[go: up one dir, main page]
Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rishabisajakepauler/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Rishabisajakepauler

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

26 October 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

An editor has been blocked by Ad Orientem for disruptive editing and using multiple accounts by using range 2600:1700:1113:2C40:0:0:0:0/64, it seems that the editor is back again using multiple accounts. This editor have a history of creating unsourced articles [1] [2] [3], and it appears the editor again creating articles without adding any sources [4] [5]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 20:12, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

The IP4s are the exact same geolocation as the blocked IP6, so that's a certainty. This article-from-redirect shows the same pattern by RobTheGreat454, in the same area of interest (hip hop music and rappers). Although RobTheGreat454's version of the article has references, there are portions of it violating WP:NOR: "It is worth noting that on the same day..." The sequence of editing shows a connection between the Frisco, Texas, IPs and the registered account, with a very new redirect-to-article made by the IP, then "discovered" by the registered account a half hour later, continuing to build the new article.[6][7] I think these are all the same person, IPs and RobTheGreat454. Binksternet (talk) 12:30, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Binksternet: This is clearly the same editor, after one of the IPs got blocked by Widr just recently, the editor start to used the registered account and going back to the same articles as before. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 17:45, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

05 November 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Creating unsourced articles again. 4thfile4thrank {talk} :? 01:36, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

@RoySmith: This editor have a history of creating unsourced articles [8] [9] [10], and it appears the editor again creating articles without adding any sources [11] [12]. according to TheAmazingPeanuts in the archive. And the guy you mentioned had no socks for a long time (Almost over a year) and is presumably inactive, while Rishabisajakepauler has recent sock accounts. 4thfile4thrank {talk} :? 03:25, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

4thfile4thrank, I'm checking out for today, but I'll try take another look tomorrow. I do feel the need to point out, however, that creating unsourced articles doesn't strike me as strong socking evidence. If we called everybody who created unsourced articles a sock, we'd be up to our navels in hosiery. -- RoySmith (talk) 03:30, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@RoySmith Maybe run a random chesk? These accounts look like they have to be socks of somebody. 4thfile4thrank {talk} :? 03:36, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Drmies and RoySmith: Maybe Mattcataco could be a sock of Sammy? Sammy started in 2015, while Matt started a few days ago. 4thfile4thrank {talk} :? 15:19, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
  • CheckUser requested and endorsed by clerk - I'm still pretty dubious that Mattcataco2 and Sammy2012 are Rishabisajakepauler socks, but it does seem clear that they're socks of somebody, so reluctantly endorsing this under WP:NOTFISHING. As noted earlier, they could be related to LA2002. In fact, now that I look at it again, my sock-o-meter is lighting up in that direction. It's Drmies who blocked that sock drawer, and the diffs I noted earlier are both revert-waring with Drmies. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:02, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Declined. There's no evidence that this Rishabisajakepauler. Neither of the people listed above are even editing rappers. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 20:16, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Clerk note: I'm going to go ahead and close this. The obvious suspects didn't get confirmed, and it's obvious the hints dropped are as far as CU is going to go. My next thought was to block Mattcataco2 as NOTHERE, but reading this, if I put on my AGF glasses, crank up the prescription to 11, and squint hard, I could accept that explanation. If it turns out they really are a miscreant, it'll be obvious soon enough. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:06, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

22 February 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Restoring What It Feels Like (song), Template:Nipsey Hussle and generally behaving like Rapper0212: interaction and plenty more in the /64. Certes (talk) 22:22, 22 February 2021 (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]

31 March 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


User Rishabisajakepauler has already been blocked, a while ago, as well as numerous of their sockpuppets (range blocked), as recently as last month (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rishabisajakepauler/Archive. However, this IP, who edited for the first time three days ago, has a similar range and is clearly an experienced user, shown through their rapid editing of hip hop articles (which was what Rishabisajakepauler edited mostly too), and creating new articles, over the course of a day or two. Also, the editor posted to user Doggy54321's userpage asking for help with uploading cover art (see here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Diff/1014786092); as Doggy54321 posted a month ago in the original SPI (Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rishabisajakepauler/Archive#Comments by other users), one of Rishabisajakepauler's IPs had also previously asked them [Doggy54321] for help before getting blocked, which makes this all the more suspicious. AshMusique (talk) 22:16, 31 March 2021 (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]

22 April 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

This IP of Rishabisajakepauler was blocked a month ago for block evasion. Their edits from that IP were mostly editing hip hop articles and creating new articles, in the space of a day/two days. This new IP has performed way too similar edits, also in the space of less than a day, and they seem very knowledgeable of how Wikipedia works. They created new articles here, here, and here. AshMusique (talk) 09:37, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

Hi NinjaRobotPirate, since you blocked the previous IP, could you please kindly check this one out? Thank you. AshMusique (talk) 08:17, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

