Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BumpBoBmansw/Archive

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

Suspected sockpuppets

• FksdiwBob (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Gfc fgvy (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• BumpManWNB (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Bumpbobwoll (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

• User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
• Editor interaction utility

All of these accounts were created either in January, or February in the case of Bumpbobwoll, and all have the exact same MO: they change the end dates of anime/manga series to "ongoing" to make it appear a series hasn't ended yet. Diffs include: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], as well as all of the other edits from these accounts. Multiple articles have been targeted by multiple accounts, including Ben-To (3 times, 3 accounts), Heaven's Lost Property (3 times, 2 accounts) and Chobits (2 times, 2 accounts). 十八 22:58, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Note Filer is a (now) blocked sockmaster. -- WV ● ✉ ✓ 02:30, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Winkelvi: No one has been blocked at this time as far as I can tell. And you made the same remark at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Taospark.--十八 04:15, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Self-endorsed by clerk for checkuser attention - @Winkelvi: User:Juhachi is not blocked and never was. I'm endorsing the CU check because the evidence is overwhelming. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:17, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• @Vanjagenije: There's no need for CheckUser in obvious cases where there's no history of sleepers, they just need an admin to deal with them. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:22, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Suspected sockpuppets

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

• User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
• Editor interaction utility

The user is back under a new account; see diffs [8], [9] and [10]. This is the exact same MO as before with the oldest account as in [11] and in subsequent socks including [12], [13], [14], [15], [16] and [17].--十八 20:38, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

•  Clerk note: Juhachi, please show some diffs of both the suspected sock and master. Try to explain their similarity. Vanjagenije (talk) 19:27, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• CheckUser requested - Self-endorsed by clerk for checkuser attention - Might be more of them. Vanjagenije (talk) 23:10, 23 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• As with the last case, which Callanecc declined, this can just be handled as a WP:DUCK case. I've blocked the account accordingly.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:59, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]