Nsmutte

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

Older archives were moved to an archive of the archive because of the page size and are listed below:

03 March 2015
Suspected sockpuppets

All the accounts are SPAs involved in promoting an Indian doctor called Yellapu Srihari (Y. Srihari), also spelt Sreehari. The recent activity has consisted of creating and editing the article about Srihari, posting to WP:REFUND and the article's talk page with pleas of keeping it, and, as of today, posting to the AfD discussion that's been open since Feb 25. The article was semi-protected after six different IPs had removed the AfD tag. All the requests to keep the article are very similar indeed, with nonstandard punctuation and capitalisation, and weird use of spacing - the latter is also seen in the article [1], [2], [3], [4] (honestly, check almost any random diff in the article history and you will see it) as well as in other articles edited by the accounts: [5].

Other activity involves creating Global medical association, created by several of the accounts at different times and deleted every time. This is the association that Srihari is the president of. In April 2014, the accounts that were active then would insert Srihari's name in other articles, e.g. [6] and [7].

Some of the accounts are from April 2014, the rest were created in late February or early March 2015. In addition to the sockmaster, the accounts from 2014 are User:Agganoor, User:Ygbvani, User:Ygbhavani, and User:Ydsameeksh. Of those, Agganoor and Ygbvani are blocked. All the IPs that are listed have been active over the last couple of weeks.

Three of the newer accounts are also already blocked as obvious sockpuppet accounts: User:Deepadeepa5, User:Madhavi3, and User:Vidhyadhari.

As can be seen, several of the names are very similar indeed (e.g. Jyoshna7, Jyoshna200, Jyoshnajyoshna7). In addition, there is strong behavioural similarities as shown above. See for instance this bit of tag-teaming to get rid of the AfD template: [8] and the next edit [9] Note that all edits of all accounts and IPs, with the exception of some very old edits by a couple of the IPs, are directly related to promoting Y. Srihari.

CU requested because of the ridiculous number of suspected socks and my suspicion that there are sleepers. bonadea contributions talk 19:59, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment to the CU investigation: Ydsameeksh (talk · contribs) was marked as stale as that account hadn't been used since April last year, but since the CU was completed, this afternoon, that user has made several edits. Not sure whether another CU can be made but I wanted to mention it anyway. --bonadea contributions talk 21:57, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Suspected sockpuppets

This IP wasn't on the list above. It only started being used today and was used for 2 edits that were adding similar content to List of medical organisations. These edits occurred just after one of the other listed accounts had been active on the List of Indian doctors' associations, making similar edits. Drchriswilliams (talk) 17:35, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
The following users are  Stale:
The following users are  Confirmed (Group 1):
The following users are  Confirmed (Group 2):
The following users are  Confirmed (Group 3):
The three groups are  Possilikely (a mix between possible and likely) matches to one another. In the same vein, the following user is a  Possible match: Naaga_100 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). Naturally, no No comment with respect to IP address(es). Yunshui 雲水 14:15, 4 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I thought about it, but my concern is that there might be too much collateral damage If there was a range block. Also, the AfD was closed and the article has been deleted, so I don't anticipate any IP contributions in the immediate future. Mike V • Talk 01:55, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

17 August 2015

Suspected sockpuppets

First and only edits have been to create new articles about Y Srihari. bonadea contributions talk 13:56, 17 August 2015 (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

31 August 2015

Suspected sockpuppets

The original Sockpuppet Investigation was carried out in March 2015 after promotional material was added relating to an Indian doctor called Yellapu Srihari (Y. Srihari), also spelt Sreehari. After discussion, an article was deleted Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Y. Srihari. A new article has now been created with the name of Hypnotist srihari. Here are some of the edits by WP:SPA Plkmnb and an IP that I suspect may be connected. [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20]

A deletion tag was added that was removed by an account called Okmnb1 [21] then readded shortly after [22]. Drchriswilliams (talk) 14:54, 31 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have also added a second IP that has only edited the new article. [23],[24]. Drchriswilliams (talk) 15:27, 31 August 2015 (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

07 February 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

New recreations of the article about Y. Srihari: Kumarikumari100 created Sreehari some months ago, and it was deleted yesterday; Hypnoanesthetist created Dr srihari today and Kumarikumari100 has been editing it. Although the old socks are stale, there seems to be very strong behavioural evidence. The Guinness World Record claim (which appears to be incorrect) seems to have been present in Hypnotist srihari, a version of the article that was deleted in September - I don't know what else that article said, but it's clearly about the same person. bonadea contributions talk 18:31, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Some stylistic similarities with previously blocked socks are noticeable in these diffs: [25] and [26]. --bonadea contributions talk 20:57, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed that an IP was used to fix some spelling errors in Kumarikumari100's talk page post, [27]. There were a lot of previous socks from the 115.24x range. --bonadea contributions talk 21:39, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And here Kumarikumari100 says that s/he has saved the history of Y. Srihari, the first deleted article from a year ago, on his/her laptop... --bonadea contributions talk 21:57, 7 February 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 February 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

WP:DUCK. This time the article is called Sreehari dr but the contents are identical. I suspect User:Sekharrahkes is another sock since they have only edited this article, but the edit was pretty weird: [28].

At this time I'm asking for a CU because it seems likely that there are more accounts around. bonadea contributions talk 08:49, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also 115.242.224.1 which posted in a characteristic manner to the article's talk page. --bonadea contributions talk 11:17, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, and to have this on one page, these are the article versions I found by making a couple of quick searches: Y. Srihari (Afd), Dr sreeharii, Dr sreehari, Doctor sreehari, Dr y.srihari, Dr srihari, Hypnotist srihari (Afd), Sreehari, Sreehari dr. Also Global medical association and Global Medical Association, about a non-notable organisation that Srihari is the leader of. --bonadea contributions talk 11:17, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Another day, another iteration of the article, essentially identical. This time the account is User:Zaqwsxs and the article is Drsrihari(actor) (I'd forgotten that the original Y Srihari article talked about his acting career, because later versions have been silent about that, but it is documented in the AfD.) --bonadea contributions talk 20:25, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Yesterday, their argument was that Srihari was not notable before, but is now.[29] (note the signature, by the way. That's the user name of one of the socks from last year.) Today, they are claiming that Y Srihari is a different person from the one in the most recent version of Sreehari as well as Drsrihari(actor)[30]; that is a preposterous claim not only if you look at the deleted articles, but the evidence that it's the same guy is there in the original AfD unless there were two actors by the same name in the same film. I am somewhat tempted to ask for a community ban because it frankly pisses me off to see somebody disrupt this place for their own gain. I refuse to believe that the guy is stupid, which means that he is aware of bending the truth quite a lot. --bonadea contributions talk 17:05, 10 February 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

13 February 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Duck. Bonadeaphone5 created Tractor for cultivation, which was tagged speedy A10. 2 minutes later, Bonadea3 adds a nonsense edit [31]. Bonadea3 and Bonadea5 then post to the talk page repeatedly with each others' signatures. Evidently meant to impersonate longtime editor User:Bonadea. NeemNarduni2 (talk) 17:48, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