05 June 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Same modus operandi of creating new hip hop articles in the space of a couple of days, moving redirects around (please see contribs), and asking other users to perform extended confirmed edits for them: as seen on :CAMERAwMUSTACHE's talk page - in the same fashion as their previous sock did here. Exactly the same editing behavior exposed in their previous SPI. Pinging NinjaRobotPirate as they were involved in their previous block. AshMusique (talk) AshMusique (talk) 09:35, 5 June 2021 (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]
  • I did a couple blocks based on behavioral evidence. 99.71.209.242 is getting kind of stale, and there's doesn't seem to be anything else on the IP range that would justify a preventative block. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 16:40, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

18 June 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Back again creating hip hop articles, and an article for a Maroon 5 song; clearly has an interest in Maroon 5, as one of their previous socks created another article for a Maroon 5 song, here. Also, moving around a redirect to an article they created as is their fashion. Also returned to restore redirected articles, as can be seen at Ice Daddy, and the latter two IPs restoring the Top Chef Gotit article. Pinging NinjaRobotPirate who is familiar with this sockpuppeteer. AshMusique (talk) 11:41, 18 June 2021 (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]

05 July 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Editing and creating hip hop articles as is their fashion of editing. Also, editing the same articles that a previous sock of theirs edited: previous sock vs current; previous vs current; previous vs current. Pinging NinjaRobotPirate as they are familiar with this sockpuppeteer. AshMusique (talk) 21:17, 5 July 2021 (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]

14 July 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Similar range as most recently blocked sock, and repeated M.O of editing hip hop articles. AshMusique (talk) 09:32, 14 July 2021 (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]

05 August 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Usual MO of moving around redirects, mass editing of hip hop articles, and creating articles, including ones that were previously created by now-blocked socks of theirs, here and here. Also, two of the socks editing the same article, here and here. Also, restoring their own edits, here vs here. AshMusique (talk) 10:24, 5 August 2021 (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]
  • Blocked based on behavioral evidence, except for 12.184.218.61, which I think might be a wifi hotspot. I think my earlier blocks have been too short for such sticky IP addresses, but I'd rather err on the side of caution for this one. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:41, 6 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

12 August 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Back again, restoring a redirected article that one of their previous socks created recently. Also, the second IP editing and enforcing the same edits and editing the same topics as one of their previous socks did, notably the same article from above diffs, here, and here vs now-blocked sock here. AshMusique (talk) 18:42, 12 August 2021 (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]

21 September 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Possible block evasion by Rishabisajakepauler who have a history of going back to hip hop-related articles [13] [14] [15] [16]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 23:31, 21 September 2021 (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]

28 September 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Using the same edit summary ("Start.") that now-blocked socks of theirs used before when creating new articles; see here, here vs edit from this sock which I'm reporting, here. Also, again asking another user to perform edits for them, as they have previously done here and here. AshMusique (talk) 20:34, 28 September 2021 (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]

18 October 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Back again, using an an expired blocked IP adress which they were previously blocked from, and using that IP adress to ask another user to perform edits for them, as is their M.O: asking to upload cover art for the song, Lonely (DaBaby and Lil Wayne song) + also returned to that same user's talk page, asking them to perform an edit for them, here; this is connected to them editing that same article (Lonely (DaBaby and Lil Wayne song) again: changing a redirect to that article, after creating the article. AshMusique (talk) 11:02, 18 October 2021 (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]

27 October 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Went to the talk page of the same user who a now-blocked sock of theirs went to before, recently, asking to upload a song's cover art for them, exactly as the now-blocked sock did too (see difffs). Also, as is their M.O, creating a hip hop article article, and then changing redirect targets to that article, [17] [18], as they previously did here and here. Second IP returned to restore the article after it was redirected, as can be seen here. AshMusique (talk) 20:11, 27 October 2021 (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]

28 November 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Constant restoration of Top Chef Gotit, similar to a previous IP sock with similar content. Edit summaries and Talk page behavior have also gotten similarly aggressive. Requesting CheckUser for possible connection as well as for sleeper accounts. Jalen Folf (talk) 23:45, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cabayi, note that previous IP 12.251.184.78 (talk+ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log)), currently blocked as an IP sock to this master, had also attempted to recreate this page as well with similar content: [19]. Similar content restoration from ForeverUnknown55555, with supposed improvements that occurred between diffs as well as similar edit summary, can be seen here: [20]. Courtesy pinging AshMusique to this investigation as an involved user in the matter. Jalen Folf (talk) 17:40, 29 November 2021 (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]
  •  Clerk note: JalenFolf, what is the WP:ILLEGIT behaviour? There's no overlap between the two "sock" accounts, no evidence provided that they are Rishabisajakepauler... Cabayi (talk) 12:19, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Clerk endorsed - This master has used IPs for so long that seing sock accounts is a throwback to their earliest behaviour. They used sleepers before. A check for sleepers now seems justifiable. Cabayi (talk) 19:13, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • ForeverUnknown378  Confirmed to ForeverUnknown55555.  No sleepers immediately visible. I spot checked a few of the IPs mentioned in the archives; they all geolocate near each other but far away from the IPs Forever is using, so I'm inclined to say Red X Unrelated. -- RoySmith (talk) 19:59, 29 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • One IP edit to Top Chef Gotit from June is certainly similar to that of the ForeverUnknown accounts, but I don't see anything else to connect the ForeverUnknowns to any other account or IP address, and I do see a number of striking differences. I also don't see "similar edit summary": they look quite different to me. I therefore see no reason to conclude that theses are sockpuppets, and I am closing this without action. JBW (talk) 20:09, 30 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

