinghampalace: [71] [72] [73] [74] [75] [76].
  • Both have been remarkably consistent at using the same edit summaries over the years like added many details and references or added information and references. These can often be seen opening any two accounts side by side, but let me know if you'd prefer to see a full list of diffs.
  • Both have frequently added WikiProject ratings manually with assessment as an edit summary.
  • Both overlap on Sara Blakely, Lev Binzumovich Leviev, Lindsay Lohan, Kerry King. Some of them are possibly just coincidence while gnoming though. I give more weight to everything else above.
MarioGom ( talk) 14:20, 18 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • I've been reviewing the diffs and other evidence for a good while now, and, frankly, I'm dizzy. Bottom line is I'm not convinced that the user is a sock sufficiently to block on that basis. However, I am convinced that the user is an undisclosed paid editor and have blocked accordingly. I'll leave this open in case someone else wants to evaluate the evidence of socking. If not, at some point it should be closed.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 15:16, 18 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • LuvReading08 is very  Possible to this farm from a technical perspective. behavioural perspective. Given behaviour, I'm convinced they're related. @ MarioGom: I'd say merge this case with Factsonlyplease39, and tag LuvReading08 as proven? -- Blablubbs ( talk) 17:26, 18 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  •  Clerk assistance requested: agreed. Let's merge this case to Factsonlyplease39. I think a subset of confirmed accounts should preserve dual tags. MarioGom ( talk) 19:11, 18 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Done. Re-tagged, with dual tags where appropriate. That was a lot of socks... Closing. Spicy ( talk) 19:20, 13 May 2023 (UTC) reply

03 August 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Signed up one month and half after the last block, it has the same Israeli office hours timecard [77] [78] that is very common in this sockfarm, similar edit summary style, similar interests (varied contributions, often biographies, then spam). Also compare user name: Reach4stars (new), ReachingtheStars (old). MarioGom ( talk) 17:53, 3 August 2023 (UTC) reply

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

  • information Administrator note I looked at the behavior connection, and I find it strong enough to block, which I have done. @ MarioGom: AFAICS every previous iteration of this SPI has found sleepers; was there a reason you didn't ask for a CU? Regards, Vanamonde ( Talk) 22:44, 5 August 2023 (UTC) reply
  • CheckUser requested and endorsed by clerk - Vanamonde93: Not really. I generally inhibit myself from most clerking actions when I intitiate a report. But given that you confirmed that you see what I see, I self-endorse a check for sleepers. MarioGom ( talk) 00:01, 6 August 2023 (UTC) reply
  •  Checkuser note:  No sleepers immediately visible. Closing since the account is blocked. Reaper Eternal ( talk) 15:33, 6 August 2023 (UTC) reply
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Factsonlyplease39/Archive&oldid=1169177581"

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook




Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE