HoshiNoKaabii2000

HoshiNoKaabii2000 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
31 August 2013
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


(Note, not spelled "Original", but "Orginal")

There is another account that might deserve a look from the community: HoshiNoKaabii2000 (Is there a way to link to this user without triggering the user notification?) This editor claims to be 13, has made a series of "good-faith edits" which have been mostly original research and edit warring. In spite of numerous attempts to guide the user, the user persists in adding questionable, unsourced info, and acts huffy when confronted with rules. User has called me out on their User Page as a thorn in their side, and has acknowledged on their user page, as well as on their talk page that they have met Unorginal in real life, and that Unorginal has vandalized from Hoshi's home. In fact, the first Unorginal's first edit was to this user's talk page. "r u british?" I suspect either a good hand/bad hand campaign, or meatpuppetry. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:13, 31 August 2013 (UTC) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:13, 31 August 2013 (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]
08 September 2013
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Username is similar, plus creation of the same article Fudget (UK and Ireland. A previous case has already been closed from this user: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HoshiNoKaabii2000/Archive  [[ axg // ✉ ]] 11:09, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. The user has been blocked already, so this is just an informational thing, but user David Jetix claims to be a sock of Unorginal. He fits the profile, so I'm inclined to believe it. Benboy00 (talk) 18:11, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
17 September 2013
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


User admits to it. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:32, 17 September 2013 (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 September 2013
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


He admitted it WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 17:21, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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

We have another one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Uno_the_First Benboy00 (talk) 19:08, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
22 September 2013
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Thewikiguru1 (talk) 16:15, 22 September 2013 (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 October 2013
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

This sock continues to abuse a relatively small number of articles, with a particular focus on Cartoonito, Discovery Kids (UK) and similar children's television articles. Most recent activity is from the 90.216.10 IP address, again showing the same pattern of edits, undoing undos of previous cleanup of their vandalism under other names and IP addresses. No real attempt to hide their behaviour - significant 'tells' include abusive edits and edit summaries - e.g. [[3]] and [[4]] - and interactions with the talk pages of previously used sock names - e.g. [[5]] and [[6]]. Bonusballs (talk) 12:17, 5 October 2013 (UTC) Bonusballs (talk) 12:17, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Added IP 90.200.232.155, abuse has moved to this address following blocks on other IPs. Bonusballs (talk) 12:40, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Added IP 90.196.92.131 as editor has moved again. (All same ISP) Bonusballs (talk) 17:31, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The articles Discovery Wings (UK), Discovery Kids (UK), Cartoonito and Disney XD (United Kingdom and Ireland) continue to be a particular focus for this editor currently. Possibly article protection would be appropriate, although they seem to change focus to other similar and related articles from time to time. Bonusballs (talk) 17:36, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Added 78.146.191.228. Bonusballs (talk) 19:00, 7 October 2013 (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 2013
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Vandalism resumed with same pattern of behaviour as previous socks. Created own user page User:THEUNOSHlT admitting to be a sockpuppet of Unorginal, itself another sock name used by this vandal. Bonusballs (talk) 17:50, 18 October 2013 (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 2013
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Repeated insertion of errors into articles followed by immediate reversions of own edits - same behaviour and focus articles as previously targeted by this sock. Bonusballs (talk) 09:47, 27 October 2013 (UTC) Bonusballs (talk) 09:47, 27 October 2013 (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]
01 November 2013
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Similar pattern of edits to Hoshi/Unorginal sock puppets, including common pattern of adding errors to an article then immediately reverting it - e.g.[[7]] and [[8]] and [[9]], plus creation of hoax articles Sky Highlights and repeated vandalism of sock's previously targeted articles including Toonami (UK & Ireland) - [[10]] and same ongoing edits to talk pages of other socks - e.g. [[11]]. Bonusballs (talk) 21:08, 1 November 2013 (UTC) Bonusballs (talk) 21:08, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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

Hey, that only happened once, I have looked at both of their contribs and I have edited SOME different articles from them. GMTV World (talk) 08:09, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you are editing my 100% correct text from Channel One (UK and Ireland), YOU are vandalising and YOU ARE A TROLL. GMTV World (talk) 17:15, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
21 November 2013
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

I saw his edit on Cartoonito and clicked his name. The user claims to be a sockpuppet of Unorginal, who is said of being a sock of Hoshi. Toon Disney HD (talk) 19:44, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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

I added a second duck to the list. Same style, same subjects. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 12:46, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
13 December 2013
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


User blocked for vandalism but admits in his unblock request that "i am who I am" and wishes to be changed to Unoriginal2000 [12]. Editing pattern is similar as well, as he has been editing Disney/Cartoon articles like his previous socks. Seems like a Duck test but could be worthwhile to do a CU and see if there's any sleepers or the possibility of a range block. Jns4eva (talk) 20:15, 13 December 2013 (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]

- Mailer Diablo 00:34, 15 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

26 December 2013
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


I blocked Kids Network today for general vandalism. On his talk page he stated that he and Gunge Is a Disease are socks of User:Unorginal. Unorginal was one of the socks of HoshiNoKaabii2000. Just want to make sure there aren't other socks sitting around as well. only (talk) 17:17, 26 December 2013 (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]
5 January 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Was blocked, however he claim he is Unorginal.--jcnJohn Chen (Talk-Contib.) RA 13:48, 5 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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

Reaper Eternal, who is a CheckUser, reverted the unblock request, therefore there's a high probability that he also did a CU there and if you look at Reaper Eternal's logs you will see that User talk:90.207.17.107 is probably him, as that IP was CU hardblocked immediately after. This SPI is really sort of pointless. HigherEntity (talk) 23:19, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]


10 January 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Looks like a fairly obvious sock of Hoshi/Unorginal - first edit is to their own user page claiming to be a sock, second is a nonsense edit to a protected page. Looks like they're repeating past efforts of attempting to emulate 'GMTV Chart Show', but the true sock master seems pretty obvious. Bonusballs (talk) 19:44, 10 January 2014 (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]
13 January 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Fake information to Nick UK and List of Mario television episodes. I don't have Checkuser though, so I'm not sure. TDFan2006 (talk) 12:22, 13 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Added the "He Stinks" guy, due to fake information on Cartoon Network UK. TDFan2006 (talk) 08:19, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Added second 'stinks' persona, created (and blocked) this evening. Bonusballs (talk) 21:25, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Added third 'David Jetix' persona. Bonusballs (talk) 17:03, 25 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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

Bugger off you 2 bitches. Uno the Rapper (talk) 16:51, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What's with the ugly language? I think we've all treated you with civility. Surely you haven't actually convinced yourself that you're in the morally superior position? You've been at this for years. What exactly are you rebelling against? Who done you wrong, little fella? Do you want to get it off your chest? We'll listen. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:17, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
26 January 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Also see user:OrginBot ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(talk) 17:11, 26 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
In the future, please provide a reason for block. TDFan2006 (talk) 10:31, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
3 February 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Your edits on Cartoon Network (UK & Ireland) and Disney Junior (international) make us think you are.

The pages Cartoon Network (UK & Ireland), Disney Junior (international), Disney XD (United Kingdom and Ireland), Pop (UK & Ireland) and even TV shows like Bob the Builder are focused on. Protection would be a good idea for these articles, escpecially considering this teenager's huge sockpuppetry.

It also appears that the user seems to like writting songs on talk pages to show his silly feelings. They are creative... and very annoying. TDFan2006 (talk) 10:47, 3 February 2014 (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]
08 February 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Our friend is busy again this evening. Long list of accounts created purely for disruptive editing against their same focus articles. Bonusballs (talk) 23:13, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

They seem to have now exposed their underlying IP also. Bonusballs (talk) 23:19, 8 February 2014 (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]
15 February 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Same pattern of introducing fictitious edits to same focus articles as before. IP address is from same ISP and locale as previously blocked. Bonusballs (talk) 23:33, 15 February 2014 (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]

@Bonusballs: In order to facilitate and expedite your request, please provide diffs to support your case. Please give two or more diffs meeting the following format:

  1. At least one diff is from the sockmaster (or an account already blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet of the sockmaster), showing the behaviour characteristic of the sockmaster.
  2. At least one diff per suspected sockpuppet, showing the suspected sockpuppet emulating the behaviour of the sockmaster given in the first diff.
  3. In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided. Around one sentence is enough for this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Callanecc (talk • contribs)
How about this? One nonsense edit, complete with fake reference, from blocked user Benboy00 Stinks (one of Hoshi's many aliases) - [[13]] and the same edit reinstated here by the IP [[14]]. User IP address is same ISP and location as 90.207.33.87 which was also previously identified as a sock and blocked accordingly. Bonusballs (talk) 11:47, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
15 February 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

You can just tell by the names that it is him. David Jetix must be his real name. I have never been more insulted in the Cyber World.

He also seem to like using the words "bastard", "shit" and "bitch". Another thing to note when trying to find more socks.

He also seems to be pretending to be GMTV Chart Show once again. Nonsense requests on KidsCo.

He also add sources which brings you to Never Gonna Give You Up, such as what he did to JimJam. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TDFan2006 (talk • contribs) 13:10, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cream Frache has been added due to similar vandalism. (see JimJam) The Toon Disney Guy (talk) 10:33, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

One One Seven Avenue has been added due to attempt rickrolls (see Talk:KidsCo) and nonsense edits. The Toon Disney Guy (talk) 10:33, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PRO has also been added via unsourced CBBC Channel rebrand to BBC Kids. The Toon Disney Guy (talk) 10:14, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Added users Rschen7754 Stinks and Spshu Stinks as well as Dirtee Danzer via JimJam and Disney Junior (international).