14 December 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

IP is editing a wide range of hip-hop and other discography articles, as well as deleting sources that are still needed (1, 2, and there are several others) which is similar to a previous IP 1, 2. They are also asking other users to upload cover art for them here like earlier socks here and here. CAMERAwMUSTACHE (talk) 23:44, 14 December 2021 (UTC) CAMERAwMUSTACHE (talk) 23:44, 14 December 2021 (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]

23 December 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

IP continues to make similar edits including removing references and asking users with more access to perform actions for them. (See previous socks doing the same.) CAMERAwMUSTACHE (talk) 16:29, 23 December 2021 (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]
  • Looks like they've already moved on to a new IP, so blocking is pointless. However, I've thrown some ECP around to the discography pages they've been editing. And, I demand hazard duty pay for having to deal with Justin Bieber. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:59, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

31 December 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

This IP of Rishabisajakepauler was blocked 6 months ago for block evasion (see talk page), and they are now back again, editing their usual pages, and once again asking another user to upload cover art for them, here. AshMusique (talk) 17:58, 31 December 2021 (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]

03 February 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

The user is back again with the same unsourced additions and reference removals as the previous accounts https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Juice_Wrld_discography&diff=prev&oldid=1061638613 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Juice_Wrld_discography&diff=next&oldid=1061640960 CAMERAwMUSTACHE (talk) 02:11, 3 February 2022 (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]
  • Same types of edits to the same pages from a range they've used repeatedly previously, blocked for a week. Was planning on applying semi protection on just previous targets, but given the large degree of overlap with previous socks (or likely socks that didn't get properly investigated) and most of the rest being for new albums I decided on protecting almost all pages they edited for a month. I noticed RoySmith used ECP in for this purpose in the past but I don't see this as justified currently when there's no documentation of them using accounts for many months. --Trialpears (talk) 03:55, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

26 February 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

A dead giveaway here was that this IP asked another user to upload cover art for them here, as since-blocked IPs of theirs have done multiple times before, as displayed in the archives of this SPi, [21], [22], [23]. Also, as is their usual MO, they moved around song redirects [24], [25] (they always do this after creating articles, for reference). AshMusique (talk) 17:58, 26 February 2022 (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 March 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Back to their usual M.O. of creating hip hop articles, moving around redirects, and once again, asking another user to upload cover art for them, [26]. AshMusique (talk) 06:14, 26 March 2022 (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]

07 April 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

So Rishabisajakepauler is seemingly a fan of Justin Bieber, regularly creating Bieber-related articles (from redirects), spanning from Bieber's own songs to songs Bieber is featured on. I knew this was them, again removing a redirect, of a Bieber-featured song, because from what I discovered, they are practically the only IP editor that creates songs for Bieber's articles. I blanked the article and redirected it, per WP:EVADE, intending to file an SPi report immediately, but didn't get to it in time. Anyway, they made things very easy as they basically admitted that they are Rishab; after I redirected the article and called them out for their tendency to ask other users to upload covers for them, they responded, on a different IP, with: "This time, I did not ask anyone to add a cover for anything (...) And it is a Justin Bieber article, so basically, every article for a single by or featuring him needs an article". Clearly a Bieber fan. On another IP, they returned to said article, here and here, and created a related article. On yet another IP, they headed to WP:AFC/R, requesting for an alternately spelled redirect of Up at Night (song) to be created, subsequently recreating it there. They've also made a habit of abusing the Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Redirects and categories noticeboard to get users to create redirects for them so that they can create articles on, just three examples – [27] [28] [29]. I kindly advise for all these IPs to get blocked, as Rishab makes it a habit of returning to old IPs. AshMusique (talk) 19:13, 7 April 2022 (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]

12 April 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Trying to get another user to restore their now-redirected article, as reported in the previous SPi. AshMusique (talk) 09:11, 12 April 2022 (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 April 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Restoring article created by 172.58.108.88, who is blocked for evading Rishabisajakepauler's block. 108.217.3.222 has also been previously blocked several times for the same reason. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 22:31, 17 April 2022 (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]

