UnderArmourKid

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

Older archives were moved to an archive of the archive because of the page size and are listed below:

15 December 2015

Suspected sockpuppets

They all quack, but I'm missing the master and sleepers. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 23:48, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also, a check for a rangeblock would be helpful; that's a lot of accounts in a short time. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 23:51, 15 December 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

15 February 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Making similar nonsense edits to cyclone articles as blocked puppeteer: RE[1], LC[2] RolandR (talk) 01:40, 15 February 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

17 February 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Many users vandalizing Cyclone Laurence and other pages. GZWDer (talk) 15:25, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Note: Libertadores = Rust EZE X950, Megachannel2 = WormHole25. This may need to be moved. GABHello! 01:59, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Bbb23: Sorry, I was on my phone. By Libertadores, I was referring to the sock already listed, and by moved, I meant that this might have to be merged to another case if there's another master. Megachannel2 and WormHole25 are already on the list.GABHello! 13:37, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
We also have Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Edison Lobos, which should also be merged.--GZWDer (talk) 15:45, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • @GZWDer: Thanks for the link to the other SPI.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:31, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
     Clerk note: I thing that UnderArmourKid should remain the master here, as there is interesting number of pages commonly vandalized. Other two SPIs will be merged into this one soon. Closing. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:59, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

18 February 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Another possible sock who vandalize Cyclone Larry. GZWDer (talk) 15:42, 18 February 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

18 February 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

And also: (low confidence)

Other possible socks. GZWDer (talk) 19:12, 18 February 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

  • Groups 2 and 3 are obvoius vandals, no need to tag them. I'm closing this. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:40, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

19 July 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Lately I've noticed a lot of vandalism only/throwaway accounts on Cyclone articles. I believe these users are all UnderArmourKid (example: confirmed sock to this user). The only unblocked account is Smoke1780, who I also believe to be connected (made this edit to Cyclone Larry and also there's this, which can be compared to this and this and this. However, here HeadrushGD claims to be a sockpuppet of a different master, iPhonehurricane95. Maybe UnderArmourKid is actually a iPhonehurricane95 sock? Sro23 (talk) 20:39, 19 July 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

HeadrushGD (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Smoke1780 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
FRIES MAN 25 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
DarkUser2016 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
GOGGLE GOGGLE (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

07 August 2016

Suspected sockpuppets 

~ Junior5a (Talk) Cont 00:58, 7 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

06 September 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Probably WP:DUCK quacking. Already blocked, just want to list in here. NgYShung huh? 14:16, 6 September 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

06 September 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

For the creation of the exact same page, Refutation of Apollo 11 on the basis of the fuel balance for the start and flight trajectory (see deleted contribs), as well as similar edits to other pages. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 13:35, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've added 5 additional usernames, evidence is a similarity of names and similarity of vandalism on Hurricane Patricia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), some of which use CU / SOCK templates (indicating someone who is quite familiar with this type of abuse). Murph9000 (talk) 14:14, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Murph9000! :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 14:15, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. :-) 190.47.181.41 added, due to same editing pattern. Murph9000 (talk) 14:34, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
2 more names added. Connected through Exploration Flight Test 1 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Already blocked, just adding for documentation and investigation purposes. Murph9000 (talk) 14:48, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See also: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/UnderArmourKid

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

Everyone is blocked. Closing.  Clerk assistance requested: Please see if this should be merged into Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/UnderArmourKid.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:20, 6 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

09 September 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

 Looks like a duck to me Murph9000 (talk) 13:46, 9 September 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

15 September 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

 Looks like a duck to me First obvious sock, already blocked. Second undid revert of first's vandalism. Third created by second. Murph9000 (talk) 13:29, 15 September 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

18 September 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Mostly likely "Armour" is matched. ~ Junior5a (Talk) Cont 22:15, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Sounds like a duck quacking into a megaphone to me for both. Murph9000 (talk) 22:39, 18 September 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

21 September 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

 Sounds like a duck quacking into a megaphone to me Murph9000 (talk) 21:43, 21 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All blocked now, leaving report for the record and any analysis you may want to do. Murph9000 (talk) 21:53, 21 September 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

04 October 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

 Sounds like a duck quacking into a megaphone to me Murph9000 (talk) 13:24, 4 October 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

04 October 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

 Sounds like a duck quacking into a megaphone to me N-C16 (talk) 23:01, 4 October 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

Sharp Minor (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Xcy-7 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Relokos de la U (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
no No comment with respect to IP address(es). A block has been applied. Mike V • Talk 17:52, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

19 November 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Quack. They've been known to have sleepers, so sleeper check? Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 05:02, 19 November 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

21 November 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Seems pretty quacky. Vandalizing tropical cyclone articles like past socks. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 22:39, 21 November 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

23 November 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Self-admitted. Let's do the usual check for sleepers, please. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 20:15, 23 November 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

24 November 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

 Sounds like a duck quacking into a megaphone to me. Just reporting for the record. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 23:50, 24 November 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

27 December 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

A clear self identified sock as can be seen in this edit [3] on Cyclone Nargis and also the same edit was done by User:BlassCFB [4] due to which they have already been blocked. Hence, requesting checkuser for any other possible sleeper accounts. TheGeneralUser (talk) 17:47, 27 December 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

12 January 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

same types of edits, abusing page about sockpuppets of UnderArmourKid -glove-(alt, public) (talk) (main account's talk) 19:43, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

same types of vandalism, editing page about their sockpuppets -glove-(alt, public) (talk) (main account's talk) 19:45, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

same types of edits, editing sockpuppet category page for puppeteer -glove-(alt, public) (talk) (main account's talk) 19:46, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

similar editing patterns and articles to other socks WNYY98 (talk) 22:25, 12 January 2017 (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

-- Amanda (aka DQ) 15:33, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

16 January 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

As per this edit, where they admit to being a sock:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Danica_Patrick&diff=prev&oldid=760275490

Also editing the same kind of articles, ie ones that have had some form of aviation involvement:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=United_Airlines_Flight_175&diff=prev&oldid=615404989

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=World_Trade_Center_(1973%E2%80%932001)&diff=prev&oldid=760275387

Requesting CheckUser to see if there are any others and also because of this threat to create another sock unless unblocked:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:GameCube_Racing&diff=prev&oldid=760275835 5 albert square (talk) 00:46, 16 January 2017 (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

 Confirmed + the following accounts:

29 January 2017

Suspected sockpuppets


[5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] New accounts vandalizing the same pages sometimes within minutes of each other. I think these are the only unblocked socks? Sro23 (talk) 19:37, 29 January 2017 (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

  • I'll pass on the CU this time. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:42, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]


30 January 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Fairly obvious duck. Chrissymad ❯❯❯ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 22:00, 30 January 2017 (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 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Quack quack. (See edit to Home Depot, a UAK favorite and the self-proclamation of being UAK...) Chrissymad ❯❯❯ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 17:32, 6 February 2017 (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 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Fairly obvious Duck. Chrissymad ❯❯❯ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 20:44, 6 February 2017 (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


07 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Pretty obvious WP:DUCK from edits and username. Have CheckUsers looked into any possible rangeblocks? Jasper Deng (talk) 02:21, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Update: just saw the previous case. Looks like I may want to look into constructing an abuse filter instead.--Jasper Deng (talk) 02:22, 7 February 2017 (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

07 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Obvious duck of UAK. Chrissymad ❯❯❯ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 18:34, 7 February 2017 (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


08 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

I mistakenly added this to the wrong SPI. Obvious UAK duck. Chrissymad ❯❯❯ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 13:58, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

User:UnderArmourMan is likely a sockpuppet of UnderArmourKid. --B1 l T l C (C)2016 Brynda1231 Do Not Steal. 14:12, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

10 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Quack quack. Chrissymad ❯❯❯ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 23:29, 10 February 2017 (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 March 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

See diff provided; explicitly claims to be UnderArmourKid in vandalistic edit. YITYNR My work • What's wrong? 21:45, 16 March 2017 (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 April 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

See his contributions. RitoWiki likes editing on pages that past socks of UnderArmorKid have been known to vandalize (e.g. Aflac). Editing pattern appears quite similar, particularly these [11] [12], some sort of nonsense vandalism seen from this sockmaster in the past; also, the "GD" in the vandal edits are very likely a reference to his other socks with the "GD" name (e.g. User:211 GD, User:GironDavidGD). The user also continued to vandalize after their first block expired. Requesting a sleeper check in any case (it never hurts), and if the account is confirmed, requesting block on the IPs used there. LightandDark2000 (talk) 09:44, 18 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, this edit here seems to reference the account's link to UnderArmourKid, which would make it a possible quack. It's very similar to other vandal edits by different UnderArmourKid socks as well, see [13], [14]. LightandDark2000 (talk) 05:04, 19 April 2017 (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 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