I think this'll need to be archived soon. The Toon Disney Guy (talk) 10:39, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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

Added further pseudonym Uncle Thucker. I doubt if 'David Jetix' is his real name, although he certainly uses it a lot - but Jetix was the name of a children's TV channel. Bonusballs (talk) 12:26, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also added 'Pelikan Power' due to [[15]] and [[16]] Bonusballs (talk) 12:30, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

He is probably trying to take credit for being Pelican Shit. TDFan2006 (talk) 18:18, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey you pricks, mind your own f**king business. One One Seven Avenue (talk) 21:50, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Woah woah woah, mind the language! The Toon Disney Guy (talk) 10:29, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All of those accounts have been blocked. This case definitely needs to be archived. LightandDark2000 (talk) 09:06, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
11 April 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Familiar personal attack against other user (use user page) ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(talk) 19:56, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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

Continuation of previous behaviour, vandalism by inserting errors into articles (mostly relating to children's TV), hoax articles Nick Nostalgia, continued hoax claims and obsession with 'Fudget', [[17]], 'Disney Kids' [[18]] and non-stop obsessive editing against Toonami (UK & Ireland). Same pattern of abuse and grudge-matching against editors who clean up their vandalism ([[19]] and the obligatory abuse about Cyphoidbomb in their initial edit to user page) Bonusballs (talk) 20:02, 11 April 2014 (UTC) Bonusballs (talk) 20:02, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The account has been blocked. Requesting the archiving of this case, along with the previous one. LightandDark2000 (talk) 09:06, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
18 April 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Same pattern of behaviour and Cyphoidbomb-abuse as per the previous roll of accounts abused by this sockpuppet. Bonusballs (talk) 18:32, 18 April 2014 (UTC) Bonusballs (talk) 18:32, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Added second freshly minted username blocked this evening for same old behaviour. Bonusballs (talk) 22:04, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Added third username, same behaviour. Bonusballs (talk) 11:48, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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

Yeah, it seems to be him. This appears to be pretty indicative of LTA, given the year + history of socking and attacking other users. Requesting a Checkuser to investigate this case and to run a sleeper check as well. LightandDark2000 (talk) 08:55, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
27 April 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Same stuff as before, and vandalism to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/HoshiNoKaabii2000.☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(talk) 15:32, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. YOU GAVE NO REASON WHY I AM A SOCK YOU ARE MEANT TO! Klubklassik (talk) 15:35, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
01 May 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Vandalism to same articles, vandalism of user pages, continued routine/same activity ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(talk) 17:33, 1 May 2014 (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]
02 May 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

WP:DUCK - immediately began adding unsourced claims to kids' TV articles, created an abusive page attacking Cyphoidbomb. Matches previous behaviour for this editor. Bonusballs (talk) 12:04, 2 May 2014 (UTC) Bonusballs (talk) 12:04, 2 May 2014 (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 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Continuation of previous behaviour, same hoaxes and false claims. Bonusballs (talk) 15:42, 5 May 2014 (UTC) Bonusballs (talk) 15:42, 5 May 2014 (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 May 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Duck. Name style matches that of other socks. Admission at usertalk. Already blocked by me for disruptive editing before I remembered the "Unorginal" name. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:08, 17 May 2014 (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 May 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Same article edits as previous ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(talk) 14:06, 18 May 2014 (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]
25 May 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Edits to the usual article set ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(talk) 18:00, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty DUCKy, especially the Jetania nonsense or whatever it was. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:45, 25 May 2014 (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]
30 May 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Edits to the same articles as before ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(talk) 18:17, 30 May 2014 (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 June 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

At some point, a Checkuser confirmed that the HoshiNoKaabii2000 socks were connected to FanforClarl, yet when I filed a sock report on TDFan2006 linking them to the presumed sockmaster, FanforClarl, no link was made and a unique SPI was created for TDFan2006, who had exhibited disruptive behavior that reeked of Duck, and who was confirmed to be using sock accounts anyway. King of Hearts judiciously applied a mere 1 month block based on the discrepancy. Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/TDFan2006/Archive for the boring details. Anyhow, all the signs pointed at TDFan2006 being behind the Hoshi/Unorginal accounts, and my "mistake" was filing it under FanforClarl. That said, it's pretty obvious TD is Hoshi/Unorginal based on the boring details, and I ask that this be double-checked. If you need some nugget of evidence, please check sandbox2, which mentions "Unovia" numerously. Aaand, because they've gotten some flak from another n00b user, SillyPotatoe, you might want to double-check that account as well, since Hoshi likes to talk to her/himself. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 06:04, 12 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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