I would like to add User:Hypertension1 to this SPI. They are already blocked as a sock of another editor (User:Anxiety100), and the suspect edits are all deleted so I cannot add diffs here, but in brief they created (as their first and almost their only edits) three or four SPIs targetting me and another long-term editor, listing Bonadeaeaea and a few other newly created accounts with user names very similar to mine as the socks. I personally suspect a connection to User:Nsmutte, partly because I'm one of the targets and partly because the writing style is rather distinctive. --bonadea contributions talk 22:10, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am so suddenly surprise by seeing your message ,i causally created an article contact lens solution,really i don’t know who is bonadea ,and also one thing the article was not deleted ,only merged in the other article contact lens... (Bonadeaphane (talk) 07:27, 14 February 2016 (UTC))[reply]

I dont know the rules of wikipedia, i created 3 ids,name Bonadeaphonn,Bonadeaphune,Bonadeaphane, ←if you have objection i will delete 2 ids and will keep one id, i have more than 2 ids in many social networks, i am very happy by seeing my created words in Wikipedia article,i want to create some more articles, because my first article was succeed and merged in other article...(Bonadeaphane (talk) 07:49, 14 February 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • Tagged and closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:44, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

14 February 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Similar usernames, Phune randomly shows up to make an edit to a page Phonn made. I think this is a pun on Bonadea's username... Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 06:48, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear. I remember that there was another account going around with a clone of Bonadea's name, so I go check this list, and all created within the same week...

At a glance, it's obvious someone's trying to harass her. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 06:57, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. I am so suddenly surprise by seeing your message ,i causally created an article contact lens slution,really i don’t know who is bonadea ,and also one thing the article was not deleted ,only merged in the other article contact lens... (Bonadeaphane (talk) 07:27, 14 February 2016 (UTC))[reply]

I dont know the rules of wikipedia, i created 3 ids,name Bonadeaphonn,Bonadeaphune,Bonadeaphane, ←if you have objection i will delete 2 ids and will keep one id, i have more than 2 ids in many social networks, i am very happy by seeing my created words in wikipedia article,i want to create some more articles, because my first article was succeed and merged in other article...(Bonadeaphane (talk) 07:45, 14 February 2016 (UTC))[reply]

I cant undestand what is the problem to banadea ,if identical ids present,identical ids common in social network .....(Bonadeaphane (talk) 09:16, 14 February 2016 (UTC))[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • Tagged and closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:44, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

17 February 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Self-identifies on their user talk page and here as a new account of User:Ydsameeksh, a previously blocked sock. bonadea contributions talk 15:17, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Adding another sock: see here. GABHello! 22:14, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Added two more socks based on obvious attempts at impersonation. GABHello! 22:18, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Gonna request a username filter to be set up to stop these bizarre attempts at copying Bonadea's username. Zeke Essiestudy (talk) 23:17, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments


21 February 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

The usual edits: harassing User:Bonadea and promoting "DrSreehari". Thomas.W talk 11:04, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Both are now blocked. GABHello! 14:32, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments


21 February 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Same edit on Hypnosurgery as sock Editingloverrr ([32][33]). GABHello! 15:29, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sock's now blocked, feel free to close. GABHello! 16:42, 21 February 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

24 February 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Created List of Indian record holders individual which on its face looks ok, if in need of formatting. However, he did sneak Sreehari in there as well. CrowCaw 16:34, 24 February 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 March 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Call me paranoid, but when two new accounts show up and create a nonsense article called Bonadea, written in the voice of all Nsmutte's socks, I hear ducks quacking. (For the sake of completeness let me add that there has been some harassment directed against me by Nsmutte's ipsocks since he was community banned.) bonadea contributions talk 22:22, 8 March 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

User:DeltaQuad/SPI/Clerk Training Notice

09 March 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Suspected sock creates Dr sreehari hypnotist, which soon gets XFD'd ([34]). They remove the AFD tag, but revert, and the suspected master soon does it again. Both are SPAs for the article, too. The suspected master also is !voting on the AFD, and while they seem to have created a (now-deleted) article, too, they've been around since July 2015 with little activity that I can see. Also, compare these extremely similar edits: Suspected master vs. suspected sock. I would appreciate if you could compare these accounts and look for sleepers. GABHello! 20:08, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Added Qazsxde, an account also created back in mid 2015, with few edits outside of the area of "hypnoanesthesia". WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:45, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Vanjagenije: I'm such a moron, I just realized who the master is. Could you please move this to the Nsmutte SPI, which has the same abuse related to sreehari/srihari and hypnotherapy? Thanks, GABHello! 20:49, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Vanjagenije: Gladly. The master has been promoting the same exact person, albeit with different spelling, who is some sort of hypnotherapist; the alleged "Global Medical Association" is another big area of his. The same thing is in the article listed above. Only a couple of the diffs I can see are linked: [35][36] but previous SPIs have established this incessant behavioral trait, with articles such as Y. Srihari, Global medical association, Hypnotist srihari, Sreehari, Dr srihari, etc. GABHello! 21:02, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Not to mention the fake Nobel Prize nomination claim. Also note that one of the current accounts has displayed behaviour consistent with the many many IPsocks of Nsmutte that have been blocked over the last few weeks: [37]. Also this which they kindly provided - this is identical to recent IPsock trolling, e.g. [38] and [39]. --bonadea contributions talk 21:22, 9 March 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

11 March 2016

Suspected sockpuppets


As with so many of the others first edits are to attack Bonadea. Clearly a WP:DUCK but worth checking for sleepers as these happen almost daily now. MarnetteD|Talk 06:08, 11 March 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

11 March 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Same as Feb 24 above, created List of indian record holders with Srehari in there. CrowCaw 19:28, 11 March 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

Blocked and tagged based on behavior. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:14, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

12 March 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Created a phony SPI case against Bonadea, complaining about 3RR. As a look through the archive shows, Nsmutte has harassed Bonadea very persistently, and they like making spurious ANEW reports. They are blocked now, but I am requesting CU to look for possible sleepers, especially since the pace has quickened as of late (4 cases within the past week). GABHello! 16:32, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Added another obvious suspect. GABHello! 18:42, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Tfvb yujm would like to say hello, too. GABHello! 23:17, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

There are a handfull of IPs a day too, all geolocating to Chennai, India (starting with 117.*). And the fake SPI-report against Bonadea (and me) has been created twice so far today. Thomas.W talk 18:55, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, this is getting out of hand. What countermeasures might be effective? GABHello! 18:57, 12 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm wondering the same thing. I'm not sure how many hoax/attack SPIs have been created at this point - I did not see any of the ones created this weekend, but I've tagged three different ones for deletion today... One of them had a good-faith comment from an editor who presumably did not know any of the background, simply informing the SPI creator that Bonadeaphone is a legitimate alternate account, which then resulted in this. It's all very tiresome indeed and it's frustrating that so much time is wasted on this troll. --bonadea contributions talk 10:25, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

13 March 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Continued harassment of Bonadea and Thomas.W. General Ization Talk 03:55, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

115.241.21.48 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) too. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:21, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

13 March 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Bogus sockpuppet allegations on User:Bonadeaphone ([40]) clpo13(talk) 17:37, 13 March 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


