Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Altimgamr/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Altimgamr

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

Similar user names. Making same edit on Kia Motors within seconds of each other. [1], [2] NeilN talk to me 02:09, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • I have indef blocked the sock, blocked the IP for 24 hours (CheckUser was not used), and warned the master. Tiptoety talk 06:53, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


29 August 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Primary user was indefinitely blocked on 19 August 2013 for disruptive editing and sockpuppetry. His activity consists of false edits on several automotive articles such as the following:

Ford Crown Victoria

Mercury Marauder

Geo Metro

User IP 75.43.33.125 created the hoax article "Shelby Crown Victoria", and the main user in question has posted on the IP's Talk page.

User IP 75.43.46.175 became active less than a week after the main user was blocked, and is the most active among the three IP addresses. The most recent edit was on its own Talk page with the edit summary as "I hate you" directed toward the last editor. Areaseven (talk) 10:38, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

SRT Viper

Adding a hoax "1,500 hp Super" version to the SRT Viper article then revert warring to keep it in the article. The "I hate you" message was in response to a user warning for adding hoax material that I posted on the IP's talk page. Thomas.W talk to me 10:53, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • Obviously all ducks but it's stale at this point. They are all dynamic so I won't bother with blocking. I'll keep an eye on the articles in question. NativeForeigner Talk 22:48, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
31 August 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


User has struck again with the IP address above by creating a hoax edit on Honda Crosstour. Also admitted on this edit that prior anonymous posts on Talk:Porsche Panamera were his. Areaseven (talk) 01:07, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


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

Loudly quacking IP-editor geolocating to Modesto, CA, which is where the sockpuppeteer is known to come from (based on geolocation of IP-socks, comments made in edit summaries etc), who makes edits of the same type as the sock puppeteer and previous socks, has an obsession with Ford Crown Victoria and refers to his dad's cars in an edit summary (diff [3]), as previous socks have also done. Thomas.W talk to me 08:02, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • A complete duck. Same IP range as used before. Blocked. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:11, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
25 September 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Noscamsetc continues to insert a bunch of baloney about a Shelby Crown Victoria, compare [4] and [5]. Noscams also has a bee in his bonnet regarding size classification, see this edit summary for an example. So does ip2: [6]. ip1 continues Noscams conversation at Chevrolet Cruze [7], an ongoing mix-up about EPA size classification. ip3 then writes more in the same vein [8].  Mr.choppers | ✎  04:34, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


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

Judging only from CU scans, these 4 users are most likely one person:

Materialscientist (talk) 07:07, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just blocked Jasons99Contour and Noscamsouttherebeinglovedby2013 indef, the other two were already blocked. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:07, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Clerk note: If those are the results, does this require merging? Rschen7754 18:36, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes. (There may well be more than 4 accounts, but I can't track them at the moment). Materialscientist (talk) 23:45, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Done. --Rschen7754 06:02, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
02 November 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

IP1: Continuing the "work" of sock puppeteer and previous socks by posting hoaxes about "Shelby Crown Victoria" on Talk:Ford Crown Victoria (diff), also posting on User talk:Jasons99Contour (diff).
IP2: Reverting my removal of the hoax from Talk:Ford Crown Victoria (diff).
Named account: Posting about the hoax "Shelby Crown Victoria" on Talk:Ford Crown Victoria (diff), also has a username that is very similar to blocked sock User:RonaldClownsterMcDonaldHater.

Thomas.W talk to me 08:37, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The user has posted from a number of IPv6 addresses from the same range lately so a range block might be in order... Thomas.W talk to me 08:53, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • information Administrator note Took me a while to figure out what the heck was going on, but I've managed to piece together the puzzle enough to block under WP:DUCK Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 21:58, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • information Administrator note Blocked 2602:306:CDB2:4130:0:0:0:0/64 for 3 months. I don't have a good way of checking, but I suspect the collateral damage on this is minimal if it exists at all. Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 22:06, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
04 November 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


User continues to troll on the talk pages of his IP sockpuppets, as evidenced here. He also continues to disrupt the Talk page of the Ford Crown Victoria article, as evidenced here. Areaseven (talk) 05:05, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


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

This tireless vandal continues to mess up particularly the Ford Crown Victoria page and Luxury vehicle ([9], [10]), specializing in making a series of vandalistic edits and then reverting only the last one, proclaiming his "mistake" in the edit summary - thus attempting to hide the vandalism already introduced. Jason's puppets have been doing the same a number of times, see: [11] and [12]. Loves introducing the Mercury Grand Marquis to pages everywhere.  Mr.choppers | ✎  04:30, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Judging by this edit, the ip is also somehow related. Already blocked, but still.

