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

• TheErectile (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• TheTruthAboutCatsandDogs (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• 82.81.218.180 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
• Editor interaction utility

The contributions between Oct 8 on this user and the contributions of the alleged sock master since Oct 7. The IP user made the same contributions shortly after a block. Requesting a CheckUser to check for sleepers due to obvious sock puppetry and exhibiting continued abuse through multiple accounts. -- Dane2007 ^talk 05:29, 21 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

•  Confirmed with respect to the named user(s).  No comment with respect to IP address(es). Plus: FredFlinstoneWasHere (talk · contribs) -- Amanda (aka DQ) 07:13, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• All blocked. Closing, Kevin (alt of L235 · t · c) 14:44, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• BeenThereDoneThatAlready (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
• Editor interaction utility

The only contribution this account has made after a block matches the comment made on the sockpuppeteers talk page. This user has a CheckUser confirmed history of using socks, which they are doing for block evasion and POV pushing. -- Dane2007 ^talk 16:08, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

•  Confirmed -- Amanda (aka DQ) 17:41, 23 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
•  Awaiting administrative action – extend the master's block too, if you please. Kevin (alt of L235 · t · c) 14:44, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
•  Administrator note  Blocked and tagged. Thanks Dane2007 doing up the tag in advance. Marking as closed. Mkdw^talk 15:09, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Erm, Mkdw, mind extending TheErectile's block? Thanks, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 18:41, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now done. Feel free to archive. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 18:47, 24 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Xparta (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
• Editor interaction utility

This edit and the users editing history strongly matches the alleged sockmasters editing history and behavior. -- Dane2007 ^talk 14:25, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

•  In progress - Katie^talk 18:11, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• There are technical similarities that make Xparta  Possible. Xparta is also a much older account than TheErectile.  Behavioural evidence needs evaluation Katie^talk 20:35, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
•  Awaiting administrative action - These edits are practically identical. I think a block is in order. Thanks, GAB^gab 21:34, 31 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blocked.  Clerk assistance requested: to move this to the oldest account (Xparta) and fix tags. ~ Rob₁₃^Talk 04:07, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
•  Clerk note:  Done. GAB^gab 15:27, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Monkeyonthebed (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
• Editor interaction utility

This page looks very similar to the sock puppetry by Xparta on this page. It appears the user tried to make a different page due to the fact there is protection on the original page. -- Dane2007 ^talk 23:13, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

•  In progress - Katie^talk 23:32, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
•  Confirmed, blocked, and tagged. Closing. Katie^talk 23:37, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• TheImageCollector (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• 82.81.218.180 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• 2.53.155.46 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
• Editor interaction utility

This diff and this diff show the socks first edits (under "Xparta") while this diff and this diff shows the new socks edits. -- Dane2007 ^talk 15:54, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Added IP who made the same contribution as the sock. -- Dane2007 ^talk 16:06, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Added another IP who made the same contribution as the sock. -- Dane2007 ^talk 16:16, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@QEDK: There were sleepers in the initial report. Additionally, this case was originally filed under TheErectile's SPI until one of their older sleeper accounts emerged (Xparta). I believe CU may be needed as the sock stopped editing for a month while the article was protected - additional accounts may have been made in that time. -- Dane2007 ^talk 21:14, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

•  Awaiting administrative action - Block sock per DUCK, no prior evidence of sleepers to justify CU. Softblock IPs. QEDK (T ☕ C) 18:13, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Dane2007: That wasn't a sleeper, but an uncaught sock. Nearly all of his socks are made, and begin editing after that. --QEDK (T ☕ C) 09:01, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@QEDK: TheImageCollector may have got missed out here as they were blocked for edit warring - do they still need blocking? -- samtar ^{talk or stalk} 13:32, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Nothing more to do here. Case closed. Vanjagenije (talk) 20:53, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• GermanSherman (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
• Editor interaction utility

This edit is the same as this edit. Sock has made a new article to get around the protection. -- Dane2007 ^talk 12:08, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

• @Samtar:, I need you to go through the deleted edit and see if the behaviour is same. Block the previous sock indefinitely, preferably with a higher autoblock time (default is 24 hrs, I think). If this one matches the pattern too, block it indefinitely too. --QEDK (T ☕ C) 17:32, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  ECP/PC2 the page. Entirely forgot that. --QEDK (T ☕ C) 17:39, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

   Blocked and tagged GermanSherman per WP:DUCK (deleted contribs) -- samtar ^{talk or stalk} 18:06, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  @Samtar: Block TheImageCollector too. --QEDK (T ☕ C) 19:47, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

   Blocked and tagged TheImageCollector -- samtar ^{talk or stalk} 19:54, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Nothing more to do here. Case closed. Vanjagenije (talk) 20:54, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• 82.81.86.82 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
• Editor interaction utility

This IP and the editing style matches the prior edits made by Xparta on articles related to the Kobo family. This is the same IP range as the prior socks. Not requesting checkuser due to IP address - this is strictly behavioral. -- Dane ^talk 19:39, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

•  Awaiting administrative action - Block and forget. Perform collateral check on 82.81.*, might recommend a rangeblock if more IPs of the same range comes up in the future. QEDK (愛) 18:07, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Way beyond block stale, and 82.81.80.0/20 block is not advised with too much collateral vs. target. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 06:37, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Mandotopo (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Tools: Editor interaction utility · Interaction Timeline · SPI Tools

This appears to be a sock puppet of Xparta based on editing style and focus. User previously communicated among multiple channels and was informed not to edit their own articles due to COI.

Suspicious Edits ("Edit style") appears to be removing potentially negative information about O.D. Kobo and promoting his related ventures. These same behaviors were seen with the prior socks. Requesting CheckUser to look for potential sleepers. -- Dane ^talk 23:47, 11 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

•  Check declined by a checkuser -  Stale -- Amanda (she/her) 15:30, 13 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• @Dane:  Additional information needed. In order to facilitate and expedite your request, please provide diffs to support your case. Please give two or more diffs meeting the following format:

1. At least one diff is from the sockmaster (or an account already blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet of the sockmaster), showing the behaviour characteristic of the sockmaster.
2. At least one diff per suspected sockpuppet, showing the suspected sockpuppet emulating the behaviour of the sockmaster given in the first diff.
3. In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided. Around one sentence is enough for this. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 13:08, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing as no further information was provided — JJMC89 (T·C) 00:24, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]