* Salamon650 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Quack, quack, quack.  Looks like a duck to me. See the contributions of the vandalism-only accounts listed above (the first 2 have already been confirmed as socks of UnderArmourKid and are blocked; they are included for referencing purposes). These accounts all appear to be unblocked sleeper accounts of UnderArmourKid. They all edit in identical manners, and they vandalize the same articles consistently. All of their editing patterns/behavior is pretty consistent with the kind of vandalism seem from other UnderArmourKid socks in previous cases. Also, most of the accounts were created in quick succession of each other. In addition, all of those accounts edited in a rather short period of time within each other's activity, or within a short amount of time after the blocking of a confirmed UnderArmourKid sock. The names of some of these accounts are also very similar to other blocked sockpuppets of UnderArmourKid; for example, User:Smoke2014 is extremely similar to User:Smoke1780. Requesting that all of the accounts above be blocked indefinitely, as well as a sleeper check on the underlying IP range. I would hate to see any more of these socks remaining unblocked. Even if a Checkuser can't be done on these accounts, I would still request an indef block on all those accounts due to the behavioral evidence. LightandDark2000 (talk) 21:32, 23 April 2017 (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

28 May 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

WP:DUCK. Nearly every account named has vandalized User talk:UA rocks!. In the case of NetherGD and Skrillex Party, identical edits [29][30]. In the case of ExtremeArmourKid, UnderArmourKid666, By Zobros and UA rocks!, they make pleas/threats to unblock [31][32][33][34]. In the case of the others, similar one-two word gibberish at top of page [35][36][37][38][39].

Other than piling on the same talkpage, some have explicitly or implicitly declared themselves to be UnderArmourKid [40][41][42][43][44]

In addition, several accounts with similar name conventions have vandalized Bass Pro: OceanicFish!! [45], Robot and Nascar!! [46], UA Kid!! [47] and ExtremeArmourKid as well [48].

Many users use a template-style blob in their vandalism, incorporating 9-11 imagery. Examples: [49] from the IP, [50] from OceanicFish!! and [51] from the most recently active sock are identical.

Many if not nearly all socks have vandalized Jimmie Johnson, including Sonic Wave and BlueArmour [52][53]

I realize these aren't all current but this needs to be filed for the record. Bri (talk) 02:09, 28 May 2017 (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

7 June 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Quack, quack. Obvious socks. The editing behavior pretty much gives it away; vandalism is nearly identical and there is a direct overlap at Aflac, which UnderArmourKid has been known to vandalize recently. Since the sockmaster has been generating new socks as recently as a week ago, and since the IP Range he's on right now is still unblocked, I strongly recommend a sleeper check on all of his IP ranges, and Rangeblocked wherever possible. A sockmaster of his type isn't just going to quit, and we're going to have to implement stronger measures against him. At this point, I would also recommend filing a WP:LTA report, due to his persistence and the severity of his vandalism. LightandDark2000 (talk) 22:43, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The named accounts are currently blocked; however, I listed them for reference and because their recent activity deems a sleeper check on their underlying IPs, as well as the underlying IP ranges of all known UnderArmourKid socks. LightandDark2000 (talk) 22:43, 7 June 2017 (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

21 September 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Consistent with WP:Long-term abuse/UnderArmourKid, specifically, cyclones [54][55] and 9/11 imagery [56]. Note that the first diff also introduced text "underarmourkid". ☆ Bri (talk) 00:18, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

StarLightZone1 listed for coherency, may have already been CU blocked. ☆ Bri (talk) 03:30, 21 September 2017 (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

Everyone is already blocked. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:59, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]


24 September 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

This seems like a very obvious one; see the username itself and the two edits thus far (also VOA). 65HCA7 12:45, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Edit to add another obvious one from recently. 65HCA7 12:50, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

My God, can someone please rangeblock this guy for 6 months to 1 year? I know that a Checkuser or two implemented about 3 separate 3-month rangeblocks for this guy back in March 2017 (see SPI archives); they must have expired by now. He's been mass socking for over 2 weeks now, and without any kind of larger-scale blocking at the IP level, I doubt that we will see any of this socking stop. Even 5-10 small rangeblocks would be better than letting this guy go unchecked with his IP switching. LightandDark2000 (talk) 06:58, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Added the remaining recent socks that I could find. Requesting a sleeper check on the underlying IP ranges, just to make sure we didn't miss anything (especially since the sockmaster appears to be active very recently, and could be making new socks). LightandDark2000 (talk) 07:14, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ks0stm: Please help. This is really getting out of control. Worse, this guy is also vandalizing a number of high-viewership articles (e.g. Hurricane Irma, Hurricane Maria, etc.). LightandDark2000 (talk) 22:25, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note to Checkusers, when considering rangeblocking this sockmaster, it would also be helpful to see the other sock IPs indicated in the SPI archive, and to consult with other CUs who have rangeblocked this guy in the past (such as the admin I've pinged above). LightandDark2000 (talk) 22:33, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
This IP (157.157.58.170) has also been used repeatedly during this year.