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • Mrtacos2 blocked indef per his claim of not being in control of his account, IP blocked 36 hours for vandalism. Closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 06:46, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
10 March 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


WP:DUCK - same editing patterns on Buick Lucerne (deliberately adding in unencyclopedic information). Both also have an infatuation with "weebly"-hosted sources, as [13] shows, as does the master's edits like [14]. I wonder if we could get a range block on the first range of IPs, and have monitors on the other ranges this user used. Lukeno94 (tell Luke off here) 22:30, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

  • information Note: I added some additional accounts following an email from Altimgamr admitting that he is Jasons99Contour, Mrtacos2, and Jason London. Some of the articles highly edited by him have been protected allowing only autoconfirmed contributors. This has brought on the creation of some new accounts Jason London and KimJMykle building up their edit count to become autoconfirmed. (A review of the edit history of KimJMykle indicates another sock based on behavioral patterns.) Once the account becomes autoconfirmed, I'm seeing the same editing as before. Accordingly, I would request a sleeper check for additional accounts. Cindy(talk) 20:55, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Here is a diff in which IP 166.137.191.46, in one of the normal ranges, cites a fake video that they have added to YouTube. This is at least the second one I've seen by this user. Bahooka (talk) 02:49, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • CheckUser requested - Self-endorsed by clerk for checkuser attention - Given new accounts were created after the block can a CU take a look please. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:22, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Additional information needed - Given the amount of CU cases, I must ask for more diffs. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 00:25, 24 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Procedural decline since there's a case below. --Rschen7754 20:47, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
29 March 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

First two accounts are obvious, and already blocked accordingly: both created Ford Shelby CV525 (44thPresidentOfUSA: [15], Nissan Maxima: [16]), which is a recreation of the same hoax Altimgamr propegated as Saleen S281 Sedan (with the same claimed sourcing to Motor Trend that didn't hold up). Abcdef(etc.) popped up doing the exact same thing: [17].

However the thirdfourth account is an oddity; while not (yet?) making any edits itself, its name is an obvious reference and the edit by Nissan Maxima to its talk page [18] raises an eyebrow (why would they go and do that, as the only edit not the recreation mentioned above, unless it was because it was their own account?). Requesting CU for confirmation on Annoying duck and for a sleeper check. The Bushranger One ping only 23:26, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to adding the third account above, CindamuseBot (talk · contribs) popped up and laid down a string of gibberish at Talk:Ford Shelby CV525; obviously the same fellow. - The Bushranger One ping only 23:29, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users[edit]

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

  • I've blocked a few of these hard, no email, autoblock, no talk page, finally had to salt the talk page where they were recreating the article. Basic bored troll with access to a lot of IPs. It would be helpful for a CU to explore the idea of a short term range block if that is practical. In my opinion, a CU is strongly recommended, to check a range and perhaps snag any accounts he hasn't used yet. Note: he published his password on the 44th account, I revdel'ed, logged into his account to verify it was really the password, then hardblocked. That account log should show an IP from NC, which is me. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 23:36, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I believe that that 166.137.191. 166.137.208. , and 174.141.208. should be considered for the range block also. I've see at least 20 IPs from these ranges that seem to be the same car article vandal (commenting on each other's talk pages, referencing the bogus Ford Shelby CV525 source, trolling on the car talk pages, etc.). Meters (talk) 23:47, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • You can add 166.137.191.20 to the list when considering a range block. Same types of edits. Bahooka (talk) 17:34, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • I also just added User:Give me your own laptop under March 10. I'm not quite sure where to put new ones to the ever-growing pile of socks. Bahooka (talk) 05:18, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • NOTE to CU. The 44th account mentioned the sockmaster in his talk page revert summaries, if that helps. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 23:40, 29 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • NOTE 2 - I semiprotected for a week and added User:The water bottle after two obvious blanking attempts. Feel free to modify without asking. IP was blocked, verified by their last edit as well as blanking, I didn't bother listing them above. ADDED: I also blocked an IP and protected the talk page after some more socktrolling. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 20:24, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • No range blocks? Really? Just to verify my impression of what ranges are being used, I looked at the contributions of the first 50 IP addresses under 166.137.191. Fifteen have never had any contributions and are probably not available to the socker since they are consecutive (166.137.191.0-15). Five seem to have legitimate contributions with no recent socking (only one of these has been active in the last month). Three have been used by the apparent socker in the last rwo months but have since made legitimate edits. The other twenty-seven IPs in this range have all been used by the apparent sock in the last two months with no subsequent legitimate edits. Thirteen of the thirty IPs used by the socker have been used in the last week alone. I'm curious. What does it take to justify a range block? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meters (talk • contribs)
    • That is part of a /9 network, or half of a Class A network, 8,388,608 hosts. Narrowing it down can be tricky and often not fruitful. Having 50 addresses that have no action on them doesn't influence the decision much if many of the other 8 million do have action, and have known good users on them. Range blocks are often handy, but not a cure-all, and sometimes impractical. CUs have access to better tools than you and I, so when they say it isn't practical, there is usually a good reason but they can't fully disclose why. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 23:28, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • Maybe I'm making a misassumption about how rangeblocking works with IPv$ addresses, but I think we're talking at cross purposes. Anyways, getting off topic for this board. Thanks for the response. Meters (talk) 00:07, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • @Risker: could you comment on this? --Rschen7754 20:31, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I will comment further later on; however, having done some checks in relation to this already, please NO RANGE BLOCKS. The primary related ranges are active with many appropriate accounts, including many "good editor" new/unconfirmed users who would be shut out. Risker (talk) 20:37, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • While investigating disruptive editing elsewhere, I made two blocks in relation to this case, but I don't have the tools to perform a complete investigation at the moment. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 02:03, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay folks....this is probably not entirely complete, but it's a good start. Please note again, range blocks for *all* of the ranges involved are problematic; there are a lot of appropriate edits within the applicable ranges, and they are very dynamic. Many of these accounts are already blocked, but some may not be. Clerks, please merge with Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jasons99Contour/Archive - doesn't much matter which username you wish to use here, although I suspect "Altimgamr" might be best.