14 March 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Another one. Creating attack SPI at [41] ; see also their talk page before they blanked it [42], with a deletion notice for Dr sreehari and for the records page they have also created multiple times to smuggle Sreehari's name into Wikipedia. bonadea contributions talk 09:11, 14 March 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

14 March 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Brand-new editor editing and defending one of Nsmutte's bad-faith SPIs [43] and [44]. bonadea contributions talk 16:24, 14 March 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

Both  Confirmed, blocked, and tagged. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:36, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


15 March 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Same SPI shenanigans. GABHello! 02:02, 15 March 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

15 March 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Created List of Indian records‎, which looks quite identical to the deleted articles created by previous socks User:Indianworldrecords and User:Uhbvc - and which, of course, includes Sreehari's name. bonadea contributions talk 12:28, 15 March 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) 13:50, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

18 March 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Still harassing users in the same broken English about Bonadea. I'm leaving it up to the discretion of a CU if a check is needed. GABHello! 19:20, 18 March 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


18 March 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Placed a db-user speedy tag on User:Nsmutte, which sounds like an admission of being the same user [45]. bonadea contributions talk 21:20, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Yes, it's him. Nsmutte likes spamming false deletion and sockpuppetry templates. GABHello! 22:05, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

19 March 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Admin shopping with a confused claim about SPIs never being eligible for speedy deletion; here he admits that it is the bogus/attack SPIs created by Nsmutte socks he's talking about. Duck + megaphone, as usual. bonadea contributions talk 07:46, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

I don't know, Bonadea, this one has an amazing grasp of SPI procedure :) GABHello! 12:55, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments


21 March 2016

Suspected sockpuppets


Latest duck spouting bogus SPI accusations against User:bonadea [46] Meters (talk) 18:29, 21 March 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


22 March 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

 Looks like a duck to me TJH2018 talk 15:47, 22 March 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

26 March 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Duck, duckity duck.

Yet another faked SPI report on bonadea. Same style username as some of their previous socks, too. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 04:53, 26 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fake SPI-report is here. Tagged for CSD, but of course reverted. Pretty blatant Nsmutte MO. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 04:55, 26 March 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

30 March 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Same style username. Same behaviour (harassing Bonadea by reverting their edits left, right and center). Duck. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 03:49, 30 March 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

03 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

This account has already been blocked as a blatant DUCK. This request serves two purposes.

  1. Please check for sleepers. Nsmutte has been keeping to IPs recently, so I'm worried this may herald a return to registered accounts. I know it's unlikely you'll find anything, but please have a quick look?
  2. Please provide me with a definitive list of Nsmutte's usual IP ranges (the recent ones, at any rate). I already know about 117.192.0.0/10, but sometimes they use others and this information would be important in my maintenance of (private) edit filters. This could be provided privately to me if you wish and then it would only be available to sysops and EFMs. I belive this falls within the spirit (although not the explicit letter) of WP:CheckUser#CheckUser and privacy policy point 4. Thank you for your consideration. BethNaught (talk) 20:29, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Thank you, MarnetteD. Between your help and the filter logs, I have now compiled a list of ranges. However I would still like to see if CheckUser can reveal underlying IPs/ranges which have not been openly used. BethNaught (talk) 21:06, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments


04 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Nsmutte's most recent MO is to tag articles I have created with deletion templates - here is a brand-new account whose first edit is to list one such article at AfD with a patently nonsensical rationale. bonadea contributions talk 05:48, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This clinches it. --bonadea contributions talk 06:04, 4 April 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



04 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Has recreated AfD of Per Gustafsson Banér (i.e. here) roughly 6 hours after last nomination was deleted. Stumbled across whilst delsorting at AfD. Nordic Dragon 13:47, 4 April 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

05 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Frivolous AfD nominations of article I've created, as before. bonadea contributions talk 04:59, 5 April 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


05 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

And another one - badly formed AfD nomination of an article I created, with a rather nonsensical rationale. bonadea contributions talk 09:42, 5 April 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


05 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Seems to have switched to attacking my contributions (although they did pick my weakest article, fair play). Don't want to act on this case as it is about me. Advice on the propriety of using the tools to defend myself? BethNaught (talk) 17:15, 5 April 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


05 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Duck, megaphone, quack. bonadea contributions talk 17:51, 5 April 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


05 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Duck. BethNaught (talk) 18:19, 5 April 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


05 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets
TJH2018 talk 19:24, 5 April 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


06 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

New user, placing a request on my talk page to help them create an article about anaesthesia, a Nsmutte core area, as their first and as yet only edit. At this point I'm starting to worry that I see Nsmutte socks everywhere and maybe I should AGF more, but surely this has to be another one? (The writing style is quite distinctive, too.) bonadea contributions talk 09:36, 6 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll also mention Sedrftyu (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) who has already been duck blocked and tagged, but if there's a CU as requested above, it might be useful information. --bonadea contributions talk 09:53, 6 April 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

06 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Duck, harassing Bonadea by nominating more of their articles for deletion. GABHello! 23:14, 6 April 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


07 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Disruption related to Bonadea.

— JJMC89 (T·C) 00:49, 7 April 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

 Clerk note: All socks blocked and tagged. Closing. TDL (talk) 02:45, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


07 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Adding Sreehari's name to articles again.[47] bonadea contributions talk 05:42, 7 April 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

07 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets


bad faith AFD nominations have moved from pages that Bonadea created to one that I started. MarnetteD|Talk 12:47, 7 April 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



07 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

They seem to have picked an article at random to nominate for AfD this time, but the pattern is the same: new editor nominates a clearly notable subject (in this case it's a dab page) with confused rationale[48], and an IP (in the 117. range) removes the AfD tag after a while[49] bonadea contributions talk 15:12, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:DUCK, I have added a couple more accounts involved in the same disruption. -- Ed (Edgar181) 16:09, 7 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

  • This is the worst kind of disruption - creating a malformed version of an existing article in order to have it deleted, and then tricking good editors into telling them things that Nsmutte will then use for further disruption and harassment. :( Don't the pointy/trolling nominations of articles about living or recently deceased people violate BLP, by the way? Should I ask for revdel of some diffs or would that just feed the troll more by wasting people's time? --bonadea contributions talk 05:50, 8 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

08 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

 1.75x amplified ultimate quack of ultimate destiny. GABHello! 16:29, 8 April 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 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets


Agoodboyfrom (talk) 03:07, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Per this edit, these are all socks of banned User:Nsmutte. Can this be merged to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nsmutte? --bonadea contributions talk 20:44, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

Drtfyuh (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Mike V • Talk 22:22, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

13 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Quack. bonadea contributions talk 11:30, 13 April 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



13 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Seems to be trying to nominate my user page for AfD; usual euphonious user name, too. bonadea contributions talk 16:10, 13 April 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


15 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Quack. bonadea contributions talk 04:57, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Adding 45.118.120.5 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) [54] because of the range. --bonadea contributions talk 05:05, 15 April 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