19 April 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Created article after having requested on a different (blocked) IP for the redirect to be created. AshMusique (talk) 18:03, 19 April 2022 (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]

05 May 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

First sock of Rishab was blocked for socking in November 2020 and now they're back to their usual M.O. of editing/removing redirects of hip hop articles and Justin Bieber-related articles and using misleading edit summaries as to not look like a sock, [30]. Second sock was active about a week before, making links to the articles (Honest (Justin Bieber song) and Hold That Heat) the first sock created, [31], [32], [33], [34]. Third IP was editing Bieber-related articles, and making edits to articles the second sock edited: [35] vs [36]; [37] vs [38]. AshMusique (talk) 11:56, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

We are not that gullible. You always lie so easily. AshMusique (talk) 08:15, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@TheAmazingPeanuts:, @Binksternet:, it is them. They also just used this similar range from Washington, [44]. They denied it's them, right in this SPi, [45] (they reverted that reply), but they've edited from other ranges before and then have also denied it's them, so this is just part of their M.O. AshMusique (talk) 05:21, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

06 July 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

It seems this user has a history of making multiple accounts. From this message from an editor on the IPs talk page they are violating the guidelines: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:64.40.1.140 Btspurplegalaxy 🗩 🖉 05:45, 6 July 2022 (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]

16 September 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Continued once again after his block expired. He even admitted to being a sock of Rishabisajakepauler on his talk page.Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 02:30, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They show which IP ranges have been used by the sockmaster, indicating which rangeblocks might be placed. Binksternet (talk) 16:16, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Is there a 107.128 IP range? Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 16:24, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see any behavioral matches in the range Special:Contributions/107.128.0.0/18, except for the IP you listed at the top here. That IP is by itself. Binksternet (talk) 16:38, 16 September 2022 (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 October 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Requesting other users to make redirects for him, which is typical of the previous socks. ( compare this and this). Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 20:06, 17 October 2022 (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 November 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

I suspect a much earlier sockpuppeteer exists, but I can't point them out. This one is a WP:DUCK considering the dates, things like Special:Diff/1121105426 vs. Special:Diff/1121783588, this history or this. That should be enough but I request CU to identify sleepers and maybe the earlier sockpuppeteer. Muhandes (talk) 14:35, 17 November 2022 (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]
  • The accounts above are  Confirmed. I couldn't see any others / an older master unfortunately. Blocked, tagged, closing. We can always revisit this case if more evidence is found to link it to another. firefly ( t · c ) 16:44, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

1 January 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Possible block evasion by 556greentip [50] [51] [52] [53] [54] [55]. TheAmazingPeanuts (talk) 17:23, 1 January 2023 (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]

07 January 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Sahbabi04 is doing the same things as blocked socks 556greentip and Ppok ll.[56][57]

There is a strong behavioral match to the case Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Rishabisajakepauler, with the same behavior as Texas IPs such as the range Special:Contributions/172.58.0.0/16. The behavior is always adding new song articles, especially by creating song articles from existing redirects, and adding cross-wiki connections to same. If the connection to Rishabisajakepauler is to be investigated, then the Texas IP 50.84.2.226 (and a non-Texas behavioral match IP 99.62.159.193) were active recently.

CU requested to compare cases and search for sleepers. Binksternet (talk) 03:06, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The point about the IP addresses was to make a connection between 556greentip and Rishabisajakepauler. Earlier discussions about 556greentip included conjecture about an earlier sockpuppet account, and I think I've found it. Binksternet (talk) 19:14, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do I need to reset the CU parameter to "yes"? Binksternet (talk) 01:00, 11 January 2023 (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 July 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Rishabisajakepauler IPs have tried to get new redirects made[58] so that the IPs can create articles.[59] Rishabisajakepauler also creates sockpuppets to write new articles from redirects. The first edit by new user 7amiwas was to add a reference to "rap rock" cited to a reference with an access-date of five months earlier.[60] That same reference had been added by now-blocked IP Special:Contributions/70.113.1.139.[61]

After 7amiwas was reverted, IP Special:Contributions/2600:6C48:763F:2A47:E0C4:5A1B:D957:82C0 swooped in to restore within minutes. The username and the IP are clearly connected.

Checkuser requested to check for sleepers. Binksternet (talk) 20:25, 11 July 2023 (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 October 2024

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Soulinend repeated the actions of several previous socks. Example 1.[62][63] Example 2.[64][65][66] Example 3.[67][[68][69]

NinjaRobotPirate said two months ago that Soulinend was "obviously" running two other accounts: User:Soucolein and User:Mokry76.[70]

Checkuser requested to make certain, and to sweep for sleepers.

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]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Rishabisajakepauler/Archive&oldid=1253815682"