LightandDark2000 (talk) 22:37, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I would also like to see a sleeper check on all known IP ranges of this sockmaster as well (regardless of whether or not they've been used in the last 2 months), because you never know what might be lurking out there. He also appears to be creating new socks, based on recent activity. LightandDark2000 (talk) 22:44, 26 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As I thought, he's still at it. It also wouldn't hurt for admins to sift through the User Account Creation Logs for fishy accounts, until rangeblocks can be implemented. LightandDark2000 (talk) 03:43, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, this is a bloody mess. I suspect the he is in the process (or soon will be) of creating new sockpuppets. And the accounts/IPs listed above are just for the past 2 months alone, so plenty of other socks (all blocked) from earlier this year are not included. LightandDark2000 (talk) 03:58, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the blocks. By the way, this is probably long overdue, but looking at this guy's behavior, it appears that this sockmaster is an indirect meatpuppet of User:IPhonehurricane95, due to their editing similarities (in 2014 and 2016) and overlapping interests. It seems that whoever is operating the UnderArmourKid sockfarm has taken a liking to IPhonehurricane95's former (hopefully) vandalism, and has based his sockfarm on the old IPh95 account, UnderArmourKid. I'm just stating this for the record, so that any future admins and involved users will know what they are dealing with. While the UnderArmourKid sockmaster appears to operate independently of IPhonehurricane95 (especially given recent evidence that IPh95 has been inactive for 9 months now), UAK's admiration of IPh95 and emulation of the latter's vandalism means that this sockmaster may be just as persistent and disruptive as the older sockmaster, meaning that actions taken against IPhonehurricane95 in the past may also have to be taken for this user as well (such as Global Account locking). Users can reference IPhonehurricane95's SPIs to analyze behavioral similarities between the two sockmasters, and see just how UAK has taken on the mantle of vandalism that IPh95 seems to have abandoned. LightandDark2000 (talk) 20:18, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As of today, the rangeblocks appear to be effective, and there are no new sock accounts that I'm aware of. However, I advise users to be vigilant and continue to check up on the articles most frequently vandalized by this sockmaster, as you never know whether or not he will find some way to circumvent his blocks. That's another reason why I believe that a sleeper check needs to be performed on his IP ranges. LightandDark2000 (talk) 21:16, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note the use of usernames consistent with WP:Long-term abuse/UnderArmourKid. Email me if you need more specifics. ☆ Bri (talk) 20:19, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I think they're busy right now. Hopefully they will be able to run some checks and finish up this case soon. LightandDark2000 (talk) 22:29, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

10 October 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Self proclaimed duck  Velella  Velella Talk   19:34, 10 October 2017 (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

11 October 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Ducks. The first one is a dead giveaway, but the second account needs to be CU checked, because someone commented that it might be an User:Incorrigible Troll sock. Requesting a CheckUser to run a sleeper check and block the underlying IP ranges of these accounts, as this guy is still evading his block. LightandDark2000 (talk) 05:29, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ks0stm:, please help. This guy has evaded his rangeblocks. And the second account is another potential block evasion, either by UAK or by Incorrigible Troll. LightandDark2000 (talk) 05:29, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Just noticed these things about UAK and Troll. 1) both habitually drawn to hurricane articles 2) Troll's editing fills in a gap in UAK's timeline 3) both have socks containing "David". ☆ Bri (talk) 05:54, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I personally believe that those are coincidental. Both sockmasters geolocate to completely different locations (Incorrigible Troll appears to be stationed in the eastern US, but UAK is in Chile). It could be an obsession with similar stuff, or possibly with each other. The recent UAK did Hurricane Irma account is a bit interesting, given that its editing patterns didn't conform to most of what we've seen from UAK socks recently. I find what you've noted about both sockmasters very intriguing, nonetheless, if they are the same person, that would be very bad. We need a CU to run checks on all those accounts, especially the ones listed above. LightandDark2000 (talk) 06:32, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I know, Incorrigible Troll didn't start vandalizing hurricane articles until last month (with the creation of Category5AtlanticHurricaneBoy101). I could be wrong, but his recent targeting of hurricane articles appears to have started less than a month ago. LightandDark2000 (talk) 06:33, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

7 December 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Obvious ducks. Requesting a Sleeper Check and a re-blocking of all IP Ranges involved, given the persistence and severity of this vandal's disruption.