16 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Probably Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nsmutte based on similar behavior — Andy W. (talk · contrib) 18:22, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Good work. The spelling idiosyncrasies check out. I was actually thinking Nsmutte, but they didn't seem as aggressive as before, probably because they thought they could fool people. GABHello! 18:42, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like a new tactic is harassing Bonadea-related vandalism reverters by nominating their pages for AfD. It's also happened to MarnetteD with Dftvghjnk (talk · contribs) on Disraeli (TV serial). clpo13(talk) 18:53, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments


17 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Bonadea110 and Bonadea111 are WP:DUCKs, according to the edit filter log. Supereditor12 was caught trying to create the page List Sock puppets of Bonadeaphone in the Edit Filter log. Passengerpigeon (talk) 03:46, 17 April 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


17 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Nominating a Bonadea article for deletion [55] on first edit. BethNaught (talk) 15:52, 17 April 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


18 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets


Same behaviour as previous sock Laber□T 07:18, 18 April 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) 11:37, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


18 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Quack. (nonsense AfD of an article I created some time ago.) bonadea contributions talk 13:51, 18 April 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

18 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

A previous sock was User:Ydsameeksh - see this, this, and more recently this. Their only non-userspace edit is pretty characteristic as well, even though the subject is not the same as usual. bonadea contributions talk 16:00, 18 April 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


18 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Creating DR SREEHARI, a possible repost of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Y. Srihari - certainly seems to be the same subject, an Indian hypnotist, and seems very dubiously sourced (I know the Guinness Book of Records has dropped a lot of its old "eat the most pies" type records for health and safety reasons; them encouraging a record for "Most Persons Anesthetized At A Time" seems highly unlikely).

Lots of similar article titles in the sock archives here: Dr sreeharii, Dr sreehari, Doctor sreehari, Dr srihari, Sreehari dr. McGeddon (talk) 16:29, 18 April 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

26 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Fixation with Gunilla Wolde NorthBySouthBaranof (talk) 04:45, 26 April 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

27 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

They found another article I created to take to AfD without any rationale. bonadea contributions talk 19:39, 27 April 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

28 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Created DRSHRI, which was then moved in good faith to Dr. Sreehari by another editor. bonadea contributions talk 19:03, 28 April 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


28 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Reactivated account from 2009. Hit the edit filter with a classic Nsmutte combination of nonsensical deletion templates, although not on a Bonadea article or a user talk page as usual. This could require some serious clerking... CheckUser please. BethNaught (talk) 20:17, 28 April 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

Closing per Beth's request.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:02, 29 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

30 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Brand new account nominating an article I created with no rationale [56]. Similar behavior to earlier socks, such as DODODODO1 (talk · contribs) ([57]) and Made in usa1000 (talk · contribs) ([58]), where some of the very first edits were to nominate an article for deletion. Nsmutte has a history of doing this to other editors, primarily Bonadea. clpo13(talk) 17:27, 30 April 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) 18:44, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

22 May 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

[59] and [60]. bonadea contributions talk 17:46, 22 May 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

15 June 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

For reasons I am not clear on, @Bonadea: appears to be claiming that Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Tynell was created by a sockpuppet. No doubt he can expand. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:54, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

  • A new user with a keymashed name, immediately nominating an article created by Bonadea for deletion sure fits the pattern of this sock. CrowCaw 16:59, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments


18 June 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Continued harassment of User:Bonadea at Afd. Random keystroke username also matches recent pattern. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:34, 18 June 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

23 June 2016

Suspected sockpuppets


Behavioural purely on the pattern of editing. CU check for sleepers would be helpful as even with acc creation disabled appears to be carrying on (or a rangeblock if tahts the solution) Amortias (T)(C) 09:32, 23 June 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


26 June 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Similar random name as previous sockpuppets. Bad-faith edit warring report against Bonadea. WP:DUCK. clpo13(talk) 15:12, 26 June 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

15 July 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Created Sreehari (hypnotherapist) which is essentially identical to all the previous versions. bonadea contributions talk 14:34, 15 July 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

09 August 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Created Dr sreehari hypno anesthetist, which is the same article as usual. bonadea contributions talk 19:23, 9 August 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

14 August 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Alright, I'm not sure if this is the proper place to put this, however the editor has just used a bunch of accounts for harassment. Those are the IPs. Please note that I have probably missed some. Considering that Nsmutte really likes having sleepers, could a sleeper check be done? Dat GuyTalkContribs 19:02, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

User:BethNaught Thanks for the update and apologies for the wrong report, I believe I misread a comment. However, why would Zzuuzz block 73.81.119.125 with the block reason set as sockpuppetry and not block evasion? 20:30, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

I actually would endorse a sleeper check, since we haven't had one in a while. GABgab 20:53, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

25 October 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

Duck: first edit was to create Drshari, an article plainly about Dr. Sreehari. Wikishovel (talk) 15:39, 25 October 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

27 December 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

This user's only edit was to create List indian records. Then an IP user and an Nsmutte duck account came along to add in our old acquaintance Dr Srihari and his hypnotic achievements. This could be Nsmutte hijacking a new article, or a team of Nsmutte socks working in concert with more than usual stealthiness. Can you get the technical data to help decide which, please? For record the blocked ducks are Asdfasdf100 and 106.51.222.238. 🎄BethNaught (talk)🎄 07:56, 27 December 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 to each other are:

09 January 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

New accounts blathering at Talk:Hypertension about Jac8, like previous socks. BethNaught (talk) 13:22, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Rvamsi, more of the same. --bonadea contributions talk 13:51, 9 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

10 January 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Idiosyncratic posts e.g. here (cf these) - what clinches the deal is this which ties back to all the recent edits by several sockpuppet accounts and IPsocks to Hypertension and Talk:Hypertension. (By the way, when I looked through the sock archives right now to find useful diffs, I realised that their interest in hypertension is not entirely new.) bonadea contributions talk 19:30, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

I am really wonder feel ,i think they may be confused.

(Medical.student (talk) 19:53, 10 January 2017 (UTC))[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

Very  Likely. Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:28, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]


14 January 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

User:Dr Sreehari Sivajipalem was in the last batch of socks and the new Doctor is again making the same type of edit at Talk:Hypertension‎, as are the IPs. Barodaj is already blocked, but included for completeness. As usual with this sock farm, it would be worth checking for other sleepers. David Biddulph (talk) 15:40, 14 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

Nothing to do here. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:58, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

19 January 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Semi-literate newbie messing around with a Bonadea article and AfD. BethNaught (talk) 12:49, 19 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

01 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Y diptanshu sameeksh was previously reported without any action being taken due to weak evidence, but now he is quacking loudly, which is considerate of him. bonadea contributions talk 20:43, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And of course Priyankakadoo who created the Sreehari article again. --bonadea contributions talk 20:45, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Added Ruxena rukku, as the creator of the latest DOCTOR SREEHARI article. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:49, 1 February 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

@Bonadea: Y diptanshu sameeksh was found to be  Unlikely by a CheckUser. I don't see anything about "weak evidence".--Bbb23 (talk) 21:45, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