A Checkuser has already confirmed HoshiNoKaabii to FanforClarl (who may be a sock of Brightify himself), so there will need to be some merging done after this. Anyhow, Cyphoidbomb, you do realize that you can just copy and paste the evidence here right? That being said, this is already looking to be pretty suspicious, and so I'm requesting a Checkuser to help out here. LightandDark2000 (talk) 04:12, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think I said fairly clearly that a Checkuser linked Hoshi to FanforClarl, but I am suggesting this was a mistake, since the behavioral evidence seems to link TDFan pretty strongly with Hoshi. They were, after all confirmed to be socking, just not linked to "FanforClarl". As for your proposal to merge, your attempts to merge have been more harmful than helpful, particularly where you've removed my comments, and inexplicably posted new comments while signing on behalf of other users, as you did here. I can't help but notice that you didn't voice any objection when I reverted that edit, nor did you have any explanation for why you performed that edit. Anyhow, I would suggest that admins question any hasty merges suggested by this user. What's the rush to link all of these socks to one master, if it's not the proper master? Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:08, 17 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, guys. As you may have noticed, I added the newest sock to the list. The names between TDFan2006 and TDFan2007 makes their connection seem all the more likely. Last night, TDFan2007 left a link to a personal attack, probably HoshiNoKaabii2000 retaliating for my involvement here. Anyhow, please indef block all confirmed accounts, and the account I just added, as this sockmaster is just not letting up. I'm hoping that a Checkuser can drop by here soon, since this mess is getting worse with each passing day. I'm also requesting a sleeper check, as you never know what else might be hidden. LightandDark2000 (talk) 20:39, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Woah woah woah. I don't know who this '07 guy is and I only breifly know who this "Potatoe" guy is. Also, '07's edit was a mobile edit, I have none. Also, Potatoe has a lot of different article edits than me. Cyphoidbomb, you have to stop being so "Oh, this guy does this like this guy and this guy, now they must be socks." which is what you should do, just it feels you do it in an annoying manner. I am still saying I am NOT Dickhead or NewEditor or anyone, and if I am to make an alternate account, I would post it on my userpage. The Toon Disney Guy (talk) 21:10, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, dude, once you have defended yourself, there's no need to start accusing the reporting user. FYI, User:TDFan2007's edit was tagged as "mobile web edit," so I am inclined to believe that the sockmaster was using a proxy IP. If that's the case, I recommend an extended block with account creation disabled for that IP/IP Range, in order to prevent further disruption. LightandDark2000 (talk) 23:10, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Umm... Wait a minute. If HoshiNoKaabii2000 and Brightify/FanforClarl were 2 different users, then why were they both confirmed to each other? Also, I have one more question: which of these 2 sockmasters does User:WangsDaringsFun belong to? That account was definitely confirmed to one of the 2 sockmasters in 2 previous SPI onvestigations, but given the current findings, the connection is no longer all that clear. LightandDark2000 (talk) 08:23, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As for your question, Cyphoidbomb, I didn't object because I saw the point behind your reverting me. Also, I was under the impression that they were all socks of Brightify, because the accounts were apparently tied to FanforClarl, who in turn was linked to Brightify. However, if it is really true that it was a mistake, that Hoshi and Brightify are really 2 different sockmasters, then we need to sort things out. The reason why I wanted to merge some of the SPIs was because having all of the reports for a single sockmaster under one profile is so much more convenient. In this case, we may need 2 separate mergers (or only 1 if WangsDaringsFun belongs to Brightify) to group the sock farms under their respective sockmasters. LightandDark2000 (talk) 08:32, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Hold on, when you said that you guys may have filed 2 SPIs for unrelated sockmasters "lumped" under FanforClarl/Brightify, are you implying that Brightify, HoshiNoKaabii2000, and WangsDaringsFun are actually 3 different sockmasters?? If this is the case, I need to go back and undo the 2 redirects I have inserted into Hoshi's and WangsDaringsFun's SPI archives (after obtaining permission, of course). But given the present confusion, I agree that a Checkuser needs run a check on all listed accounts, along with the mentioned sockmasters before we do anything else. I have added the 3 sockmasters to the list above, in order to help straighten this out once and for all. LightandDark2000 (talk) 08:54, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and if Checkuser evidence confirms that we really do have 3 different sockmasters at work here, then someone will have to clean up this mess, and remove the "FanforClarl" tag from the user pages of HoshiNoKaabii2000 and WangsDaringsFun. LightandDark2000 (talk) 08:54, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well then, can you please indef block all likely and confirmed accounts, as well as their repeating sockmasters? Also, please indef block TDFan2007 for being an imposter. He was using a mobile web to edit, you have to keep on mind that it could be a sockmaster editing from a proxy IP. LightandDark2000 (talk) 19:31, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I dug through the SPI archives of Brightify (the sockmaster behind the FanforClarl sock farm), WangsDaringsFun, and HoshiNoKaabii2000. It appears that Brightify edits from Washington, WangsDaringsFun from Oregon, and HosbiNoKaabii from Britain. So it appears that there may indeed be three separate sockmasters at work here, who were mistakenly identified as one. Cyphoidbomb, I can't be sure, but when the Checkusers confirmed the other 2 sockmasters to Brightify/FanforClarl, I think that they meant that the accounts had a behavioral match, since that is a possible way to link sock accounts created by different IPs. Although some prolific sockmasters have been known to edit from really odd locations or seemingly unrelated IPs, it may not be the case here. Anyways, at least you have somewhat of an answer now. LightandDark2000 (talk) 22:01, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And just a side note here, some of the listed accounts may be listed as inconclusive because the sockmaster may have used proxy IPs to create them (which happens pretty often). Besides the point, the listed accounts (other than SillyPotatoe) need to be indef blocked if they aren't already, because they are obviously sockpuppets or impersonations of another user. LightandDark2000 (talk) 22:01, 26 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It turns out that TDFan2006 is a sockpuppet of HoshiNoKaabii2000, along will pretty much every other account listed in this SPI case (with the exception of SillyPotatoe). So can an admin please change the tags for "TDFan2006's sockpuppets" accordingly to HoshiNoKaabii2000, along with the incorrectly placed tags for the other related socks not on this page? LightandDark2000 (talk) 21:54, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, User:TDFan2007 is very likely a sockpuppet, due to the relation in usernames and the mobile edit/website tags. But even if it isn't a sock, an admin should still block that account indefinitely, because then it would be an obvious impersonation attempt of another user, as well as a VOA account. LightandDark2000 (talk) 21:54, 1 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, I have gone out and reverted TDFan2006's tagging of WangsDaringsFun as a sock of FanforClarl/Brightify (it was most likely that there were 3 separate sockmasters anyways). Bbb23 took care of reverting the tag on HoshiNoKaabii2000's user page. LightandDark2000 (talk) 07:26, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]