@Ks0stm: Can you please re-block the IP Ranges that UAK used within the last 6 months? He returned to vandalize almost immediately after his last 2 rangeblocks expired, and it's clear that he isn't just going to stop. The ranges 191.119.0.0/16, 191.116.0.0/16 should probably be re-blocked as well. LightandDark2000 (talk) 03:20, 8 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I also found an obvious sock account that he used to evade his rangeblocks a couple of weeks ago. The IP range for that account (now listed) needs to be blocked as well. LightandDark2000 (talk) 03:25, 8 December 2017 (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

11 December 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Obvious ducks. The articles targeted and the behavior is pretty much identical. Requesting a Sleeper Check and a re-blocking of all IP Ranges involved, given the persistence and severity of this vandal's disruption. Given his pattern of mass sock creation, it's possible that there are still some sleeper accounts lying around. LightandDark2000 (talk) 09:37, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Ks0stm and Zzuuzz: Can you please re-block the IP Ranges that UAK used within the last 6 months? 191.119.0.0/16, 191.116.0.0/16 are some of his most recent ranges, and the recent SPI cases in the archives should help as well. This vandal has been vandalizing ever since his rangeblocks wore off, and continued to sock recently almost immediately after his most recent IP block wore off. His persistent mass socking/vandalism spree is especially problematic, given his use of 9/11 imagery and targeting of high-viewership articles (e.g. Hurricane Harvey). LightandDark2000 (talk) 09:42, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, it would be very useful to create an edit/account creation filter to help nab new sock accounts before they can do any damage. An edit filter for the usernames related to "UnderArmour" or "ArmourKid" (or other common naming patterns used by this sockmaster) would prove quite useful. LightandDark2000 (talk) 09:44, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Can someone seriously please reblock his IP Ranges, and run some Sleeper Checks?? LightandDark2000 (talk) 13:07, 14 December 2017 (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

28 December 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Obvious ducks. The editing behavior and types of articles vandalizes matches the known pattern of this sockmaster. Requesting another Sleeper Check, given this vandal's penchant for serial socking. (The most recent range appears to be 201.219.236.0/22.) @Ks0stm and Zzuuzz: Can we please get rangeblocks on this guy? Given his past and recent behavior, he's only going to continue serial socking and vandalizing across multiple articles unless his ability to create more accounts and IP sock are cut off. LightandDark2000 (talk) 20:07, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, it seems that UAK is currently socking from his smartphone, so a rangeblock should probably be implemented here. LightandDark2000 (talk) 20:28, 28 December 2017 (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 January 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

Obvious ducks. The vandalism and the articles targeted by the sock is consistent with the pattern of this sockmaster. Requesting a Sleeper Check to be run, given this vandal's penchant for mass-socking, and also requesing IP blocks, if possible. LightandDark2000 (talk) 11:30, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, after viewing this sock's latest vandalism attacks, I believe that there should be an edit filter created for the addition of graphic 9/11 images in articles of topics unrelated to the event. LightandDark2000 (talk) 11:33, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

There's also another likely sock I've found: Rematch GD. He's just vandalized this very page and has put "underarmourkid" on one page. Person who formerly started with "216" (talk) 13:19, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@LightandDark2000: @Person who formerly started with "216": I've put in a request at MediaWiki talk:Bad image list for the series of images shown here (two of these were used above) to be blacklisted. Home Lander (talk) 16:38, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I had request an global lock at meta:SRG, stewards also can run a sleeper check as well. SA 13 Bro (talk) 19:20, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that account's definitely him. The username ("GD") is a direct giveaway. By the way, a rangeblock would really help here, given the serial socking exposed. LightandDark2000 (talk) 22:39, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I found another sock, UA Rocks 2.0!. LightandDark2000 (talk) 22:41, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

This case is being reviewed by Sir Sputnik as part of the clerk training process. Please allow them to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on their Talk page or on this page if more appropriate.