03 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

This is one of the strangest cases I've filed. A little sockfarm has converged around INDIAN RECORD HOLDERS, the usual sock target. They then nominated the article for deletion, then withdrew it. This even mentions "Dr Sreehari." GABgab 00:41, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Creating pages about Indian records, filing various pages he has created for AfD, withdrawing the AfD, and editing about Sreehari are pretty typical instances of Nsmutte editing. The records pages have been part of his MO almost from the start (eg List of indian record holders and List of Indian record holders individual - as you say, the usual sock target), and screwing around with AfDs is something he has also done periodically - it seems to be done in order to trick good faith editors into posting to the page, which means that Nsmutte can pretend to believe that the articles and other pages he creates have supporters. I wish his AfDs were deleted per WP:BAN since he only uses them to waste people's time, but then again, devoting time to that kind of cleanup would also be a waste, I suppose (even if it were always uncontroversial maintenance to delete them, which I suspect it wouldn't be, not when other people have weighed in). --bonadea contributions talk 06:44, 3 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

03 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Ungrammatical dicking around at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/S. Dallas Dance (2nd nomination). Zyxwvutsrr posted a link to an SPI talk page [61] and has an Nsmutte-like name. Creating a self-referential SPI and asking for it to be moved from WP talk: to WP: is a common Nsmutte tactic. However as far as I can remember messing up a non-India/Bonadea-related AFD is new. BethNaught (talk) 19:57, 3 February 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


04 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Users behavior on this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julio_Sadorra is consistent with behaviors well established by Nsmutte. Nsmutte also seems to have a particular like for nominating User:CatcherStorm's pages for deletion. The language used by the user here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Julio_Sadorra is also consistent with edits by Nsmutte. I suspect that this person has got to Julio Sadorra via https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/S._Dallas_Dance_(2nd_nomination) and is again "dicking" about with deletion of articles. Wiki-Coffee Talk 18:15, 4 February 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


04 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets


Created Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Julio Sadorra (2nd nomination) right after Vinayakuduj (also listed here) created the first version. Primefac (talk) 18:47, 4 February 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

I missed it. Blocking as a sock, but posting here for the record. Primefac (talk) 18:47, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]


05 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

WP:DUCK: recreated Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Julio Sadorra (2nd nomination) with the same allegations of sockpuppetry and whatever. ansh666 07:51, 5 February 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

06 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

This one, too, voting keep at its own Afd, just to be disruptive. Bonedea-linked. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:41, 6 February 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


06 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

More of the same. Back again. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 04:08, 6 February 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


06 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

See Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations/Editor 2050. BethNaught (talk) 17:44, 6 February 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

07 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets


Disruptive editing on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amelex. Compare edits to Fevanian (talk · contribs) who was recently blocked (whom also edited this AfD along with the alleged socks) as an obvious sock + troll/impersonation of admin, Favonian. Have now added Parvathideve (talk · contribs). Compare this user to RFTGHYUJK (talk · contribs). 172.58.40.37 (talk) 04:50, 7 February 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

07 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

There's been a rash of weird malformed AfDs recently, and I'm reluctant to pin all of them on Nsmutte but I think Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Newman, which was created and edited and closed and generally played around with by Jamepriority and Kiranrathods, is one of Nsm's. The reason being this edit by Jamepriority; I don't want to be too explicit per WP:BEANS but anybody who is familiar with Nsm should see what I mean. As for Jameswarnoor, this looks very much like Nsm again. bonadea contributions talk 21:26, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. I figured these two were socks, I just didn't know who. Anyways, I've added one more name to the list (pretty much Kiranrathods but with an extra "o"; the similarities in the names as well as the (now deleted) edits pretty much confirm at least those two). SkyWarrior 22:59, 7 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

08 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

All accounts created within 40 minutes of one another, two creating bad-faith AFD nominations as their first contributions. There may be more, but these are what I've run across so far.

I am not sure what to make of the James128769 account, which was created 10 minutes before the alleged sockmaster, and has done nothing but war with the other socks, claiming also "I am Favonian" in this edit. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:12, 8 February 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

Then this should probably be archived at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nsmutte. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:42, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

09 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets


Same as last time. The usual... 172.58.40.115 (talk) 04:25, 9 February 2017 (UTC) 172.58.40.115 (talk) 04:25, 9 February 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


09 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Shenanigans at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Janna Allen(SecondNomination). BethNaught (talk) 12:25, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Shenanigans indeed, now with an added Favonian impersonator (Favanean). Quack! --bonadea contributions talk 14:39, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Very likely Johne45 as well: [62] vs [63], and [64] vs [65]. --bonadea contributions talk 14:43, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

09 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Bad grammar, AfD silliness... BethNaught (talk) 18:28, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

+1 BethNaught (talk) 23:08, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

I've added User:Gamrandus. They're already blocked, but I figured it could be useful for a CU... 172.58.40.66 (talk) 22:44, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Added User:Awsdfghj. 172.58.40.66 (talk) 23:54, 9 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Added User:Zsdxfcgvh. 172.58.40.66 (talk) 01:21, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Added User:Vcoldcold. 172.58.40.66 (talk) 03:32, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Gogo Dodo: Found another one: Wsedrftgy (talk · contribs). 172.58.40.66 (talk) 04:59, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments


10 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Appears to be more of the same at Afd. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:06, 10 February 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

04 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Contribs to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/S._Dallas_Dance_(2nd_nomination) suspect. Wiki-Coffee Talk 12:00, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


I am not sock:

CatcherStorm and Wiki-Coffee Both socks try to save the article,the discussion is not routine,with a specific ambition,can get conclusion with the behavioral evidence.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/S._Dallas_Dance_(2nd_nomination) https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/S._Dallas_Dance_(2nd_nomination)&diff=763651046&oldid=763649561 Christaphercharly (talk) 12:50, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Both are definite confirmed socks; please look following, discussion closed prematurely.Aim is to save the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Julio_Sadorra

(Christaphercharly (talk) 14:07, 4 February 2017 (UTC))[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

Both accounts are  Confirmed to Nsmutte and are blocked without tags (nor should they be tagged in the future). I've also semi-protected the AfD for one week.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:19, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: Please hist-merge this report to the master's case page (Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nsmutte) for archiving. TDL (talk) 16:39, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done and closed. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:09, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

12 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Identically worded Afd. WP:QUACK. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:03, 12 February 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


13 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

[66] WP:DUCK Sro23 (talk) 00:44, 13 February 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

 Sounds like a duck quacking into a megaphone to me. GABgab 01:40, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Blocked. BethNaught (talk) 08:14, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

13 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

More of the same at Afd, seems like. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:50, 13 February 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

Added a sock. Please block these two perps. Thanks, GABgab 04:10, 13 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

12 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Pretty obvious sock that is already blocked, but it would be good if a CU could check for any possible sleepers. 172.58.41.39 (talk) 01:45, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just added User:Qwertyufg, who is currently unblocked. 172.58.41.39 (talk) 02:08, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

+1, for the record. BethNaught (talk) 09:05, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