I'm going to ping @Risker: as she ran the original check. Quite honestly, I can't understand half your request. The nutshell that I get out of it is that you think CU incorrectly matched two people, so that's why I've paged the original CU. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 22:48, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @DeltaQuad:, summarized: Reaper Eternal confirmed Hoshi as a sock of FanforClarl in Dec 2013. I am respectfully asking for a double-check of this, then a check to see if TDFan2006 is a sock of Hoshi. I believe there is strong behavioral evidence that TDFan is Hoshi. When I previously filed a sock report on TDFan, I did so under the FanforClarl SPI report. When Risker performed a CheckUser on TDFan, no connection was found to FanforClarl. Risker said, "None of these accounts are related to FanforClarl; they are all from a different continent." But TDFan was socking, and was found to be LIKELY related to Cyphoidbomb Hater and Cyphoidbombfanciesbonusballs. Hoshi had been known to create these sorts of So-and-So sucks accounts. There's only so much I can do since I can't see the CU data--I only have behavioral evidence to go on. And also, I could be barking up the wrong tree entirely. Thanks, Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:33, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also confused enough I'll wait for Risker. NativeForeigner Talk 22:09, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
FanforClarl/Brightify was active in late 2012/early 2013 and was located on the West Coast of the US, probably Seattle. Hoshi is from the north of Scotland, i.e. Aberdeen. See [20] for example. (TDFan2006 has also stated that he is from Aberdeen.) The confusion might have started with a number of Duck submissions, which I and others editors may have been involved in reporting, which were not confirmed via checkuser, but blocked anyway before the was closed. I think we have at least two unrelated sock operators lumped under FanforClarl. This is confirmed by Alison here. What is needed is for the Checkusers to unravel this mess because they have the raw data, where I only have behavioral stuff. I am willing to help however I can. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 04:07, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • This was a mess, and I commend Callanecc for closing it. I was going to tackle it this morning (I'm fresher and felt I had the energy to do so) after having declined to do so last week. I have not completely reviewed what Callanecc did, and it's not clear there are any right or wrong answers to some of the issues raised by DeltaQuad's CU. So, I will report only what I changed and why and then leave it to another clerk to archive. The one thing that came out of the CU was that Thuckin Hell and Klubklassik were very likely to be the same person. Therefore, at a minimum the tags had to be consistent, and yet one pointed to Hoshi as the master, and one pointed to GMTV Arena as the master. As far as I can tell, both in the archives of this investigation and the archives of the GMTV investigation, the accounts were only suspected. Without looking at the behavioral issues in detail, I decided based on one comment about Thuckin Hell messing with this report, that it was more likely they were the same as Hoshi, so I changed both tags to suspected (I suppose I could have chosen confirmed but didn't) and pointed to this investigation. If nothing else, there is more discussion here about the two. The only inconsistency that leaves is the block itself of Thuckin Hell, which says it's based on GMTV. I suppose I could reblock, and any clerk who archives this is free to do that or whatever they deem appropriate. Sorry for the long-winded explanation.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:49, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
14 July 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Same pattern of edits, usual 'Jetania' nonsense and abuse of talk pages. Bonusballs (talk) 10:37, 14 July 2014 (UTC) Bonusballs (talk) 10:37, 14 July 2014 (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]

information Administrator note Already blocked for personal attacks, but that led me to asking questions of a CU, which led me here... Having looked at the SPI history I'm convinced enough to up the block to indef. Yunshui 雲水 13:22, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

