Pablo909

Pablo909 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
15 August 2010
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]


Evidence submitted by Rschen7754
[edit]

[1] and [2] are just two of the examples of what these accounts are doing - violates multiple accounts editing the same page, and this works to avoid scrutiny. All of these accounts have been indef'ed, but we're trying to make sure we got them all, and maybe do an IP block. Rschen7754 05:42, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties   
[edit]

See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users
[edit]
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
[edit]

 Clerk note: Looking at the Geolocation data and contribs from 12.38.172.9, it's possible that this person briefly edited from an Apple store, so I don't think anything useful is going to come from this IP. –MuZemike 05:58, 15 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 IP blocked and a lot (!) of socks blocked. -- Luk talk 11:00, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
information Administrator note Blocked and tagged. The oldest account appears to be D62943, so the case probably needs to be moved there. I have also left the IP mentioned in the original filing unblocked - they have not edited in several days. TNXMan 13:20, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Moved SpitfireTally-ho! 16:19, 21 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
18 November 2011
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Need a checkuser for a possible sock. I am having some problems with User:Ynotradio and his suspected socks User:PennHelper and User:76.98.205.8. This user seems to have some obsession with WXPN-HD2 because it used the branding "YRock" which was popular in Philly, which this user now uses on his online web stream (probably against copyrights). This user has tried on two different occasions to get the WXPN-HD2 page moved to a different page name. First "Y-Not Radio" (the name of his web stream) and then "WPLY-FM", neither of which is the legal name of the station under MOS or the FCC. It appears the user is now trying to move the WXPN-HD2 page to WXPN (WXPN and WXPN-HD2 are considered separate stations per the FCC and per MOS). This is tendentious and disruptive editing at it's worst...and just plain wasting the community's time. Even if a CU can't do a checkuser, could a DUCK block be put in place or at least one for disruptive editing? Thanks. - Neutralhomer • Talk • 19:43, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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

Before this gets closed, it may be worthwhile for a checkuser to take a look at User:0pee3, who appears to have been created to participate in the nascent edit war on 5 November. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 23:26, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DC, which article are we talking about? The WXPN-HD2 article or another article? - Neutralhomer • Talk • 01:17, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
PennHelper is  Confirmed to operate PieInFaceWithGrayHairs (talk · contribs). No comment on the IP. WilliamH (talk) 21:53, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]


0pee3 is apparently technically Red X Unrelated to Ynotradio and PennHelper, but  Confirmed with the following accounts:

WilliamH (talk) 00:49, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

08 July 2012
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


[3] Similar editing patterns to each other, similar subjects as other socks; similar naming convention. Rschen7754 00:04, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]

information Administrator note Another sock farm found. Blocked and tagged all the accounts. Elockid (Talk) 00:11, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

12 July 2012
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Same naming convention, only edit is to a road article. I was responsible for filing the SPI report last time; think this is some sort of attempted retribution. Rschen7754 09:24, 12 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
11 May 2013
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Similar username to User:P4403493033943, a CU-blocked sock of this master (and several others in the same family), edited a road article (same topic). Requesting CU to dig up a potential sockfarm (the last two sockfarms that were found numbered in the hundreds). Rschen7754 23:19, 11 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]

 IP blocked T. Canens (talk) 09:09, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

25 May 2013
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Created hours after the last CU blocks [4]. Comparing to ParadeCloud (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki), and going down both contribution lists, both editors have the same types of editing: Pennsylvania roads, editing templates similar to Template:Johnstown, Pennsylvania (PA cities), creating redirects, uploading similarly-named Pennsylvania pictures. Comparing to Mfwo3df (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) we can add an interest in Chinatown, uploading New Jersey pictures with the same naming convention, and more creating Chinatown redirects, especially ones with anchors: [5] [6] Hoping to flush out more sleepers. --Rschen7754 02:33, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also note userpages: [7] and [8]. --Rschen7754 02:35, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users
[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. Both RowEpict and ParadeCloud have made edits to articles pertaining to Exton and Chester County in Pennsylvania. Both users have edited the Exton, Pennsylvania, Exton Square Mall, Main Street at Exton, Chester County Library System, and Chester Springs, Pennsylvania articles. In addition both users have edited Template:Exton, Pennsylvania and Template:Chester Springs, Pennsylvania. In addition, they have uploaded similar photos. Both File:Main Street Town Center.jpg by ParadeCloud and File:ExtonMainStreet2PA.jpg by RowEpict have similar summary sections, were both taken with an iPhone 4S, and in both images the same car hood can be seen. Dough4872 02:42, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
-- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 13:55, 25 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
10 November 2013
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Sumpsrummy and Saberbelt have the same interest in Chinatown districts as blocked sock RowEpict. In July 2013, Saberbelt said that "there are 4 Chinatowns in San Francisco" and tried to establish this with unsuitable sources. Today in this edit to Template:SFBayshopping, Sumpsrummy added three more Chinatowns of San Francisco. He labeled the Chinatowns "1st", "2nd", "3rd", and "4th" in the edit. The numbering of San Francisco Chinatowns is unique to this sockpuppeter: User Saberbelt created the redirect First Chinatown. User RowEpict created the redirects Second Chinatown, San Francisco, Third Chinatown, San Francisco, and Fourth Chinatown, San Francisco.
Checkuser requested to flush out sleepers of this inveterate socker. Binksternet (talk) 15:32, 10 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
17 December 2013
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