-- zzuuzz (talk) 19:29, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

16 February 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

see WP:Long-term abuse/UnderArmourKid - username and behavior match [57][58]. also self-identified [59] ☆ Bri (talk) 03:34, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, obvious ducks. The IPv6 IP sock could possibly be an IPhonehurricane95 sock (given the IP's geolocation and the service provider). However, given the fact that IPhonehurricane95 hasn't vandalized for 1 or 2 years, it could be UAK, using a proxy. LightandDark2000 (talk) 10:32, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Can CUs please run Sleeper Checks on the IPs and the named account? And please rangeblock the IP ranges, the vandal has already demonstrated that he will stop at nothing to vandalize Wikipedia. He returned to vandalize the day after his recent rangeblock expired. LightandDark2000 (talk) 10:32, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, for any Checkusers reading this: if the named account was created by an IP based in the US, it's probably IPhonehurricane95. Their vandalism is similar enough that only their geolocations (IPhonehurricane95 operates from the US and China, on occassions) would give them away. If the named account is linked to Chile, or has no relation to the IPv6 address, then the IPv6 sock is most likely IPhonehurricane95, which would be very problematic (long story short, his vandalism's much worse than anything UAK is capable of). Does UAK even have IPs to use in the US? LightandDark2000 (talk) 10:38, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, this is the IP Range: 2600:1:f440::/44. In addition, the rangeblock for 201.219.232.0/21 should probably be reset and extended to 6 months, due to UAK's persistent vandalism. The IPv4 range was UAK's most recent IP Range used, and it should be reblocked, given his statement here. LightandDark2000 (talk) 10:45, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

He's still socking. Can someone please block/re-block his IP Ranges for at least a few months? LightandDark2000 (talk) 13:13, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, the ranges have been blocked, but we still need a Sleeper Check, since UAK was busy IP hopping and creating new socks just an hour ago. LightandDark2000 (talk) 13:55, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, is the IP sock 2600:1:F447:D811:60D5:F1E4:6A84:F3E3 related to any of the accounts? If not, it looks like User:IPhonehurricane95 returned, and it this would require a new SPI page to be opened under his casepage. The IP's geolocation is in the United States, and the network provider is Sprint PCS (the same network provider as that of IPhonehurricane95's main IP Range), and these differences align much more closely with IPhonehurricane95's IP socks than those of the UnderArmourKid vandal / User:Lightning Sabre. LightandDark2000 (talk) 03:16, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

The IPv6 address looks like it could actually be an IPhonehurricane95 sock (IPh95 was the one that started the 9/11 imagery sh*t, along with the first "UnderArmourKid" accounts). However, if the IP is a VPN or a proxy, it's probably the operator of the UnderArmourKid sock family; that being said, if the IP in question is a VPN or proxy, the entire IP range needs to be rangeblocked for a year, per Wikipedia policy. LightandDark2000 (talk) 10:32, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

18 February 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

General Ization Talk 01:01, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

I found another sock. Given the behavior of this sockmaster, a rangeblock would be really helpful here. (The current IP range is 191.116.0.0/16.) LightandDark2000 (talk) 01:20, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that we need a Sleeper Check. LightandDark2000 (talk) 01:25, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Berean Hunter: You might want to revoke that sock's talk page access. Like User:IPhonehurricane95, UAK/Lightning Sabre has a history of using his talk page to dump vandalism and attack other users, even while blocked. The vandalism in question tends to be 9/11 imagery, and if he logs in to that account, vandalism is almost certainly guaranteed. LightandDark2000 (talk) 06:50, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 Sounds like a duck quacking into a megaphone to me Blocked. May need a CU check for sleepers, though. —C.Fred (talk) 01:02, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

01 March 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

Quack. The account name matches a known naming pattern used by some UAK socks (look at some accounts in the SPI archive), and the vandalism from this account is identical to some of the vandalism observed from past UnderArmourKid socks. Please also run a Sleeper Check, since this vandal is known for leaving behind Sleepers. If this account is UAK, a 3-6 month rangeblock should be implemented on the underlying IP range in order to prevent further socking. LightandDark2000 (talk) 11:45, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If this is him, he is probably using the IP range 191.119.0.0/16 to sock, since that range is currently his only unblocked IP range (in recent history). And if he is currently socking with this range, the IP range should be rangeblocked for 6 months to prevent further abuse. LightandDark2000 (talk) 12:15, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@DeltaQuad and Bri: Okay. Well, if it is another sockmaster, then are the socks Cacgv and Cacgv1 (which I've just added above) also socks of User:Brendar 1214? Those 2 sock accounts vandalized the same article before a few days before the SpacePenguin25 account. The possible impersonation is interesting, but if true, it would also indicate a troubling trend. LightandDark2000 (talk) 20:02, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