15 July 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Admission on the userpage. User requests WP:LASTCHANCE. E Wing (talk) 19:22, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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

Comment: As per User:TDFan2006 he is also a sock of User:HoshiNoKaabii2000, not to mention this. E Wing (talk) 23:35, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
DeltaQuad took a good crack at trying to untangle the relationship (if any) between TDFan and Hoshi, I don't think there's anything more that can be done from a CU point, at least nothing that wouldn't break both my brain and my spirit and which would in all likelihood result in the same findings as DQ. Do we have one disruptive juvenile vandal pretending to be two, or are there two separate disruptive juvenile vandals with some overlapping interests/technical data? At the end of the day as long as they are blocked and prevented from causing further disruption I'm not too concerned about whether the tag added to a user page ties them to Hoshi or TDFan. I get that it's a pain in the ass for the clerks trying to sort through the results though. A liberal dose of WP:DENY is likely what's needed. Just block with no talk page access and delete whatever damage they've managed to do. @DeltaQuad:, did you add any of your results from the June 12 check to the CU Wiki? Might save some poor soul from retreading the same territory in the future. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 15:50, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have this dreadful image of all the CUs lying on the ground broken, homeless, and muttering incomprehensible words. I certainly wouldn't want that to happen. I just felt that as long as we're going to have to separate SPIs on these socks, it would be better to have two masters, which is why I changed the tag. After I post this, I'm going to archive this poor beast and hope it doesn't get reopened any time soon. I assume DQ will see the ping you left him whether this is closed or archived. Thanks for your input, both of you.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:16, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
19 July 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Self-admitted vandalism account (see user page). ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(talk) 11:50, 19 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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

I KNOW IT IS ME BUT PLEASE JUST GIVE ME ONE MORE CHANCE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE. Unorginal 2014 (talk) 15:17, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's standard offer can be found here. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:32, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
19 September 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Editing history shows usual pattern of edits to usual focus articles, accompanied by nonsense claims about fictional 'Jetania' country. Bonusballs (talk) 10:45, 19 September 2014 (UTC) Bonusballs (talk) 10:45, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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

I agree with the "it doesn't matter" aspect of this. At some point it all got so confusing. I don't care if Hoshi is Uno or TDFan is Hoshi or if David Jetix is any of them. Maybe it's more than one person, maybe not. If sock 1 is upset that we keep calling him sock 2, all the better, IMO. The real commonality is that they all spend far too much of their precious lives doing nothing constructive. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:21, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We're obviously thinking along the same lines.  —SMALLJIM  17:53, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]

 Additional information needed. In order to facilitate and expedite your request, please provide diffs to support your case. Please give two or more diffs meeting the following format:

  1. At least one diff is from the sockmaster (or an account already blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet of the sockmaster), showing the behaviour characteristic of the sockmaster.
  2. At least one diff per suspected sockpuppet, showing the suspected sockpuppet emulating the behaviour of the sockmaster given in the first diff.
  3. In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided. Around one sentence is enough for this.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:36, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: Thanks, Cyphoidbomb, for the additional info and thanks, Smalljim, for the block. I've reblocked the named account only so it will point to this report. I didn't tag it because god only knows who the master is. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:42, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

24 September 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Edits are confined to the usual haunts of BBC, Nick Jr. and Sky television articles with all their usual signs of trying to assert their reality. Edits on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/History of Sky television idents are especially suspicious as trying to save edits made by other Hoshi accounts in the past. Nate • (chatter) 17:56, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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

Per Bbb23's note below: I nominated History of Sky television idents for deletion here. This is an article that has been edited by Spendcute, who I believe is a confirmed sock, as well as by Sweet Toof, who I believe is also a confirmed sock. Hoshi had a fixation on "idents", which can be found in the archive. Users who seem to be defending the History article are: 90.196.75.203 a recently disruptive and blocked Aberdeen, Scotland IP (Hoshi and some of his affiliated socks like TDFan2006 were from Aberdeen, Scotland.) and Forgave, a brand new user who somehow seems interested in preserving this article with a scant 6 other edits under his belt.
Some sockpuppet foot-shooting by Forgave with this link on their talk page to a convo to Meta between TDFan2011 and Unorginal 20, who haven't been blocked there. Somehow it doesn't strike me as some random person coming in and linking a random conversation which involves the usual bashing of Cyphoidbomb they're famous for. Then there's this beforehand. I'd like to assume good faith here but this isn't really helping. Nate • (chatter) 21:56, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
BBB: Some "fruity idents" for you: [25][26][27][28][29][30] edits. Though ident is apparently a slang term for station identifications in some areas, (I was not aware of this until Hoshi started using the term) it's a pretty specific niche to be concerned about. I've not seen much attention given to station IDs by any of the regular contributors at WikiProject Television. Thus it is a red flag when we see such interests parroted by socks that we already suspect to be related to the Hoshi tribe. It lends more credence to my suggestion that TDFan was related to Hoshi if one or more of TDs socks were tossing around "idents" in their names or in the articles they were vandalizing. I don't particularly care whether or not it's the same person, but there are glaring intersections in behavior, language, geographical location, articles of interest, topics of interest, that would otherwise be very difficult to explain other than by sheer coincidence, or through elaborate imitation. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 02:13, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Bbb23, I get your point. It's difficult for gnomes to keep track of the various reports we've submitted across the most common venues: AIV, AN3, RPP, SPI. Tedious. Lots of juggling. Too much re-writing of the same crap. (Goooood Morning, Vietnam!) Not enough tools to do the job efficiently. AIV is far quicker than SPI, and sometimes it's easier to go that route. Every trip to any of those divisions requires a new report with new diffs, there is no cross-indexing, or even reports filed automatically in triplicate. Gnomes have to hope for some foreknowledge and/or some familiarity by CheckUsers and active admins with the MOs of persistently disruptive accounts. Shifting gears, idents are mentioned in the six Hoshi edits above, fruit idents are mentioned in this edit by TDFan2006 who also agrees with Unorginal for whatever reason in his edit summary, and in this additional edit by Hoshi, more ident nonsense can be found. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:40, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]

