Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Maya515/Archive

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.


Maya515

Maya515 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log· investigate · cuwiki)

20 August 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Quack.[1][2] SummerPhDv2.0 01:05, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Prior to socking as Smallness88 (a previously blocked account), OofS admits to socking after the block today.[3] I'm guessing a CU is in order. - SummerPhDv2.0 01:10, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

From what it looks like, this OofS account was just created yesterday! I however, created my account months ago! The previous block was due to my kid brother repeatedly messing up a completely unrelated page! Since then, I have always taken my laptop into the bathroom with me for this reason! Smallness88 (talk) 01:45, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
After several IP's today were blocked from posting rants on the science ref desk in support of quackery [how ironic is that?], the user in question turned up to make the same arguments. Obviously a sock with an agenda. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots02:34, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 Looks like a duck to me. If not a duck, then a goose. Ian.thomson (talk) 02:44, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


09 September 2016

Suspected sockpuppets


Yet Another User 2 was actually created a few days before MegaMan1988 registered, but remained dormant until August 23, which was coincidentally just a few days after MegaMan1988 was blocked. Both accounts share an interest in Long-term abuse cases:[4] [5] [6] [7] [8]; both admit to engaging in unwise blind reverts:[9] [10], and both tend to address users in a very distinctive way:[11] [12] [13] [14]. If more evidence is required, please let me know. Sro23 (talk) 03:41, 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


10 September 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

And a day later he's making the same edits to user pages of sockpuppets of long-term abusers:[17] [18] [19] [20] Sro23 (talk) 19:39, 10 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

 Confirmed, blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:06, 10 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]


25 September 2016

Suspected sockpuppets


Restored IP sock edits to User talk:172 (a sock of a long-term abuser; there's the characteristic interest in LTA): [21] [22]. The reason I believe 114.30.251.110 to be a sock is that it had restored edits by suspected sock User:WikiGirl295 on the now deleted article Kamia Mulhotra. Unfortunately, per WP:BEANS, I can't say what about WikiGirl295 made me suspicious, because I know MegaMan1988 will be watching this and will change editing habits in an attempt to avoid detection, and I don't want that to happen. However, an administrator apparently agreed with my suspicion, because WikiGirl295 has been blocked as a sock. So it's through this chain of restoring edits that I think these are all related. Sro23 (talk) 03:40, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Please see WP:DBQ. Thank you. Essential Oils (talk) 04:34, 25 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments


27 September 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Feels like a WP:DUCK to me. Contact me directly if you want more info (WP:BEANS). agtx 22:27, 27 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

 Done, all tags updated. Case closed. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 12:42, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

07 November 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Block evasion: first edit was to post at WP Help desk: "i want to create a profile and it's deleting agai8n and again. how can i create a profile??". Second edit an hour later was to re-create deleted Kamia Mulhotra (see also KamiaMulhotra) at User:Mrs. Kamia Mulhotra/sandbox in a single paste, as created by now-blocked User:KamiaMulhotra1, and edited by User:WikiGirl295 (see Maya515 SPI archive) Wikishovel (talk) 13:46, 7 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


08 January 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Intensely same editing pattern at Trap House III. Light❯❯❯ Saber 13:54, 8 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

Yep.  Blocked and tagged. Nothing further, as before, per WP:BEANS. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 21:03, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

04 September 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

I've suspected this for a while, but kept it to myself until now because I didn't think I had enough evidence. I believe Quinton Feldberg is returning sockpuppeteer User:MegaMan1988. There's the focus on anti-vandalism, as well as just a little overlap with previous socks (for example, see [23] [24], [25] [26]). The account also made the same requests to WP:RFPP as a past sockpuppet about three months after that sockpuppet was blocked - see [27] vs [28], [29] vs [30], which seemed a little strange to me. Lately Feldberg has been displaying temperament issues when he doesn't get what he wants that remind me of MegaMan1988. What has convinced me the most, however, is that recently Feldberg has shown an interest in long-term abuse cases ([31] [32]). Per this SPI's archive, the LTA interest is a consistent characteristic of these socks ([33] [34]). Sro23 (talk) 20:18, 4 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

Ivanvector, could you take a look when you have a chance? I see you've been active in this SPI in the past and seemed familiar with the underlying characteristics. ~ Rob13Talk 00:26, 5 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
To me, there's more differences than there are similarities. This account's activity overlaps with a significant period where the sockmaster was operating other confirmed accounts, and QF seems to be trying to contribute constructively and responding positively to criticism. I call this inconclusive, and/or I'm assuming good faith. Closed with no action. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 00:05, 7 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]