The following are  Confirmed:


The following are  Likely:

Risker (talk) 04:19, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

​—DoRD (talk)​ 06:46, 2 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • All identified socks are blocked and tagged. Three accounts listed as "likely" but not blocked by checkusers have no edits so I have left them alone for now. It's a shame we can't block the entire range. Someguy1221 (talk) 01:19, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you all for combining the Jason/Taco/Altimgamr etcetera sockpuppet reports. I felt they were all the same user, and just wanted to say that I appreciate everyone's work here. I just hope this ***** finds a new hobby or gets a date or something soon, because I am really tired of spending all my editing time undoing their idiocy.  Mr.choppers | ✎  03:56, 4 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note to CheckUsers: Please see Checkuser-Wiki page on this user for historic information. Risker (talk) 03:48, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
11 April 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Continues Altimgamr's obsession with size classification, names puppet after car (or a company in this case), also pretends to "help" reverting "vandalism".  Mr.choppers | ✎  02:15, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The IP also breaks urls, while attempting to hide vandalism amongst a mass of other useless edits. See here for instance, at Buick Lucerne, one of Altimgamr's fave topics. The ip also attempted to list another editor at this sockpuppet investigation: [19]  Mr.choppers | ✎  02:28, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

The IP that you list above: 209.251.58.174 appears to be attempting to help out with the archive with this diff [20]. I am reverting the change in order to keep the archive accurate. Rmosler | ● 02:59, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That IP edit looks to me like one in a long chain of obfuscations and attempts at confusion. Best ignored, or approached as yet another vandalism.  Mr.choppers | ✎  01:32, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Tf is Altimgamr? 209.251.58.174 (talk) 02:57, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, well, nobody's perfect! Lol Ferrari S.p.A (talk) 03:58, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

Regarding the reference-deleting, he says it's a virus. [21] I did not review the behavior to see if they are socks, though. Enigmamsg 03:21, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I guess this is a tacit admission? Enigmamsg 03:43, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Tagged for CUrequest based on the massive sockfarm found last time. - The Bushranger One ping only 10:08, 11 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Can't block based on that "admission", could simply be setting someone up for a bad block, have to use behavior or CU. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 00:35, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I was not intending to block anyone here. I was just wondering. Enigmamsg 02:30, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The ferrari account was blocked indefinitely by MaterialScientist. Enigmamsg 02:32, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Risker (talk) 03:05, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

