Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/بوكوس/Archive

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.


بوكوس

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

19 January 2024

Suspected sockpuppets

Clear WP:DUCK and WP:BLOCKEVADE. بوكوس was previously edit-warring to claim the Almohads were involved in the Siege of Jerusalem (1187) ([1], [2], [3], [4], [5]). A few days after that account was blocked, Tariq ibn ziyad 07, a new account, is doing the same: [6], [7], [8]. R Prazeres (talk) 19:31, 19 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Note that a second account spotted by CU below, Tariqi ibn yiad, is also repeating the same very specific edit-warring that بوكوس was doing at Battle of Hattin: compare [9] with [10], [11], [12], [13] (also related to the edit-warring at Siege of Jerusalem). CU shows them as likely different people, but they're surely related in some way, as meatpuppets at least. R Prazeres (talk) 17:45, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Likewise with Iacop almansor (see CU below), continuing the edit-warring at Siege of Jerusalem: [14]. R Prazeres (talk) 17:48, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • Group 2  Confirmed to each other:

29 January 2024

Suspected sockpuppets

Likely a sock of Tariq ibn ziyad 07 and/or بوكوس. Both have been confirmed as using sockpuppet accounts already (see archived case here). For some reason, Tariq ibn ziyad 07 was not blocked in the process, not sure if this was on purpose or an oversight?

In any case, Tariq ibn ziyad 07 edited the infobox at Battle of Alarcos to add a clutter of tangential claims ([15]), and only a few minutes later Abu yusuf iacob, a brand new account, began editing and fixing that same edit and adding one of the unsourced details from it into the body of the article ([16]).

More indirectly: Abu yusuf iacob's other edits are consistently about Moroccan military history, follow the same POV (pro-"Moroccan", if you'll pardon the oversimplification), resort to edit-warring, and engage in zero communication with other editors, which looks consistent with the socks reported in the previous case. E.g.: those socks were edit-warring at Battle of Hattin and Siege of Jerusalem (1187) to incorrectly add the Almohads (a predecessor state in Morocco) to the infobox there (بوكوس : [17], [18], [19], [20], [21]; Tariq ibn ziyad 07: [22], [23], [24]). Abu yusuf iacob is leaving those articles alone so far but is edit-warring over the infobox at Battle of Wadi al-Laban to introduce a "Moroccan victory", again with no attempt at communication: [25], [26], [27]. R Prazeres (talk) 18:12, 29 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Abu yusuf iacob has been indef blocked after they escalated to outright vandalism. Tariq ibn ziyad 07 is still unblocked, but we'll see if they continue to be active. R Prazeres (talk) 20:02, 29 January 2024 (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 February 2024

Suspected sockpuppets

Clear WP:DUCK of Ahmad almanzur, who was blocked two days before this sock appeared. Ahmad almanzur's only edits were mass deletions and partial rewrites of Battle of Alcácer Quibir: [28], [29], [30]. Arnoldcofcnait's only edit is to do the same: [31].

In addition to the deletions, one consistent detail is the redundant addition of "Decisive" in the infobox result parameter and the change of "[[Saadi Sultanate|Sultanate of Morocco]]" to "[[File:Flag of Morocco (1258-1659).svg|22px]] [[Saadi dynasty|Sultanate of Morocco]]". R Prazeres (talk) 16:42, 24 February 2024 (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

25 February 2024

Suspected sockpuppets

A likely WP:DUCK of Tariq ibn ziyad 07 and , former socks of بوكوس. New account re-adding material to Battle of Alarcos ([32]) that only Tariq ibn ziyad 07 and Abu yusuf iacob ever added to this article ([33]), plus some other unsourced changes.

بوكوس has had multiple simultaneous sock accounts in the past, requesting CU in case they have others. R Prazeres (talk) 17:28, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Ahmad al dahbi's additions of {{pp}} templates to unprotected articles ([34], [35]) is a very peculiar behaviour that rings a bell to me as something I saw a similar disruptive/sock account do in the past. I couldn't find this in the edit history of the known socks, but I'm noting it here in case it turns out to be a recurring behaviour. R Prazeres (talk) 17:33, 25 February 2024 (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've added Exiver009 to the list and will block shortly.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:14, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Blocked and tagged. Leaving CU request. Bbb23 (talk) 17:14, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Good blocks, but not seeing anything else. Closing case. Courcelles (talk) 19:44, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

29 February 2024

Suspected sockpuppets

Obvious continuation of WP:BLOCKEVADE as each was created and edited Almohad campaign against Portugal (1190–1191) in quick succession:

1. [36]

2. [37]

3. [38]

4. [39] XxTechnicianxX (talk) 20:26, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Please note that I've filed a similar SPI at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ahmad almanzur and requested a CU. I believe the accounts here are definitely socks of Ahmad almanzur, based on some of the other available evidence, but I also suspect that sockmasters Ahmad almanzur and بوكوس are ultimately the same or related. I've noted the suggestion there ([40]). Thanks, R Prazeres (talk) 21:05, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

29 February 2024

Suspected sockpuppets

Clear WP:DUCK (Ahmad al mustansir) vandalizing/edit-warring in similar way at the same article (Battle of Alcácer Quibir) as previous socks. Compare e.g.: [41], [42], [43] with [44]. R Prazeres (talk) 19:08, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And already adding more: Ahmad al mustansir and two other new SPA accounts, Explorantexiv889 and Sendifox, are all participating in the same edit-war at Almohad campaign against Portugal (1190–1191): [45], [46]. The behaviour is obvious, but given these multiple simultaneous accounts, I'm adding a request for CU to find any others. R Prazeres (talk) 19:28, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Now adding Isaqnewt008 for same reason ([47]). R Prazeres (talk) 19:33, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Adding this comment separately here: please note that an overlapping SPI request has been made at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/بوكوس. Is it possible for CU to look into any connection between the Ahmad almanzur socks and those of بوكوس?
They both engage in very similar POV disruptions over similar topics. It's especially suspicious at Almohad campaign against Portugal (1190–1191), which has been disrupted by both Ahmad almanzur's apparent socks (as noted above) and بوكوس's confirmed socks ([48], [49]). R Prazeres (talk) 20:58, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  •  Clerk assistance requested: Can this be merged to the aforementioned case?-- Ponyobons mots 21:37, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done, Redirect arrow Global lock(s) requested, closing. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 02:09, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

16 March 2024

Suspected sockpuppets

Clear WP:DUCK socks of بوكوس: two new accounts created at the same time whose only edits are to repeat the edits of previous socks at Almohad campaign against Portugal (1190–1191). Compare these edits by Xcappa999: [50], [51], [52]; with these edits by previous socks: [53], [54], [55], [56] (note the repeated addition of an infobox and especially the deletion of the phrase about Évora). Xriver552 is even more obvious, appearing immediately after Xcappa999 was reverted and restoring the latter's edits: [57]. R Prazeres (talk) 09:03, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And for good measure, see also this, an obvious repeat of this previous sock edit. R Prazeres (talk) 09:10, 16 March 2024 (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

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/بوكوس/Archive&oldid=1217279573"