 Clerk note: It's not obvious to me, Mrschimpf and Cyphoidbomb. How about some evidence in the form of diffs comparing the new account with the master or confirmed puppets?--Bbb23 (talk) 23:44, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

← Thanks for the ping @Bbb23:. I've dealt with the accounts at meta. Best, Tiptoety talk 15:17, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

22 October 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Inserting "Jetanian" music charts ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(talk) 23:38, 22 October 2014 (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]
15 November 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Same circle of articles. Introduction of "Jetania" in sandbox. User re-instated an edit made by another IP of his that was blocked. [31]. My removal of the bracket was obviously made per WP:RBI. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 23:38, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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

The bracket makes it look like it was not wrote by a 5 year-old. LolUK (talk) 23:43, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
WP:RBI does not apply if it is not vandalism, genius. LolUK (talk) 23:44, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
23 November 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


User re-adding same unsourced content as LolUK here vs here, minus "Jetania". Still unsourced. User is from Scotland, as is Hoshi. Ducky. Account has already been reported to AIV. Account being added here for completeness, and in case AIV admins pull the dismissive "this board is for obvious spammers and vandals only, please consider taking this to SPI" game. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:16, 23 November 2014 (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 have blocked the user as it seemed to be an obvious sock. I honestly don't know what else CU can do here as I think the reporting user would have noticed any other accounts--5 albert square (talk) 22:36, 23 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Looks like a duck to me, so nice to see it's been blocked.  No sleepers immediately visible. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (Message me) 13:31, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
10 January 2015
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

tossed in edits about Jetania to the usual articles ☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(talk) 23:06, 10 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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

  • I did file an edit filter request a while ago for blocking this Jetania/Jetanian nonsense, but that page doesn't get much traffic, and it probably won't ever be dealt with. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 23:55, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I appreciate the effort. Tangential: The kid seems to be under the impression that so long as he makes good edits, that they won't be reverted. Can't tell if he's trolling or if he actually believes that. I attempted to educate him about WP:REVERTBAN, but I doubt it will sink in. I saw your edit summaries at the Bashy song, thanks for keeping an eye on that. I opted to not revert it in spite of REVERTBAN. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 01:09, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • 99% of the time, I would just fire the revert button myself (indeed, you can see from my edit summary that I did do so initially). As it turned out this time, there was even more vandalism in there, so I just rolled it back to a 2013 edit with Twinkle in the end. It looks like a very unwatched page, so it's now in my watchlist. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 08:14, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Good call! Cyphoidbomb (talk) 08:26, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
No. I make good edits to show I can change. You fucks just take it for granted. 2.96.22.67 (talk) 19:36, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Nope. You're engaging in typical good-hand/bad-hand vandalism. You make a few constructive changes at point A, then add unsourced garbage and deliberate vandalism at point B. If you'd taken Wikipedia's standard offer immediately after your first block, and started sourcing things and respecting community guidelines and policies, you'd probably be a welcome addition just like any of our other good-faith teen editors, by now. Instead you've repeatedly taken the petulant low road, insisting that somehow you are in the right and are rebelling against some sort of agenda-driven tyranny. Get over yourself. The standard offer still stands. Go away for six months, come back with an intention to contribute constructively, and we'll talk. Until then, any and all of your edits will be reverted on sight, with no consideration for whether they are useful or not. And tsk tsk, this sort of comment is ridiculous. You are in full control of how you are treated here. Cursing at me only means you're cursing at yourself. "Every time I vandalize, that asshole Cyphoidbomb ruins my whole shit! Fuck Cyphoidbomb!" Hilariously absurd logic. Also, I've never cursed at you, so it's just plain mean. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:42, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
20 January 2015
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Duck per Psych 101: User hates himself, but takes it out on me. Also, his usual focus at Nickelodeon UK [35][36] and the creation of Wikipedia:Long-term abuseHoshiNoKaabii2000. User has been submitted to AIV. Record being included for completeness. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 19:40, 20 January 2015 (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 April 2015
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Creation of Drinks On Us with inclusion of "Jetania" nonsense again. Content was removed, then readded by disruptive user. Note also the editorial "This is Mike Will's worst performing song to date, as it has only managed to chart in Jetania." He also uses "Jetanie", for instance here and note the reference to Scotland in edit summary (Hoshi is from Aberdeen). Somewhat of a shame. The vandal went off the radar for a while. If he'd continued to avoid editing, he could have taken the standard offer. Now the clock resets. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:41, 23 April 2015 (UTC) Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:41, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