19 April 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


WP:DUCK at here with his insertion about a non-existent Shelby CV525 plus other additions of nonsense references of mainly mid-size cars. Altimgamr is adding fake information about this "car" at various car forums online to make it appear legitimate, all recent additions and containing bizarre information. Bahooka (talk) 13:30, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A new IP is now being used by Altimgamr User:210.163.11.135 with the edit here. Does this require a new SPI case as the other sock had already been checked? Bahooka (talk) 20:05, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And User:Clear your cookies with the same car and Debby Ryan edits. Bahooka (talk) 02:35, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  •  Confirmed, blocked and tagged, two open proxies blocked. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:21, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Confirm that all accounts have been blocked, as have the proxies. May close now. Risker (talk) 05:51, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
20 April 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

WP:DUCK. Obviously trying to troll two other users. Jasper Deng (talk) 03:20, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


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

 Confirmed, open proxy blocked earlier today. Risker (talk) 05:45, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

25 April 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Altimgamr is making the same disruptive car edits as before (these accounts were created today.) A couple of accounts and IP addresses have already been blocked today by User:Mike Rosoft, but adding some more. Also requesting a checkuser as Altimgamr has had sockfarms before. Bahooka (talk) 16:02, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • All are  Confirmed and blocked. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:36, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]


25 April 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Altimgamr is still editing on the BMW M5 article. Bahooka (talk) 16:48, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


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

information Administrator note These two socks have already been blocked. They're not even trying to be sneaky, they're being obvious about it. The article has since been semi-protected to stop this vandalism. -- Atama頭 20:25, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]


26 April 2014[edit]

Making the same kinds of edits to the same kinds of car articles (like here), including various mentions of autism. Bahooka (talk) 00:04, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

The IPs and the named accounts are all related to each other; they all vandalize the same articles. See their contributions for more details. If User:Bahooka is innocent, then this would also be a case of impersonation. Reqesting the indef blocking and tagging of all confirmed named accounts, as well as a sleeper check. If Bahooka is clean, then an admin should move this page to that of the appropriate sockmaster. LightandDark2000 (talk) 01:23, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that is Altimgamr impersonating me as retribution for this SPI case, the AIV case, and the reverting of his vandalism. I have no alternate account. Thanks, Bahooka (talk) 01:41, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I added some more recent accounts for a better comparison of their behavior. LightandDark2000 (talk) 01:48, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, he has been rangeblocked for a day, so that should end the trouble for today. LightandDark2000 (talk) 01:57, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Add to that:

Mike Rosoft (talk) 05:17, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting a check on User:Kevin Hart (famous actor) and User:The Bushranger (backup account) as per edits on User talk:66.87.115.147 (I was trying to make a new report but for some reason the finished report shows up blank). E Wing (talk) 05:56, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Added these to the batch above. Somebody's being a very naughty boy... - The Bushranger One ping only 08:08, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]


28 April 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


WP:DUCK, seeking a checkuser to identify other socks due to Altimgamr's history. Bahooka (talk) 00:22, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • Nothing else of interest at this time. Elockid (Talk) 14:54, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
06 May 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Same types of edits on car articles, including restoring one of his edits here. Edit summaries are similar and poor quality references are the same. Bahooka (talk) 01:09, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


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


06 May 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Similar edits on Ford Mustang Mach 1. E Wing (talk) 01:32, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

  • It's worth noting that this time, the car in question (Ford Mustang Mach 1 Twister Special) does exist, although the style looks close enough to Altimgamr's to make my antennae twitch. - The Bushranger One ping only 01:40, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

 Clerk endorsed Based on initial evidence, editing and interest area plus Bushranger's comment. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:43, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Possible. Same country, but his ISP is of such a nature that it's impossible to go further than that. T. Canens (talk) 15:34, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Given that he hasn't edited since, I'd suggest leaving this one for now, but keeping an eye on it. - The Bushranger One ping only 21:10, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
07 May 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Revising vehicle sizes based on length (see the edit summaries here and here.), a POV Altimgamr also pushed. Also editing the same types of articles that Altimgamr frequents and editing from Northern California like Altimgamr. Bahooka (talk) 20:19, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

If this guy continues to vandalize using completely different IP Ranges, then maybe the articles he targets should be semi-protected for 1-2 months. That might not work, but it should help. LightandDark2000 (talk) 08:08, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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


10 May 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


WP:DUCK per articles edited, types of edits, and edit summaries. Bahooka (talk) 19:25, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

  • Here he even references the Shelby CV525 in his edit summary. Also invents the Ford Crown Victoria "QX Sport" model here, another typical Altimgamr behavior.  Mr.choppers | ✎  19:29, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The IP also geolocates to the part of Northern California that Altimgamr is known to operate from, roughly within a triangle with its points in San Fransisco, Sacramento and Modesto. Thomas.W talk 20:43, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • Don't mean to step on any clerk's or CU's toes, but this is obvious and SPI is already busy enough, so I've just boldly closed this. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 20:49, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]