@LightandDark2000: I'm just not seeing enough behavior matchups with the LTA listed at the top of this page. Vandalism to a hurricane isn't enough on it's own to convince me it's him. UAK has quite a few quirks to go on. More than that I'd rather not say; some LTAs monitor their own sockpuppet investigations. ☆ Bri (talk) 21:22, 2 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

21 March 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

DUCK per blanking on cyclone pages EvergreenFir (talk) 18:54, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

It is an unusual username for UAK but the cyclone blanking is suspicious. Also the apparent taunt in one edit summary. ☆ Bri (talk) 18:56, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm starting to think from the last couple of reports here (post-CU), there's some kind of copycat ☆ Bri (talk) 19:27, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

21 March 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

Obvious sock is obvious (see the user's edit summaries). CheckUser would be to check for sleepers and/or effect rangeblocks. Jasper Deng (talk) 19:46, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

How about User:JotCeVauDe? The vandalism is quite similar compared to that of the other recent accounts. Is this also a sock of Vandyrandy, or is it a sock of User:Wikinger? LightandDark2000 (talk) 01:44, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
In any event, the underlying IP range(s) of Vandyrandy and JotCeVauDe need to be Rangeblocked for at least 1 month, in order to cut off this rapid socking spree, if they haven't been blocked yet. LightandDark2000 (talk) 04:04, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, according to this discussion, JotCeVauDe is a sock of Wikinger, while the other impersonator accounts are all socks of Vandyrandy. LightandDark2000 (talk) 06:31, 23 March 2018 (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

It's an impersonator. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Vandyrandy. -- zzuuzz (talk) 20:34, 21 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

17 August 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

Sock. Source Content Self-Maker (talk) 18:19, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Obvious sock is obvious. A CheckUser might not even be needed here, since I've already filed a report at m:SRG. LightandDark2000 (talk) 19:18, 17 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

20 August 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

WP:Duck. IP and TLG on Aflac (both) and TLG on Bass Pro Shops (see here fav target of the master. JC7V-constructive zone 14:11, 20 August 2018 (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

22 September 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

Obvious ducks. Requesting a CheckUser to run a Sleeper Check, due to this LTA's tendency for mass sock account creations and leaving behind sleeper accounts. Also, please rangeblock the underlying IP range of the first 3 listed accounts for at least 3–6 months (12 months is ideal), because without rangeblocks, this LTA's history has shown that he will soon return to sock and vandalizing articles en masse, likely at a much higher pace than before (September 2017 is a good analog for comparing his vandalism activity). The underlying IP range(s) is likely one of the 3 that I've listed above, but it could be different. 🌀 LightandDark2000 (talk) 04:23, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Zzuuzz, Ks0stm, and Berean Hunter: Can you please take a look at this report? This LTA needs to be rangeblocked before he can return to resume his mass vandalism. Thanks. 🌀 LightandDark2000 (talk) 04:23, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Those accounts are within the CU time horizon, but the underlying IPs of The Lab games has already been blocked (the IP range of CriticalFusionGD is currently unblocked, though). 🌀 LightandDark2000 (talk) 04:49, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think that Architect 134 is behind any of the accounts from this month, though Namedmaker and UAK strikes again! appear to be his attempts to imitate IPhonehurricane95, an unrelated sockmaster that UAK/Lightning Sabre is imitating in his copycat vandalism and unblock requests. 🌀 LightandDark2000 (talk) 07:17, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

All accounts are confirmed UAK except Namedmaker, who is Architect 134. I am confident that UAK has been impersonated several times by Architect 134. Any further IP blocks are not appropriate at this time. -- zzuuzz (talk) 07:56, 22 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

06 December 2019

Suspected sockpuppets

See this diff from one of the vandal edits: Special:Diff/929528808. Was also on one of the "targeted" pages listed at UnderArmourKid's long-term abuse page. Master of Time (talk) 11:52, 6 December 2019 (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 December 2019

Suspected sockpuppets

Recent edits to this very page (among others), obviously. No CU needed to know. Master of Time (talk) 12:00, 6 December 2019 (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

Also blocked, closing. GABgab 23:33, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