Added another as per DUCK. GABgab 03:53, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a mess, I'm going to list only the four unblocked accounts I'm sure of, but there are other technical possibles if another CU wants to go looking at the range.  Confirmed: Kraker234, Sxdcrftvgyhu, Edrftghbjg, and You are dangerous than sanke. Courcelles (talk) 00:39, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • The 2nd and 3rd are Nsmutte names for sure, and the last one made a typical Nsmutte edit. The first one is... something I've not seen before in this case. GABgab 00:47, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Given the technical evidence is a match I'm satisfied these are all Nsmutte and I will block them. 2 and 3 are characteristic names. 4 also edited Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DMOZ, created by Istraven, who is CU blocked, and acted like Nsmutte. 1's sole edit corresponds to this deleted diff by an Nsmutte duck. Closing as all accounts mentioned now blocked. BethNaught (talk) 10:45, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

14 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Very obvious duck, but adding here because it may be useful for CU purposes. bonadea contributions talk 06:41, 14 February 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

Blocked, and since we just ran a CU (above), closing. GABgab 14:13, 14 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

15 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets


S nominated Bonadea's user page for deletion and B shows up to vote. Standard trolling by this O/C person. These accounts often come in waves so a C/U is requested to sniff out any others MarnetteD|Talk 02:44, 15 February 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


15 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Tag-team deletion dickery at Adair Park Historic District and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adair Park Historic District. Same bad spelling and idiosyncatic template use, but as creating their own article to nominate is a new tactic, I'm getting a second opinion. BethNaught (talk) 14:55, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have nothing of value to add to this but I am still laughing at this: Tag-team deletion dickery. This might be the best description of Nsmutte's vandalism yet. Chrissymad ❯❯❯ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 16:26, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Adding Skytop333 due to their abuse filter hit which is in the usual Nsmutte layout. BethNaught (talk) 00:06, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Added Kaajupakoda (talk · contribs). 172.56.38.78 (talk) 03:59, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Added Jumritha (talk · contribs). 172.56.38.78 (talk) 04:34, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Added Sdfghjrdfgt (talk · contribs). 172.56.38.78 (talk) 04:50, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
+Bagunnayi. BethNaught (talk) 08:07, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
+Nuvvuedianna because of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frank Norris (footballer)]. BethNaught (talk) 13:57, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. Any bets that Bowser0000 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) is not another one? Created a copy of an existing article and immediately took it to AfD. --bonadea contributions talk 17:01, 15 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments


17 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets


Still more anti-Bonadea deletion dickitude (and WP:DUCKitude) at Sigurveig Jónsdóttir. --Finngall talk 03:56, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Yup, was just about to add Elaayinaparledu (talk · contribs) myself... 172.58.41.33 (talk) 04:28, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I reported the two accounts to WP:AIV and Oshwah nuked them... 172.58.41.33 (talk) 05:08, 17 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments


19 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Fits pattern of AfD disruption, but no quacking as of yet. BethNaught (talk) 12:45, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

@Favonian and BethNaught: I found and added another little duckling... (User:StadiumCCC). 172.58.41.56 (talk) 03:22, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Materialscientist has now blocked them. 172.58.41.56 (talk) 03:40, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

21 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Did a drive-by AfD for Hypnosis and speedy-closed it as frivolous, then I reported them to AIV; as they were blocked based on that this is reference-only, but they have all the signs of this editor's history. Nate • (chatter) 04:47, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. Added Sdfghi (talk · contribs). 172.58.41.30 (talk) 04:49, 21 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments


22 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

A disruptive Afd opened and closed by this editor with the tell-tale edit: "Bonadea." WP:QUACK Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:50, 22 February 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


23 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

New editor instantly becoming disruptive at Afd with nonsense votes and noms. Worth a look? Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:29, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

I'm not seeing it. Don't these socks' AFD nominations normally mention something about notability? And this person's English actually makes sense. I genuinely believe this to be a new user who just doesn't understand the Afd process yet. Sro23 (talk) 01:44, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not exclusively, in my opinion. They nominate with a range of nonsense rationales. At least to my recollection, as someone who's made a number of reports. But you may be right. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:09, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

23 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Disruptive editing on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/75 Ark using identical edit summaries - see [67] and [68] Exemplo347 (talk) 17:19, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Nah, Kadamarialage and Benedea are loudly quacking socks of long term abuser User:Nsmutte. --bonadea contributions talk 17:31, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

See also this by Goodeditor125 Exemplo347 (talk) 17:53, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I dunno - his English is a bit poor but I think a lot of his seeminlgly stupid behaviour is just that he is a troll and his only aim is harassment and vandalism, and having had 500+ socks blocked he probably doesn't care about being instantly recognisable. But that's just my hypothesis, of course. --bonadea contributions talk 17:58, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
But even for a troll there must be so much more effective things to do than to be mildly annoying and to write nonsensical comments... Carl Fredrik 💌 📧 18:02, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fascinating how he/she gets all those IPs...Carl Fredrik 💌 📧 18:43, 23 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

26 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Seems to be following all the normal patterns of these socks. IP edited (as an obvious block evasion, compare this ES to confirmed sock's ES here) SuperstarSS then shows up with nonsense !vote, including other editors names like previous socks. Also suspicious is that this was the first edit immediately after registering (and creation of their userpage.) Chrissymad ❯❯❯ ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 03:49, 26 February 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


26 February 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

WP:DUCK, see [70] Sro23 (talk) 22:31, 26 February 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

04 March 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

This is more of the same sort of harassment BethNaught has been subject to for months. I think a very-wide rangeblock is called for. Surely we care enough about our volunteers to risk losing a handful of useful IP edits. Chris Troutman (talk) 05:17, 4 March 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

10 March 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

This sort of thing -- creating an account; immediately nominating for deletion, a key article Sweden; a poorly worded nom statement like this -- is this characteristic of the sockpuppeteer? I believe so. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:00, 10 March 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


11 March 2017

Suspected sockpuppets


Nsmutte sock User:Vushakiran started this AfD, it was closed, the account blocked, and Gamjumbo complains about it on (of all places) the BN. — O Fortuna! Imperatrix mundi. 06:50, 11 March 2017 (UTC) — O Fortuna! Imperatrix mundi. 06:50, 11 March 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

17 March 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Found some CU evidence that this account may be related, and they admit to being a sock, but I'd like another CU more familiar with this master to take a look and see if Nsmutte is indeed who this belongs to. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 20:13, 17 March 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

 Endorsed by a checkuser - Per my filing comment. Ks0stm (T•C•G•E) 20:15, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't urgent, so I'll let the process run, but based on behaviour, I hear quacking. BethNaught (talk) 20:26, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

23 March 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Disruptive AfD here with some of the usual characteristics. Active between times of a couple of other socks, see filters. BethNaught (talk) 17:28, 23 March 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

 Confirmed, blocked, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:18, 23 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]


25 March 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Classic WP:QUACKing on this one. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 04:19, 25 March 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. GABgab 04:26, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 Blocked and tagged. I'm not sure if it's proper to speedy delete an AfD nom, so I'm going to let someone else handle that. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:10, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]


27 March 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

harassment of User:Bonadea yet again. Prajwalla:[71] [72] [73]. The IP who made the initial username report [74] seems very likely to be the same editor. Why else would an IP with zero previous edits show up and report something about User:Bo, who has not been active for more than 5 years. Meters (talk) 06:15, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As the above diffs show, Prajwalla claimed ot be the same editor as the IP. Meters (talk) 06:23, 27 March 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

