From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Nestofbirdnests

Nestofbirdnests ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log· investigate · cuwiki)

14 April 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Nestofbirdnests reverted an edit made by C.Fred on 02:48 UTC 14 April 2023 [1]. Nestofbirdnests was indeffed for WP:NOTHERE a few seconds later. MichaelJHans was created at 03:17 UTC 14 April 2023. Their first edit was to revert the same restored edit [2], then to post a response to a report about Nestofbirdnests on C.Fred's talk page [3]. This seems far too coincidental to be anything other than a case of block evasion by the original editor. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 13:04, 14 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

The only edit to an article made by Michael is to Arjuna. It's true that the one edit was exactly the same as the one made by Nest, but I don't think they are the same person. I think that before creating an account, Michael used Special:contributions/68.205.26.246, which is precisely what he says at ANI, and is also why after only one edit by the registered account, I warned him about edit-warring as the IP had made several reverts. In addition, looking at times when Nest posted to Talk pages, their style of writing is completely different from the very long-winded style of Michael. Finally, neither Michael nor the IP use any particular editing platform whereas Nest uses "Mobile edit Mobile app edit Android app edit".-- Bbb23 ( talk) 13:19, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • If MichaelJHans is connected to any other editor at Arjuna, it is likely the IP editor who initially removed what is described as a spoiler from the intro of the article (diffs: [4] [5] [6]). I reverted the last of these three IP edits ( [7]). Nestofbirdnests then went on their destruction spree, reverting a number of my edits, including this one. In my analysis of the situation, Nest's revert was targeted vandalism/wikihounding aimed at any edit I made, regardless of its nature, whereas Michael's edit was at least followed up by a relatively civil comment on my talk page asking about the content in question. I blocked Nest, and I do not see the hallmarks of Nest's edits in Michael's edits, at least not to date. I believe the two accounts are unrelated. — C.Fred ( talk) 16:01, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Based on my comments and C.Fred's agreement + additional information, I'm closing this with no action. Bbb23 ( talk) 16:04, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply

18 April 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

All accounts are interested in languages, especially language isolates and languages in America, and removing claims that a language is a language isolate. Diffs: [8], [9], [10]*Fehufangą ( ✉ Talk · ✎ Contribs) 23:57, 18 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


23 April 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Same interest in languages, American languages, and removal of the "language isolate" label. — *Fehufangą ( ✉ Talk · ✎ Contribs) 04:33, 23 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


02 May 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Removing the language isolate claim again, as with previous socks: [13], [14], [15]. — *Fehufangą ( ✉ Talk · ✎ Contribs) 14:24, 2 May 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


09 May 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Here's another one quacking.

Again, removing the language isolate status from various articles [16] [17], as with previous socks [18] [19].

Also trolling again on Fdom5997's user talk page: Special:Diff/1153960876. Austronesier ( talk) 11:56, 9 May 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


24 May 2023

Adding for the record:

, blocked. Fut.Perf. 10:00, 24 May 2023 (UTC) reply

24 May 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Housekeeping GeneralNotability ( talk) 13:50, 24 May 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


14 June 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Pro forma, mostly for the lock request. -- Blablubbs ( talk) 22:03, 14 June 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


12 June 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Both of accounts have made same edits by creating draft article for Windows builds, and violate copy right by copy from betawiki. Winbytedemo: [20], [21] Xpbuild2504: [22], [23] Tetadřvo ( talk) 00:27, 12 June 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


From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Nestofbirdnests

Nestofbirdnests ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log· investigate · cuwiki)

14 April 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Nestofbirdnests reverted an edit made by C.Fred on 02:48 UTC 14 April 2023 [1]. Nestofbirdnests was indeffed for WP:NOTHERE a few seconds later. MichaelJHans was created at 03:17 UTC 14 April 2023. Their first edit was to revert the same restored edit [2], then to post a response to a report about Nestofbirdnests on C.Fred's talk page [3]. This seems far too coincidental to be anything other than a case of block evasion by the original editor. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 13:04, 14 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

The only edit to an article made by Michael is to Arjuna. It's true that the one edit was exactly the same as the one made by Nest, but I don't think they are the same person. I think that before creating an account, Michael used Special:contributions/68.205.26.246, which is precisely what he says at ANI, and is also why after only one edit by the registered account, I warned him about edit-warring as the IP had made several reverts. In addition, looking at times when Nest posted to Talk pages, their style of writing is completely different from the very long-winded style of Michael. Finally, neither Michael nor the IP use any particular editing platform whereas Nest uses "Mobile edit Mobile app edit Android app edit".-- Bbb23 ( talk) 13:19, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply

  • If MichaelJHans is connected to any other editor at Arjuna, it is likely the IP editor who initially removed what is described as a spoiler from the intro of the article (diffs: [4] [5] [6]). I reverted the last of these three IP edits ( [7]). Nestofbirdnests then went on their destruction spree, reverting a number of my edits, including this one. In my analysis of the situation, Nest's revert was targeted vandalism/wikihounding aimed at any edit I made, regardless of its nature, whereas Michael's edit was at least followed up by a relatively civil comment on my talk page asking about the content in question. I blocked Nest, and I do not see the hallmarks of Nest's edits in Michael's edits, at least not to date. I believe the two accounts are unrelated. — C.Fred ( talk) 16:01, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply
  • Based on my comments and C.Fred's agreement + additional information, I'm closing this with no action. Bbb23 ( talk) 16:04, 14 April 2023 (UTC) reply

18 April 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

All accounts are interested in languages, especially language isolates and languages in America, and removing claims that a language is a language isolate. Diffs: [8], [9], [10]*Fehufangą ( ✉ Talk · ✎ Contribs) 23:57, 18 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


23 April 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Same interest in languages, American languages, and removal of the "language isolate" label. — *Fehufangą ( ✉ Talk · ✎ Contribs) 04:33, 23 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


02 May 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Removing the language isolate claim again, as with previous socks: [13], [14], [15]. — *Fehufangą ( ✉ Talk · ✎ Contribs) 14:24, 2 May 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


09 May 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Here's another one quacking.

Again, removing the language isolate status from various articles [16] [17], as with previous socks [18] [19].

Also trolling again on Fdom5997's user talk page: Special:Diff/1153960876. Austronesier ( talk) 11:56, 9 May 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


24 May 2023

Adding for the record:

, blocked. Fut.Perf. 10:00, 24 May 2023 (UTC) reply

24 May 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Housekeeping GeneralNotability ( talk) 13:50, 24 May 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


14 June 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Pro forma, mostly for the lock request. -- Blablubbs ( talk) 22:03, 14 June 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


12 June 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Both of accounts have made same edits by creating draft article for Windows builds, and violate copy right by copy from betawiki. Winbytedemo: [20], [21] Xpbuild2504: [22], [23] Tetadřvo ( talk) 00:27, 12 June 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



Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook