- Colombiabeauty (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Populated account categories: confirmed
20 April 2016
– An administrator or SPI clerk has placed this case on hold pending further information or developments.
- Suspected sockpuppets
Many SPAs are continuing edits consistent with Colombiabeauty, to wit, all-at-once beauty pageant contestant article creation including ((Infobox pageant titleholder)) and ((Beauty Pageant)). Subjects are often southeast Asians/Indonesians/Philipinas. More discussion of this beauty pageant sockfarm (or farms) is found at WP:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/Archive 94#Indian fashion models and contests with input from reliable editors SpacemanSpiff and The Banner as well as the editor filing this report, Brianhe. It is suspected based on that conversation that this is the work of a Indonesian PR firm who extensively use throwaway accounts and rotating IPs in the 93.110.x.x range. Note that scattered IPs from this range are extensively editing beauty pageant articles this year , up to and including this edit a few days ago. This is an Iranian ISP whose edits are almost exclusively devoted to Miss Earth USA, Miss World, etc.
Representative diffs:
Please note that the following CU-confirmed socks of Colombiabeauty had exactly the same behavior:
Submitted for consideration – Brianhe (talk) 02:50, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Added Henry Rojas Pacheco another pageant SPA whose edits appear to be just as described above e.g. [8], plus seems to coordinate with Vidatafazoli who was just added to the case through a separate line of reasoning. There is also editing on articles frequented by another sockmaster Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Yuliaalipova like this. Brianhe (talk) 11:10, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
I like to add user:Vidatafazoli to the list of suspected sockpuppets. Reason for this is that he repeatedly re-added information that first was added by the blocked sockpuppet user:User:Amgood1993. Info that was removed by others. For example on Template:Miss Paraguay where Amgood1993 added] a red link to the 2016 version. This was reverted Ponyo but re-added by Vidatafazoli, still as a red link. According to the intersection tool Amgood1996 and Vidatafazoli shared an effort on 62 articles. He also fits in the pattern of disruptive editing and total lack of communication. (See: User talk:Vidatafazoli). The Banner talk 09:22, 20 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Additional: Vidatafazoli added multiple fake links to Template:Miss Universe 2016 delegates. Here does the suspected Henry Rojas Pacheco the same. The Banner talk 07:54, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Administrator note I think there's enough here to request CU to check for sleepers and possibly block the underlying IPs. Some of these have thousands of edits and the patterns are too close to ignore. Katietalk 02:27, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Clerk endorsed. Because so much is clearly stale here, I'm not sure how much a CU can do. However, there may still be a chance of finding sleepers, and/or connecting some of the alleged socks to each other (even if it's not possible to connect them to the master), so I'm going to endorse this one just in case. If it turns out the CU's can't help out after all, then so be it, but I think they should at least take a look. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 00:40, 13 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- The following accounts are Stale:
- En1206 was previously found to be Unrelated.
- Group 1 – the following accounts are Possible to each other and Unrelated to the master:
- Group 2 – the following accounts are Unrelated to each other, the master, and any other accounts:
- Group 3 – the following accounts are Technically indistinguishable to each other and Confirmed to the master:
- Blocked and tagged Vidatafazoli.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:08, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Two confirmed account are already blocked and tagged. Case closed. Vanjagenije (talk) 20:21, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @Vanjagenije: Can I ask you to reopen this so I can look into this more behaviorally? Some of the evidence seems compelling. I might well find no behavioral link, but unless you've already done a full behavioral investigation, I'd like the chance to have a deeper look. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 20:25, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @L235: You are a clerk, you don't need me to change the case status. Vanjagenije (talk) 20:27, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- On hold for further behavioral investigation. It seemed impolite to without checking with you first. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 20:28, 8 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- I've now spent over six and a half hours looking at this. Here are my conclusions:
- I'm finding the biography-creation evidence particularly convincing. To restate Brianhe, the following accounts have created bios on pageant titleholders, which, on the first edit, have ((Infobox pageant titleholder)), the sections "Early life" or "Personal life", "Pageantry" with subsections describing pageants attended (sometimes without main section level-2 header, but still with subsectioning), a (sometimes-blank, absolute showing adherence to structure) "References" section, and an "External links" section that links only to the pageant's website:
- AnnLivinova: Pimbongkod Chankaew on first edit, Waratthaya Wongchayaporn on first edit
- Tenkingdoms: Stephania Stegman on first edit, Mikaela Fotiadis on first edit, Anis Christine Pitty Yaya on first edit, Idubina Rivas on first edit
- Volbeat1: Andrea Kalousová on first edit, Diana Jaén on first edit, on first edit
- Kutnahora: Christi McGarry on first edit, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Janela_Joy_Cuaton&oldid=685866080 Janela Joy Cuaton on first edit]
- Henry Rojas Pacheco: Joanna Cooper on first edit (the only bio creation from this account)
- (Jonathan121501 and BeautyQueen327 will be discussed below.)