Both blocked. Closing. Widr (talk) 06:28, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

28 March 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Quack. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 04:18, 28 March 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

Blocked, closing. Widr (talk) 05:10, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

28 March 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

New user AFD in the suspicious pattern. BethNaught (talk) 16:12, 28 March 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

Red X Unrelated.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:59, 28 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Closing. The username doesn't seem that similar, and I don't see a particular behavioral tic. They haven't edited any more, anyways. GABgab 21:01, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

30 March 2017

Suspected sockpuppets


The usual bad faith AFD MarnetteD|Talk 00:29, 30 March 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

Now blocked. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:40, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]


30 March 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Typical disruption by Nsmutte, typical writing style. GABgab 03:03, 30 March 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

Please block them and delete the rubbish AFD. Thanks, GABgab 03:04, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
...And... done. GABgab 03:42, 30 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
More blocked socks from Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Josh4u:
GABgab 00:24, 31 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]


31 March 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Quacking. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 03:49, 31 March 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


1 April 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Already blocked, for the record. ansh666 04:05, 1 April 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

And Goldboxes (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). GABgab 14:47, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]


01 April 2017

Suspected sockpuppets


Looks to be Nsmutte, uses the same writing style. [75] Sro23 (talk) 16:55, 1 April 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

Blocked, closing. Widr (talk) 16:58, 1 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

02 April 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

attempted harrassment of user:Bonadea. Nthep (talk) 12:00, 2 April 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


02 April 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

New account, nonsense username, weak AFD. BethNaught (talk) 14:53, 2 April 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


02 April 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Trolling/personal attacks with the same writing style as Nsmutte. Sro23 (talk) 17:48, 2 April 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

Slightly different style, but it looks like him. Thanks, GABgab 18:24, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Considering that they targeted Ubiquity who created the article attacked by Fghjkklk in the case above, I'm calling it. Blocked; closing. Favonian (talk) 18:32, 2 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]


02 April 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

I realize they haven't technically edited yet but it seems fairly obvious... CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 18:49, 2 April 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


03 April 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

As above, personal attacks/vandalism at User talk:Ubiquity Exemplo347 (talk) 13:36, 3 April 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


03 April 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

As above - attempting to get User talk:Ubiquity deleted Exemplo347 (talk) 13:38, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. As I've just blocked two more quacking socks KKPADU and Ubaquity can we have a CU run for other sleepers? Nthep (talk) 16:00, 3 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

03 April 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Sock, etc. Exemplo347 (talk) 16:19, 3 April 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


03 April 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Quacking contribs. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 16:35, 3 April 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


04 April 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Quack. Right back to Afd, nominating User:Ubiquityy, which is actually targeting User:Ubiquity, once again. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 03:09, 4 April 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


04 April 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

See filter log.

Also worth noting: this CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 11:46, 4 April 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



05 April 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

New user goes immediately to Afd to create nonsense nomination. Enough of a link? Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:30, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Shawn in Montreal At first I was confused as to why that AfD would wind up here as part of an SPI over Nsmutte since it looked like it was just a genuine newbie disaster but now i'm in full agreement... CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 14:33, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Scratch that, I thought the AfD had already been deleted. I think this was their attempt to contest it's deletion/ start anew based on the comments in their edit summary on the article itself. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 14:35, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps. I'm just following up on Bethnaught's advice to me a while back. When I see a brand new user go right to Afd and create nonsensical, circular Afds, I bring it here. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:54, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure this is Nsmutte this time. The editor created this article that they then sent to AfD. Wondering if this was a confused newbie? RickinBaltimore (talk) 14:55, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Well, I'll just keep flagging the ones that I think fit the profile. I daresay I won't have to wait long. Thanks to you both., Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:05, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

The evidence is insufficient. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:10, 5 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

07 April 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Obvious duck is obvious (see contribs) CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 12:19, 7 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, literally blocked as soon as I hit submit. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 12:19, 7 April 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

08 April 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

 1.75x amplified ultimate quack of ultimate destiny ansh666 05:04, 8 April 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

10 April 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

 1.75x amplified ultimate quack of ultimate destiny - [76] ansh666 23:21, 10 April 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

Blocked and closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:39, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]


11 April 2017

Suspected sockpuppets


Restore the same ANI thread posted several hours earlier by another Nsmutte sock MarnetteD|Talk 02:30, 11 April 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

Blocked, rinse, and repeat. GABgab 03:13, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

19 April 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Another in a very long line of ongoing harassment-only accounts. Chris Troutman (talk) 04:31, 19 April 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


20 April 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Same as usual Chris Troutman (talk) 22:51, 20 April 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

Blocked as obvious. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:57, 20 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]


22 April 2017

Suspected sockpuppets


Shenanigans with sock User:Beeruvaas. Sro23 (talk) 15:46, 22 April 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

Blocked, closing. Widr (talk) 15:50, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

27 April 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

@Bonadea: has chosen to raise the matter at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism -- where there is currently disruptive editing from the alleged sock -- but not here. I'm flagging it here. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:07, 27 April 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

04 May 2017

Suspected sockpuppets


Goaabeuir account created and immediately creates List of user:Bonadae socks listing several known Nsmutte socks, and User:Bonadea, a legitimate user and common harassment target of this sock. Kusummamk is only slightly less obvious. The account was created minutes after the article was created, and immediately slapped a bogus AFD template on the article. I would ask for a speedy on this article but I'm leaving it up for evidence during this SPI. Meters (talk) 20:54, 4 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Article already deleted as having been created by a blocked user by User:Favonian. Meters (talk) 20:59, 4 May 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

05 November 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

I believe a sleeper check and/or rangeblock would be useful to prevent further disruption at this point Home Lander (talk) 16:33, 5 November 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

06 November 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

WP:DUCK. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:33, 6 November 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

08 November 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

The latest batch of Nsmutte s, all blocked per the usual behavior described at Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Nsmutte and reported for the record and any necessary followup with regard to sleepers and/or rangeblocks. - The Bushranger One ping only 05:24, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is going on at ANI repeatedly. Someone looking into this and rangeblocking would be appreciated. - The Bushranger One ping only 04:58, 9 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
And with ANI protected, they've moved to SPI. - The Bushranger One ping only 05:25, 9 November 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

13 November 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

All quacking at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Göran Enand. The article was created by User:Bonadea, Nsmutte's usual target. Home Lander (talk) 03:33, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

And another, FGBHJ, created another AFD. Home Lander (talk) 03:43, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

 Clerk assistance requested: Can a clerk please redirect Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dfgvbhjk to this SPI. Thanks. Home Lander (talk) 04:16, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

All accounts confirmed as Nsmutte (no comment on the IP). No sleepers left. -- zzuuzz (talk) 09:12, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

All accounts already  Blocked but awaiting tags - not sure if we're tagging Nsmutte socks or not.  Clerk assistance requested: to merge SPIs as mentioned above. - The Bushranger One ping only 09:29, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

14 November 2017

Suspected sockpuppets

Here we go again... created bogus Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/GnomeSweetGnome about a non-existent "sock account". User page and talk page were both created with a single symbol, typical of Nsmutte. Home Lander (talk) 02:34, 14 November 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

20 March 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

Accusing a vandal-reporter of sockpuppetry.  Looks like a duck to me KMF (talk) 22:12, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

I'm not sure I see it, to be honest. Somebody's sock to be sure, but Nsmutte's writing style is very different. The account is already blocked so there is no urgency, but I don't think it should be logged as a nsmutte sock (unless admins can see something I can't). --bonadea contributions talk 22:20, 20 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

05 April 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

Both caught by same filter (per beans, won't go into more detail) and both are old accounts, one from 2015 and one 2006 with no edits suddenly show up to edit Swish (payment) (created by Bonadea, the socks favorite editor to attack.)