12 May 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

The usual Altimgamr nonsense, with blatant quacking from the accounts and the usual "Shelby CV525" hoaxing from the IP. All blocked, requesting CU for a sleeper check. The Bushranger One ping only 00:10, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • The connection to Vice President M.W.P is more tenuous than the others, but they did hit one of the same (non-car) pages that one of the Altimgamr IPs did, so there seems to be enough of a connection there for a check. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:55, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users[edit]

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

Yeah, they're definitely all socks of Altimgamr. He used User:Vice President M.W.P to retaliate on my talk page and user page editnotice after I helped report some of his socks in an older SPI case. In any case, requesting a sleeper check and admin intervention against further abuse of his IP. LightandDark2000 (talk) 09:54, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I admit that it was my mistake. I already had deep suspicions about that account being Mr Wiki Pro's sock, but unfortunately, the tag threw me off. However, everyone makes mistakes, so I guess that it isn't the first time. LightandDark2000 (talk) 05:33, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Now that we're done here, can someone please archive all of the cases on this page? It's been quite a while, and the SPI cases are starting to pile up here. LightandDark2000 (talk) 07:47, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • Vice President M.W.P is definitely not Altimgamr. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 10:53, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The rest of the accounts are  Inconclusive at best.
    • Lincoln Navigator and Cadillac Escalade the Luxury SUV are the same and were editing from a web host (now blocked).
    • It is  Possible that Boys squat, too. is related to the two above, but the connection is tenuous.
  • no No comment with respect to IP address(es). ​—DoRD (talk)​ 11:10, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for the check. The MWP should have been a clue on the one. All the others are quacking definitively. I think we're done here until Alti gets bored tomorrow... - The Bushranger One ping only 11:12, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • LightandDark2000 should have known better about that one, too, particularly since it was he that reported the account at the other case. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 11:25, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • information Administrator note All of the ducks are blocked anyway, so I'm marking this for closure. —Darkwind (talk) 07:04, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]


14 May 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Same edits, same articles, same references, same everything. Bahooka (talk) 04:20, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Adding another as the earlier case is not yet closed. Bahooka (talk) 21:29, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Then we might as well add Ferrari LaFerrari and IP 99.155.192.12 too. Just for the record since they're both already blocked. Thomas.W talk 21:40, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And now four more... - The Bushranger One ping only 03:37, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users[edit]

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

177.135.248.219 displays the same mannerisms as Altimgamr, but his location is questionable. While Altimgamr's other IP socks are based in California, 177.135.248.219 is from Brazil. - Areaseven (talk) 04:27, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe he's figured out proxying? - The Bushranger One ping only 04:42, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
177.135.248.219 isn't Altimgamr. The style/wording in the edit summaries is totally different. Thomas.W talk 07:18, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The catch is that this user seems quite similar to 177.135.248.219 - and they went straight for an article I'd just edited, implying a deliberate choice from my contributions - implying Alti. - The Bushranger One ping only 07:57, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Copy cat. Alti wouldn't write "bro", "doesent", "lolz" or "n i cant evn rmr da p/w to my acc". The IP that geolocates to Brazil doesn't seem to be a native English speaker, unlike Alti, just a Brazilian teen desperately wanting to be "cool". Thomas.W talk 08:12, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Good point. But vandals will be vandals, I suppose... - The Bushranger One ping only 08:56, 15 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Thomas.W: - His new trick was to "shorten" an article using those types of terms. See User:Adam and Eve (your ancients) (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) which was blocked by The Bushranger. EvergreenFir (talk) 04:24, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(The reason for that being that, as seen below, one that was unquestionably him was doing the same thing) - The Bushranger One ping only 05:30, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
What the Brazilian IP did/wrote and what Alti did/wrote was totally different. Alti has discovered "transl8it.com", a web site where you can change any text from proper English to "lingo" with a simple copy-paste and a mouse click. "Lingoizing" a whole article in just a few seconds. Alti even gave us the URL of that site in this edit summary... Thomas.W talk 22:10, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
16 May 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Still trying to pass off his fake car, Ford Crown Victoria Shelby CV525. May have discovered Google Translate judging from the disruptive editing by that user. Bahooka (talk) 03:00, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • Umpteenth verse, same as the first. Also, given this, it's pretty obvious this is him too. - The Bushranger One ping only 03:18, 16 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've closed this case, even though it had a CU request because it appears the CUs and clerks are all backed up the wazoo and these are just obvious. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 14:53, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
17 May 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Quack. Bahooka (talk) 01:18, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
17 May 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
NeilN talk to me 14:27, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users[edit]