28 August 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

This LTA has generated new accounts within the past few months. However, I don't recall a sleeper check being run on any of them (I don't recall a CU being run on any of this LTA's socks in months). The IP range definitely belongs to him, given the behavior, and the pattern of vandalism there leads me to believe that he is currently using the same IP range (if this is the case, a CU on the range should reveal some sock accounts). Please run a sleeper check on both the accounts and the IP range, because this LTA has a long history of serial socking and leaving behind sleepers. And if he has been abusing the range recently, the IP range should receive a multi-month rangeblock, because otherwise, nothing will stop him from continuing to vandalize this site. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 19:31, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Berean Hunter, Ivanvector, and Zzuuzz: Can someone please run a sleeper check and apply the IP blocks? Thanks. LightandDark2000 🌀 (talk) 19:32, 28 August 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

17 November 2020

Suspected sockpuppets


Similar usernames of master and same pattern of disruption. Creating SPI retro-actively for record-keeping and historical purposes. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:38, 17 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

Also found and  Confirmed:
UA Rocks 3.0! (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
MoreUAKS (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
HalyconXL (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
StarLightZone3 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
CatrillancaArmour (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
All have been indef'd and tagged. Created SPI report retro-actively after running into the two accounts in the new user log. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:41, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

11 November 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

On the Spanish Wikipedia, several Mexico City Metro/Santiago Metro-related pages are protected due to vandalism by a user commonly called "Conejo" (Rabbit).[60][61][62]

Apparently the user, whose original account is named "HabíaUnaVezUnConejo" (OnceUponATimeARabbit), now globally locked, has now moved here.[63]

All the new accounts have edited Aflac[64], and as you can see with Onceuponatime, Sebastián Piñera is a common target as well.[65][66] (CC) Tbhotch™ 15:53, 11 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

 Stale
HabiaUnaVezUnConejo (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
No comment in respect to their connectivity to the master. Accounts are indef'd and tagged. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:03, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19 November 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Same vandalism and same "HCH"; also see below discussion.

 Looks like a duck to me  Sounds like a duck quacking into a megaphone to me Firestar464 (talk) 12:17, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

This is pretty clearly UAK or a copycat, as is Chadwick is a ShatBat (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). I've requested glocks for the three. Best, Blablubbs (talk • contribs) 12:20, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nosebagbear Blablubbs Are these all (possible) socks? If so, a CheckUser may be needed. Firestar464 (talk) 10:35, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Firestar464, these are socks, yes. Since they're all ducks, and all globally locked (and an associated IP has been globally blocked for a month), the main use of CU I can see here would be to run a sleeper check and see if any other underlying IPs are blockable. I also assume that this case should be merged into the relevant SPI. Blablubbs (talk • contribs) 10:57, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Blablubbs How do we run the sleeper check? Merged. Firestar464 (talk) 11:26, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

03 December 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

Vandalizing the Jimmie Johnson, Richard Petty, and American Airlines Flight 11 articles, like other socks have done. NASCARfan0548 ↗ 19:31, 3 December 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

31 December 2020

Suspected sockpuppets

I'm pretty sure this is Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/UnderArmourKid, vandalism on cyclone Larry with one asking for an unblock of Underarmourkid (see rockman x5 talk page). If it is him then global locks will probably be needed. Pahunkat (talk) 12:33, 31 December 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

02 January 2021

Suspected sockpuppets

First three edits match documented interests of LTA: NASCAR, Aflac, Home Depot/Office Depot.

Note that another sock was at Home Depot a few tens of hours ago [68], also Richard Petty [69] where they explicitly claim to be the LTA. ☆ Bri (talk) 19:33, 2 January 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

 Likely
UAK 2021 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Bagging and tagging confirmed sock. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 21:31, 2 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

02 February 2021

Suspected sockpuppets

Obvious due to edits. Report and CU request made solely for sleeper check, as this LTA is known to have sleepers. Steve M (talk) 17:47, 2 February 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

Confirmed and  No sleepers immediately visible -- zzuuzz (talk) 18:09, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

03 February 2021

Suspected sockpuppets

As usual, this LTA has sleepers, so a CU will rat out all the sleepers. Steve M (talk) 18:19, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

@Oshwah: Is it possible to check 6 new Uaks? Steve M (talk) 20:25, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

03 February 2021

Suspected sockpuppets

@Drmies and LightandDark2000: You've dealt with this guy before, presumably. L&D2K believes it's him. here ~ Destroyeraa🌀🇺🇸 20:27, 3 February 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

09 February 2021

Suspected sockpuppets

CU to catch sleepers. Sock is obvious based on edits. Steve M (talk) 13:15, 9 February 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

10 February 2021

Suspected sockpuppets

Sleeper check as usual. Edit summary confirms sock. Steve M (talk) 23:02, 10 February 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

More