Requesting CU for sleepers. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 16:26, 5 April 2018 (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 June 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

Behavioural, reported a load of blocked Nsmutte socks nonsensically on WP:AE. Worth checking for sleepers. ∰Bellezzasolo✡ Discuss 17:34, 24 June 2018 (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

Nobody else. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:46, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

24 June 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

Pretending to not be pretending to be a sock of Bonadea, (basically, loudly yelling they're not Bonadea in the hope a careless admin blocks Bonadea for it), refers to two Nsmutte socks in edit summaries, disruptive behaviour on noticeboards. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 23:39, 24 June 2018 (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

26 June 2018

Suspected sockpuppets 

―Gregorius II 02:28, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

This should be merged with Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nsmutte. --bonadea contributions talk 07:50, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

17 July 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

Something going on here but I can't quite work it out. This will have to rely on CU, as, ironically, behavioural evidence isn't just similar, it's identical (although in the converse, of course). We have User:KDNO1 (created 17 July 2018 at 10:58) and User:Carrymaekr (created three minutes later)—two accounts created within minutes of each other, same number of edits to the same article(s). They immediately began reverting each other at Meeli Kõiva: clearly neither of them are as new as they suggest, as Carrymaekr is aware of 3RR on their sixth edit, while KDNO1 is citing WP:BANREVERT on their seventh. I don't know if this is some kind of good cop / bad cop thing for the lulz, but there doesn't seem to be a history of socking at the article (recently, anyway). many thanks in advance for any light that can be cast upon these murky waters. —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap sh*t room 11:57, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, KDNO1 now blocked (as WDHlB, presumably?); got this message on my talk from the other party which suggests similarly low-grade English as them... —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap sh*t room 12:24, 17 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Acroterion: And another  :) —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap sh*t room 13:14, 17 July 2018 (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


17 July 2018

Suspected sockpuppets


Much the same behavioural evidence as the last submission—two accounts set up at the same time, that edit war, report each other, and generally tie up and waste other editors and admins' time (as is clearly the point0. These two, this time, have been edit warring over Rishi Rich. Lysome was created at 15:50 and Terenam at 14:39. Sets up a crappy ANEW report which the other blanks with an equally crappy e/s. —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap sh*t room 19:11, 17 July 2018 (UTC) . The —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap sh*t room 19:11, 17 July 2018 (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


18 July 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

Just some more of this going on, new account and reporting to edit war noticeboard, editing Talk:Rishi Rich with Lyesosome1 and Lysasome 1. -★- PlyrStar93 →Message me. ← 01:57, 18 July 2018 (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 -- zzuuzz (talk) 02:12, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]


18 July 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

Pretty clear WP:DUCK, first edit is undoing JackintheBox who was undoing a previous sock HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 04:54, 18 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I added Kbomprakash, likely a good hand account. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 05:02, 18 July 2018 (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

28 July 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

this diff shows a new user going to a noticeboard about another new user and that user reverting them and Kumpati mentions a Bonedea type name, something that his/her LTA page, which shows here says he or she does. I believe a checkuser is in order for sleepers. JC7V7DC5768 (talk) 00:31, 28 July 2018 (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

02 August 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

Again targeting ANEW noticeboard and using an IP 106.77.187.139 to revert each other. -★- PlyrStar93 →Message me. ← 23:41, 2 August 2018 (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

04 August 2018

Suspected sockpuppets


Same old same old, please check for sleepers. Also this is for the record. thanks. JC7V-constructive zone 03:15, 4 August 2018 (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. -- zzuuzz (talk) 05:15, 4 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

07 August 2018

Suspected sockpuppets


two times today, EMARAPATU does Nsmutte style vandalism here and Praneethaly does Nsmutte type vandalism here. See contribution history for more. Think a sleeper check and having above accounts on record for future checks would help JC7V-constructive zone 17:40, 7 August 2018 (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

11 August 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

WP:DUCK, see this AN/I diff. I went ahead and blocked already under WP:NOTHERE, Not sure if CU would be useful. ansh666 05:36, 11 August 2018 (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

11 September 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

 Looks like a duck to me per [77] and [78] [79] Hhkohh (talk) 11:55, 11 September 2018 (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

14 September 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

Duck. General Ization Talk 07:52, 14 September 2018 (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

29 October 2018

Suspected sockpuppets


Claiming to be Bonadea's alternate account. I've already blocked; just posting here in the event further action is required. Tiderolls 14:30, 29 October 2018 (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

17 February 2019

Suspected sockpuppets


Ducking. Same pattern of sign that have bracket wrapping around it. After Franchiodiol, a sock of the sockmaster was blocked, fixing Franchiodiol's comment. See Special:Diff/883798341 Matthew hk (talk) 18:40, 17 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See also Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring with thread "User:Blamen1 reported by User:Fylindfotberserk " Matthew hk (talk) 18:42, 17 February 2019 (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

18 February 2019

Suspected sockpuppets

Whatever this is supposed to be: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dakota_Johnson&diff=prev&oldid=883954400 https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BAMN&diff=prev&oldid=883953815 (Also, I'm just suspicious of anyone whose first edit is to their userpage.) Natureium (talk) 17:40, 18 February 2019 (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

@Vanjagenije: This is Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Nsmutte. Sro23 (talk) 13:15, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
MOved and closed. Vanjagenije (talk) 15:40, 19 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16 March 2019

Suspected sockpuppets

See contribs. Made false reports on both WP:SPI and WP:AIV. Also vandalized another SPI. Possibly a WP:DUCK of Nsmutte unless I am wrong. Requesting c/u evidence in case we have a positive. IanDBeacon (talk) 19:38, 16 March 2019 (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

Not Nsmutte. -- zzuuzz (talk) 19:53, 16 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

21 March 2019

Suspected sockpuppets

False report at WP:UAA, clearly trolling behaviour toward Bonadea, whose talk page seems to have been a recent target of these socks. Drm310 🍁 (talk) 16:22, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Update: Now blocked by Dlohcierekim. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 16:26, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Drm310: Not "a recent target" by any means! ——SerialNumber54129 16:44, 21 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

01 April 2019

Suspected sockpuppets

Same pattern of harassment toward Bonadea. [80], [81] Drm310 🍁 (talk) 05:35, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

—

Good grief, you wind up one SPI, and a carbon copy comes along. Cabayi (talk) 10:17, 1 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

—

Since we're doing this, although I'm not really sure I see the point? ——SerialNumber54129 10:21, 1 April 2019 (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

—
—
More