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • Yeah, this is absolutely Myuser89. I had my suspicions with User:Mercedes-Benz Today, due to the "spin off subtypes/merge similar types" behavior, and this (clearly the same person as MBT) confirms it by recreating a Myuser89 page. Blocked, tagged, this last section needs to be split to a Myuser89 SPI page now. - The Bushranger One ping only 20:41, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
18 May 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Inserted hoax material ("corvette final 638"), sourced to an entry written by himself ("TRUELUXURY") at autospies.com. Notice that TRUELUXURY also wrote this nonsense about a Shelby CV525, as per Altimgamr's usual habit.  Mr.choppers | ✎  04:35, 18 May 2014 (UTC)  Mr.choppers | ✎  04:35, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


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

Same obnoxious behavior as Altimgamr, now spoofing my account and trolling my user talk page. Bahooka (talk) 05:49, 18 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


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

See taunt in edit summary[22] Dwpaul Talk 02:41, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
--Guerillero | My Talk 00:41, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
22 May 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Impersonating accounts again, still editing the same accounts. Created this fake alternate account for Mr. Choppers today. Bahooka (talk) 04:56, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


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


Same m.o. Requesting a CU for sleepers. Bahooka (talk) 03:20, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

  • I took a quick look at the contributions made by DaveBChew and it is, IMHO, not Altimgamr. Based on talk page comments, edit summaries etc made by Altimgamr the only thing they have in common is autism (judging by the page history of his user page DaveBChew was a college student in 2010, so he must be well over 20 by now, while Altimgamr apparently still is a bit under 20, and both editing style and subjects of interest are totally different...). Since I don't have access to the IP-addresses I can only speculate, but maybe some of Altimgamr's disruptive activities take place at a treatment center for autism? Thomas.W talk 10:41, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
All confirmed socks that hadn't already been tagged by The Bushranger have also been tagged. Thomas.W talk 11:01, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

 Confirmed:

 Technically indistinguishable but behaviourally atypical;  Behavioural evidence needs evaluation:

Technically, all of the above are  Likely Altimgamr. All except DaveBChew are  Blocked but awaiting tags.

I have  Range blocked. AGK [•] 10:05, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • information Administrator note I admit that DaveBChew is an odd one. It doesn't seem to fit Altimgamr‎ at all. The very few article space edits (there are a total of three over the past 3+ years) are to topics that Altimgamr‎ never touches (to my knowledge). This looks like an editor who is really using Wikipedia as a web host, which is consistent with the fact that this person also has a Wordpress blog, Vimeo page, YouTube channel, personal web site, etc. (114 of their 117 edits are to their user page, which is all personal stuff.) So at some point someone might consider an MfD but otherwise I don't see any action needed against this account. With everything else blocked, I'll mark this case for closure. -- Atama頭 22:12, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]


24 May 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Pretending he is a bot, and invoking my user name and that of User:Gogo Dodo. I blanked the user page for now, but needs to be blocked. Bahooka (talk) 05:57, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Has been blocked for username violation. Bahooka (talk) 06:05, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • And as the original username violation was the "your username is the only reason for this block" sort, reblocked as a stinky sock. - The Bushranger One ping only 09:37, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
28 May 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Putting bogus information at Template:Pony&MuscleCars again. Bahooka (talk) 13:36, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Added one more IP based on both contributions (reverting a revert of edits by the other IP + editing Template:Pony&MuscleCars) and geolocation (same part of California as usual). Thomas.W talk 15:12, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • All three blocked. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:11, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]


28 May 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Some editing pattern, see edit contributions. Bahooka (talk) 23:26, 28 May 2014 (UTC) Bahooka (talk) 23:26, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

Ever thus to trolls. - The Bushranger One ping only 11:18, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.

Who? What? When? Where? Why? How?