New accounts with same interest in playing with junction lists in infoboxes, over a brief period: [9][10]. I suspect that this is not a new user either but possibly one of the road sockpuppeteers (Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/D62943 maybe?), requesting CU for confirm and identification. Rschen7754 07:20, 17 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
26 May 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Please see the recent edit history of Template:San Jose Radio for details. Similarly-named socks Geoffrey100a, Geoffrey100e, Geoffrey100z, and Geoffrey101 (also listed in the recent edit history of Template:San Jose Radio) have already been determined to be socks of this editor. Steel1943 (talk) 12:38, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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

The SPI filings are separated; you can see more of this puppet master at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Geoffrey100/Archive. The guy is insistent that San Francisco and San Jose, California, are the same radio market, though the actual market considers them separate. The geographical nearness of the two cities gives some credence to his stance, but market practice and tradition do not. WP:Reliable sources do not support his view. Binksternet (talk) 16:11, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
Oh, I've already blocked the accounts. They were all created at roughly the same time (see [11]) and the edits confirmed socking. I blocked a couple of fairly obvious sleeper accounts too. Nick (talk) 16:15, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Looks like the block on the IP recently expired.  Confirmed along with Geoffrey100z, Geoffrey101, Geoffrey103, Geoffrey102, Geoffrey900, and
 IP blocked 3 years, this time. T. Canens (talk) 00:14, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
22 June 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


The promotional/commercial article Milpitas Square was created by a sockpuppet, User:Geoffrey100, and has often been edited by socks of D62943, such as User:KGO810, User:KSL1160 and User:RowEpict. Any time I see a mention of this article by a new account I am suspicious of socking! With this creation of a new article, Fhhftgjjgfd inserted a promotional WP:COATRACK bit about Milpitas Square.
I'm asking for checkuser because previous checks have found sleeper accounts. Binksternet (talk) 15:21, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent work by DoRD and company! D62943 was created in July 2010. The oldest account may be:

Other suspicious accounts, showing much the same interest as the ones above, include:

It's quite the sock drawer. Whew! Binksternet (talk) 03:12, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. I am unrelated to the people you spoke of. I am the same sa Fhhftgjjgfd. I happen to be of Chinese descent which is why I edited the articles you referenced.--96.227.234.39 (talk) 06:18, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to be a sockpuppet of D62943 because you somehow found the little seen[16] article Chinatown,_Atlanta, which was created by confirmed sockpuppet User:Mfwo3df. Binksternet (talk) 06:39, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]

27 August 2015

[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Obvious new sock doing the same thing as many previous socks, trying to turn the San Francisco Radio template into a much wider one encompassing San Francisco, Oakland and San Jose. Here is AndrewLei1999 making that edit, and here are other socks making the same edit: Geoffrey100, 24.5.202.48, Geoffrey100, Geoffrey100, 205.155.225.1, KGO810, Geoffrey100a, and Geoffrey101. No need for checkuser since this is so easily identified. Binksternet (talk) 22:42, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
EvanGrange2006 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
EmmaYungert1000 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Theresa2006 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
TheresaNguyen2006 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
AndrewLei1999 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
JuanContres2005 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
The accounts seem likely to the master account base upon behavior. Mike V • Talk 23:48, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

17 September 2015

[edit]

Note that TVBI2006 was blocked by Barek for sockpuppetry, with TVBI2006 doing the same exact things as Geoffrey100 and other confirmed socks. Binksternet (talk) 18:51, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

02 September 2016

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Multiple controversial page moves were done on various Montreal articles without discussion. Examples here, here, here and here. The subsequent edits by several similar IP addresses seem to be related to these moves and occurred minutes after each of the moves. MTLskyline (talk) 02:36, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
  • @Vanjagenije: I have very limited skills in this area. The only thing I can think of is to copy all the accounts temporarily to this page, run the standard tagging script, and then revert back to where you started. I don't know how hard it would be to even copy them, and perhaps there is a better solution. @Timotheus Canens:?--Bbb23 (talk) 11:17, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Vanjagenije:  Done In case you run into a similar situation in the future, any edits that sound like formulaic "find-and-replace" rules can be handled efficiently with AWB, especially when the pages you're working on are in an existing category or transclude a common template. ~ Rob13Talk 17:40, 11 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

19 November 2016

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Similar usernames, similar first edits to create a nonsense user/talk pages [17][18][19][20], similar editing focus on Interstate Highway articles [21][22]. Requesting CU for a sleeper check. Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Pablo909/Archive is one possibility. Rschen7754 06:33, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

 In progress. This is going to take some time.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:07, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

More