Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Josh24B/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Josh24B

Josh24B (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
10 July 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Josh26E and Josh 24B have pretty much identical username, same weird obsession with adding the routes to transportation related articles and inability to comprehend WP:NOTDIR (see 1 and A), same inability to communicate/cooperate with other users without (see Beta and dos). Matt19B has the same obsession with transportation, and cut-and-paste created an article that Josh24B claimed to be the creator of. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:09, 10 July 2012 (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 noteWP:DUCK Would have blocked other accounts for WP:3RR violations anyway. --- Selket Talk 21:41, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

21 July 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


For the record. Already blocked as an obvious sockpuppet per duck test. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 20:42, 21 July 2012 (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 July 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Obvious sock is obvious. WP:DUCK, similar username, same pattern of editing, need I go on? MikeWazowski (talk) 21:56, 23 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. Yes, I have to agree. Ian.thomson (talk) 14:08, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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


24 July 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


(Name)2#(letter), obsessed with train articles. I'm asking for a check user just to catch more of this guy. Ian.thomson (talk) 14:10, 24 July 2012 (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]
  •  Clerk endorsed After looking, I agree that we should check for other accounts given his history.
     — Berean Hunter (talk) 14:15, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew26A (talk · contribs) is a  Confirmed match to Joshbicky (talk · contribs) and  Likely to everyone else. I've already blocked though. Nothing else of interest. Elockid (Talk) 14:26, 24 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

25 July 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Same obsession with including unsourced and useless bus schedules and fleet info for York (1 and A), same personal attacks in edit summaries (2). Also, same "binky" as Joshbicky. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:53, 25 July 2012 (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]
Obvious sock is obvious. Already blocked. Pages edited protected. Elockid (Talk) 20:30, 25 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
28 July 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Quack quack, exact same obsession with bus schedules and fleet information in York, quack quack. Ian.thomson (talk) 15:51, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And same use of the word "sourcefull" as another sock. Ian.thomson (talk) 16:08, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users[edit]

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

User:Yorkshirebus blocked per duck test and Transdev York semi-protected. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 17:42, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

Both accounts already blocked, no need to block the IP. --MuZemike 03:29, 29 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

03 August 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Also:

Same insistence on including prices and tour advertisements for Transdev york, same misspelling of "sourcefull," same obsession with Transdev York being first. Quack quack quack. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:16, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As for Alan.rich, SPA trying to keep Josh24B's playground from being deleted, trying to redirect the conversation to the talk page, where he repeats Josh24B's old claims that York doesn't have bus stations with information, even though that have to keep the buses somewhere and have schedules and such online. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:27, 3 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It could just be coincidence, but Alan.rich quit talking the second BickerstaffeC2 was blocked... Ian.thomson (talk) 18:40, 3 August 2012 (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 August 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


For information only as Uniyork has been blocked as a sockpuppet of User:Josh24B. Uniyork exhibits the same obsession with bus services in York (England) as Josh24B and his many sockpuppets, including the creation of the article Bus Services in York (now deleted) on 16th August that was deleted ten days earlier following Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bus Services in York, complete with almost identical unsourced lists of bus routes and fleet of vehicles. Also created the page at Bus services in York (now deleted) and on his user page[1]. Given this person's propensity for block evasion and socking, is it worth asking for checkuser to flush out any other socks? Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:46, 17 August 2012 (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]
29 August 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


This user has made an exact recreation of the article Bus Routes in York that was previously (re)created by a blocked sock of Josh24B, Murton747 (talk · contribs). — Mr. Stradivarius (have a chat) 18:49, 29 August 2012 (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 September 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


These users all worked together on recreating Bus Services in York as List of bus routes in York in the same manner as previous sockpuppets and on creating each others' userpages as "000" (see this prior occurance). Because there are so many different accounts, I am requesting checkuser to find the sleeper socks. Reaper Eternal (talk) 12:22, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

7Bicko is definately Josh24B, fool's been putting sock templates on my userpage, his new M.O. Ian.thomson (talk) 14:30, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

 Confirmed the same are:

It's  Possible that they are the same as Josh24B, based on technical evidence.
Amalthea 13:02, 16 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