I'm not a vandal.
I'm not disruptive.
I'm not a troll.
I'm not a bully.
And I'm not a sockpuppet of Altimgamr. Bahooka is. Please take a look at this for evidence. Let's kill some ducks (jk) (talk) 23:47, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All accounts already blocked, requesting a sleeper check to determine if more need to be carried to the washing bin. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 23:53, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious sock. As such, he has been blocked indefinitely from editing. LightandDark2000 (talk) 09:43, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, the tweet by Shelby American on May 21 that Altimgamr had been touting as proof of the "Shelby CV525" has been removed by the company. They had tweeted a fake story. Bahooka (talk) 18:35, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Same types of edits, odd remarks about Car and Driver not being an RS (he's done that before), and location. Bahooka (talk) 23:28, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]


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

Merging two cases for Altimgamr into one for overviews sake. Excirial (Contact me,Contribs) 00:08, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk endorsed For sleeper check per comments above. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:26, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • no Declined - Sleeper checks are ineffective with respect to the ranges this person has access to. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:48, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Closing. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:41, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]


02 June 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Funny Clone made this edit which links to the Shelby 525 hoax again, and tagged Don't buy a Ford, they're junk!'s userpage as a sock of Altimgamr here. Don't buy is already blocked as a vandal, but certainly looks like Altimgamr so I have no reason not to believe Funny CLone. Meters (talk) 01:45, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sure looks like him. Requesting Checkusers to help out on this one, as this has been going on for way too long now. LightandDark2000 (talk) 05:22, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
13 July 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Quack. Same M.O. as Altimgamr: adds nonexistent car to List of fastest production cars by acceleration sourced to unreliable online sources such as FaceBook and Youtube. The supposed sources have appeared the last few days and appear to be bogus entries created to be used as references in Wikipedia. Meters (talk) 05:33, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

diff [23] Meters (talk) 06:11, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note the similarity of the references to Jason Haddad in this edit by Exaggerate and this edit by User:Altimgamr has a head ache, a blocked sock of Altimgamr. User:Jason Haddad (I'm back!) blocked as a sock of Altimgamr. Meters (talk) 05:58, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
13 July 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Quack. Same M.O. as Altimgamr: adds nonexistent car to List of fastest production cars by acceleration sourced to unreliable online sources such as FaceBook and Youtube. The supposed sources have appeared the last few days and appear to be bogus entries created to be used as references in Wikipedia. Meters (talk) 05:33, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

diff [24] Meters (talk) 06:11, 13 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note the similarity of the references to Jason Haddad in this edit by Exaggerate and this edit by User:Altimgamr has a head ache, a blocked sock of Altimgamr. User:Jason Haddad (I'm back!) blocked as a sock of Altimgamr. Meters (talk) 05:58, 14 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

  • Based on various socks of Altimgamr referring to "Jason Haddad" (indef blocked as JasonHaddad in 2009), and discussions I had with a couple of socks last year that clearly showed that the first name of the vandal is Jason, this SPI should be moved to the real master account, JasonHaddad. Thomas.W talk 09:24, 16 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
21 July 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Newly created account is making multiple nonconstructive edits on car articles, including this edit using this reference from YouTube that has Altimgamr making comments. UPDATE: The Altimgamr comments were removed after I posted this. If you want to confirm, review an older version of the YouTube page. Bahooka (talk) 03:06, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, adding User:Jeep Grand Cherokee because of blanking of article and using a vehicle name as the username, an approach sometimes used by Altimgamr (or JasonHaddad). Bahooka (talk) 15:39, 21 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • The following are  Confirmed:
05 August 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Has been vandalizing Dodge Viper all day with a citation going to a 404 page with ridiculous content. Blocked earlier as User:Ben the Talking Dog. Bahooka (talk) 22:45, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
13 August 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Entries similar to past edits by Altimgamr (JasonHaddad), especially involving Shelby. Bahooka (talk) 17:56, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


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


13 August 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


 1.75x amplified ultimate quack of ultimate destiny. Already blocked, reported for the record. The Bushranger One ping only 21:31, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  •  Confirmed while I was looking at another sock. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:52, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
21 August 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Same editing pattern, including a reference to the fake Shelby he always tries to add here. Bahooka (talk) 16:37, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
21 August 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Editing one of his accounts here. Bahooka (talk) 23:39, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
26 August 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

User:That's carbage is clearly Altimgamr, and I suspect the IP is too. Bahooka (talk) 00:16, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  •  1.75x amplified ultimate quack of ultimate destiny. Account blocked and is already making the usual "but I'm not!" squawking. The IP is also loudly quacking but has almost certainly already dynamic'd away. - The Bushranger One ping only 00:39, 26 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nothing left to do here for now, closing case. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:39, 27 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
31 August 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Name is a claim to be user:GMC Yukon, recently blocked as a sock of Altimgamr. Same interest in vehicle articles. Meters (talk) 18:24, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • Sock has been blocked by Bongwarrior. Mike V • Talk 19:22, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
01 September 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Exactly the same as the last. Already blocked after everyone went deaf from the quacking; reported for the record and to note, alas, that Altimgamr has figured out how to game the system to get autoconfirmed. The Bushranger One ping only 04:08, 1 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