More Jetania crap here, in the user's sandbox. This edit seems to suggest that he has another account. This too sounds a little sketch, unless he's referring to the distant past. However, for these reasons, I am requesting a sleeper check.

His edit summaries have become more hostile over the years, like here. On the plus side, it appears he's showing some interest in discussion and being constructive, but he's got to cut the Jetania crap, get rid of the hostility, disappear for six months, and then take the standard offer. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 18:02, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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

Well spotted! I've just found these two edits [1] [2] made by 94.118.96.4 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) in February.  —SMALLJIM  15:55, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]

 Clerk note: An admin is needed to review those diffs, because the edits are deleted. Vanjagenije (talk) 17:41, 23 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yes, forgot to mention that the deleted diffs are convincing evidence.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 19:40, 24 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
27 April 2015
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Geolocates to Aberdeen City Council in Scotland, which we've seen before. Same area of interest at Pow! (Forward) for example. More misdirected hostility toward me, reference to "Unovia" in edit summary (I can't link b/c the edit has been suppressed), and they are clearly still vandalizing, yadda. IP has been blocked for a 2 years by Smalljim. (Go Smalljim!!) No further action requested. Adding IP to SPI for completeness. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 15:30, 27 April 2015 (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 May 2015
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

User's first edit here seems like a sarcastic dig against editors who spend more time handling vandalism than creating content. Edits at UK subjects here and here (Hoshi is in Scotland). User's fifth edit was to "approve" my AIV request. Immediately following that, the poor fellow seeks my attention on my talk page [37][38]. Hoshi has a long-standing obsession with me. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 13:19, 11 May 2015 (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 2015
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Obvious socks of HoshiNoKaabii2000. In these edits we see the appearance of "Uno". Some of Hoshi's socks were derivations of "Unorginal" (not a typo). Clearly self-referential. Also, introduction of Jetania in edit summary, another of his hallmarks. Also in this edit summary we see a deliberate intention to disrupt, "Yes it is. It stays and that's that. I 'll edit war you if it is to keep this page up." Here we see Hoshi talking to himself. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 14:33, 5 July 2015 (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]

06 August 2015

[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Jetania nonsense here, here, here, and here. One new development: IP geolocates to Spain, (ISP: Telefonica de Espana). So perhaps the child is now traveling or using a proxy. I've blocked the IP for a little bit. Closing case. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:53, 6 August 2015 (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 September 2015

[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Vandalism of my user page, interest in Sky-related articles, he's apparently a TV logo savant at an article where he has an intersection with Unorginal, again in the logo department. Also this restoration from redirect at an article created by another sock of Hoshi's, TheGoldVR. I'm blocking on GP. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:20, 17 September 2015 (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 and tagged See above. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 05:22, 17 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

28 September 2015

[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

User name seems to indicate some sort of cynical dispassion with Wikipedia, which would be consistent with Hoshi's general irritability. This account has edited at Harlaw Academy, which is a school in Aberdeen, Scotland. Hoshi has used numerous IPs from Aberdeen, and it's fairly well-established that he is in Scotland. Wikipedia is a lie made these edits, which I reverted, and that were reinstated a day later in these edits by IP 78.146.183.219 with the explanation "He is correct. I attend this school." This IP has edited DJ Khaled discography, which was also edited by DCFan2013, a suspected sock of Hoshi's. The IP has also edited at Fewer Friends, which was created by The Gold VR, a confirmed sock of Hoshi's, and which was also edited by DCFan2013. The IP also added Jetanie nonsense at Worldwide Choppers, which was also edited by TDFan2006.

The IP is clearly Hoshi, and since Harlaw Academy has has only been edited 17 times in 2015 with a huge gap after May, the next-day's revert of my revert suggests an extraordinary likelihood that Wikipedia is a lie is Hoshi. No CU requested for the IP, for obvious reasons. I have blocked the IP for a month. Cyphoidbomb (talk) 17:09, 28 September 2015 (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]
@Salvidrim!: FWIW, I just ran a check of my own. There's not a whole lot here to go on as Bbb23 mentioned, but from what I've gleaned I'd be willing to say that it is  Possible. Mike V • Talk 01:34, 13 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
More