- This pattern lines up very closely with Colombiabeauty and known previous socks. E.g., Colombiabeauty itself: Laura Garcete on first edit; Yuliaalipova: Hillarie Parungao on first edit; Evenewyear: Wendolly Esparza on first edit
- Although those may seem like a set of cherry-picked examples, I've flipped through where the pageant-titleholder infobox is used, and very few of them that weren't created by the suspected puppets had those exact sections and, crucially, the infobox, all on the first edit.
- All seven unblocked accused accounts have made less than 2% of edits in any talk namespace (talk, user talk, template talk, etc.): [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15]. Yet, they coordinate extraordinarily well and edit articles created by other suspected/confirmed socks without a word being discussed. See generally the editor compare report. Examples:
- Binibining Pilipinas 2016, history around February 2016. The easiest one to see is Kutnahora and Jonathan121501 on 24 Feb 2016, 05:23-05:28, Kutnahora makes a string of edits. When Jonathan starts editing a few minutes later at 06:14 and continues a string of edits until 07:03. Kutnahora comes back at 13:52 and continues a string of edits. In this process, over 25 edits are made, without a single edit conflict noted, indeed with no talk page conversation at all, or even any edit summaries (which I'll discuss in a moment).
- It's a little harder to find definitive evidence for BeautyQueen327 because of the low number of distinct pages edited (6). However, fully five of those pages were also edited by other suspected socks, some in quite heavy detail. See [16], Ctrl-F “BeautyQueen327”.
- I'm also seeing more circumstantial evidence. AnnLivinova, Tenkingdoms, Jonathan121501, and Volbeat1, the four unblocked suspected accounts with the most edits, all have average edit times within 65 minutes of each other, with the farthest ones being Kutnahora (9:52) to AnnLivinova (8:49). In addition, all suspected accounts use non-default edit summaries extraordinarily infrequently, and tend to make many (frequently >10) edits in quick succession. [17]
- Based on the above, I currently have a firm and definite conviction all the accounts listed are connected. I am thus inclined to request indefinite sock-blocks for all seven currently-unblocked accounts, notwithstanding the CU negative results (which I suspect may be due to the scarcity of recent edits). Of the unblocked accounts, I am the least certain about BeautyQueen327, but its close fit with the other more circumstantial patterns described above convince me. (I have not evaluated connections to En1206, as that account has already been blocked indefinitely separately from SPI.) I do note that I see no rebuttal of any evidence here by any of the suspected socks, despite being notified and this SPI being open for a good month and a half, and despite AnnLivinova, Tenkingdoms, Jonathan121501, Kutnahora, and Henry Rojas Pacheco having edited since then. I am still a little confused that the CU came up with such negative results. (Perhaps these are meatpuppets who edit as directed by the master?) Given the old age of the suspected accounts (AnnLivinova is the oldest and the investigation will be retitled to that account) I will leave this on hold for 2-3 days for any final statements before formally requesting admin action. Thanks, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 04:58, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]