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

18 November 2015[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

Altimgamr was very active in 2013 and 2014, but was inactive (AFAIK) for about a year before his current spree started in August-September of this year. For evidence of these socks being Altimgamr please check the deleted comments on my talk page (which I can't provide diffs to; they're in a section where the first of the IPs I spotted admitted that they had posted a hoax), including the faked "Cindamuse"-signature on one of the posts, then compare that to his apparent obsession with Cindamuse in his SPI-archive, where a number of confirmed socks were named "Cindamuse1" and up. The Flow In also signed their post on my talk page as Altimgamr, which I see as an admission that they're him. The archived SPIs also show a steady use of "weebly"-sources, just like in some recent edits, so there is in my mind absolutely no doubt about it being Altimgamr. The primary targets are articles about performance cars, covering the entire spectrum from Chevrolet Camaro, Ford GT and Dodge Viper to Lamborghini and "exotic" sports cars built in very small numbers, meaning that it's potentially hundreds of articles that would need to be protected to stop him (which combined with the large IP-range operated on might mean that an edit filter with carefully chosen search terms might be the best way to stop him...). The IPs listed are the ones I've found so far, but there could be many more. The named account and a couple of the IPs are already blocked but are included here both as evidence and for the record.

This edit made by one of the IPs is a good example of Altimgamr's typical MO, and shows why he's very hard to spot for most editors here, and why his activities on en-WP often can go on for months before being detected. The bottom section he tries to add in that edit is OK, and is supported by the source he provided, while the top section is a hoax, combined with a very reliable looking source, a source that when checked doesn't mention Corvette at all, but is only about the Manga show the Corvette version is claimed to be named for. A fake source that is very carefully chosen and even includes a car term in the link, in this case the word "spoiler", making the hoax even harder to spot.

All the IPs geolocate to San Jose, CA, matching Altimgamr's known geolocation, all are also in the same subnet and have made similar edits. Thomas.W talk 10:50, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have tagged all the named socks pr CU-result. Thomas.W talk 21:51, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


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

 In progress. The only purpose of my check is to see if a range block is feasible. This is based on a discussion on my Talk page.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:01, 18 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hmm, not sure why I'm seemingly being ignored, but I've retagged the accounts as proven.--Bbb23 (talk) 04:53, 19 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

16 August 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

User name similar to User:Altimgamr, area of interest (cars) the same. Bahooka (talk) 00:35, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Altimgamr's real name is Jason Haddad (see archive) and he's active right now as an IP-hopper on Ford GT, repeatedly adding his usual amateurish hoaxes there ([25], for more see page history). I don't think the reported user is Altimgamr, though, since the reported user is removing the hoaxes... - Tom | Thomas.W talk 17:20, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Anyone who creates a user account named after Jason Haddad/Altimgamr is not here to constructively edit Wikipedia. Bahooka (talk) 17:28, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Bahooka: Altimgamr lives in the San Fransisco Bay area, which matches the IPs who now add hoaxes on Ford GT since they geolocate to San Jose, while the IPs who do a good job removing the hoaxes geolocate to Washington state (as the reported user also probably does...). And the good job done by the Washington-IPs is the reason I haven't requested that the article be protected, since that would lock out the good guys too. Blocking the reported user, who has been helping us by reverting the hoaxes, would also block the underlying IP, who with 50% probability or better is one of the IPs who is actively reverting Altimgamr's hoaxes... - Tom | Thomas.W talk 17:36, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Then he needs to be encouraged to change his username. - The Bushranger One ping only 02:14, 17 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


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

  • I am closing this. IP ranges are too large and busy to block and the named user is behaviorally different. Vanjagenije (talk) 19:47, 22 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

01 January 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

The usual target (Ford GT) and the usual MO (posting hoax material "sourced" to a badly Photoshopped image uploaded on Imgur). - Tom | Thomas.W talk 14:29, 1 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


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

  •  Additional information needed - @Thomas.W: 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. Vanjagenije (talk) 00:18, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • No answer from Thomas.W for 6 days. Case closed. Vanjagenije (talk) 09:57, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • information Note: After looking at the edits myself, I'm satisfied that this is a sock. Blocked. T. Canens (talk) 17:46, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Altimgamr/Archive&oldid=1140217594"