18 September 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


For the record. Already blocked indef and tagged per duck test. Recreated page Bus routes in the City of York deleted per CSD G5. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 21:15, 18 September 2012 (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]
  • Already blocked and tagged, so closing. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:46, 18 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
24 September 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Same obsession with adding unsourced (and given past behavior, totally erroneous) stuff relating Transdev York, First York, etc; same name-number-letter name scheme, filled in talk page with "000" just as as another sock of his did. CU because he's has enough socks to cover ever foot in China. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:31, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Also, same old tired lie about being a gov't worker. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:48, 24 September 2012 (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]
  •  Clerk endorsed - Endorsing, mainly to check for sleepers, which this user has a major habit of creating. Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:51, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Confirmed & blocked & tagged, nothing else this time. Amalthea 19:56, 24 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
26 September 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Same old tired lie about being a gov't worker whose job is to add bus info to Wikipedia on his user page, same Transdev York obsession, first article edits are restoring Josh24B's other socks edits. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:55, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Admits to being aware of another one of Josh's recent socks, despite not having had that sock mentioned. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:15, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
05 October 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

In this edit, he claims that he's simply changing things to match the schedule on the website. However, the schedule for the #4 says that it's to Acomb (via Foxlane, not to Foxlane), and the #15 is not run by First York. Everything else about that edit that I sniffed at also didn't smell right. This is a rather glaring mistake, in line with Josh24B's intentional errors in various articles relating to bus companies around York. After this mistake was pointed out, he started making claims of having some sort of offline information from the company, in line with Josh24B's claims of working for them or the gov't, or having ridden at that time, etc, etc, all in contradiction to the online schedules. He also brings up not being from York, as if anyone had mentioned it to this account, and tries to accuse me of edit warring (even though no one has mentioned it to this supposedly new account who doesn't even know how to cite sources). Requesting CU just to make sure there aren't any sleepers, as usual with him. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:47, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm striking out part of the above for now. Turns out there are some service updates in one of the services, but I've not been able to verify all the changes he's made yet. I'm still suspicious because of the refusal/inability to cite sources after being asked and having the process explained to him, the focus on York and buses, and the out of place claim of not being from York and reference to edit warring, (Edit) all behaviors of Josh24B in the past.

I've also added Bot7770, who reverted Charlesdrakew with "rv-sock." In the pasts, Josh24B has claimed to be various authority figures, insinuated that people working against him are socks, and has been caught and reverted by Charles before. Whether or not this checks out, the username is inappropriate and should be blocked. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:11, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've added 777harrogate. Note the name near York (a number of Josh socks have York in them), the "777" between this and and Bot7770, and first edits being reversions to suspected Josh socks. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:15, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. And Bobby22A is the same naming scheme as Josh24B, it's got to be him. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:19, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  •  Clerk endorsed - Its not blatant duck but there is certainly something suspicious happening here. Even though Josh is stale if the two suspected socks are the same user, I'd be relatively satisfied they are related to Josh24B. NativeForeigner Talk 19:07, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

All three listed accounts are  Confirmed socks plus Bobby22A (talk · contribs). Elockid (Talk) 01:18, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]


08 October 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Same name format again, no reason to come to me about making an entry about something relating to York as one's supposedly third post ever, a previous sock was trying to write an advert for York Sports Village. Asking for CU because this guy's a sock drawer. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:05, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

Excuse me but i was asking you if you could check to see if it had the right content and as soon as York was said you thought Sockpuppet i don't see why York Sport Village can't have a page and i was not aware that it had tried to be made before hand. Hello19LB (talk) 17:43, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, and how would you know that I was involved with the deletion of the previous version of the York Sport Village if you weren't the previous attempt's creator? Why would you ask some guy in South Carolina about the page otherwise? Honestly, there's really no reason to not block you right now, it's so obvious Helen Keller saw it coming way back in 1895. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:48, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i know because you just told me it was deleted and also i told you because you seem to edit all york pages as i was look through them and your name popped many times and again you don't even know York and i didn't know were you were from Hello19LB (talk) 17:58, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No... you came to my page, despite there being no record of me ever being involved with the deletion of the York Sport Village page. I wasn't even the one who nominated it for deletion. There was absolutely no reason for you to approach me about the page, but you did. Just quit lying Josh, in fact, just get a life beyond adding advertisements and incorrect information to Wikipedia. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:00, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is something in York and you edit all pages in York and you would put me as a sockpuppet even if i havn't told you so you can do one Hello19LB (talk) 18:08, 8 October 2012 (UTC) Also it is correct information i know what i am doing and get a real job — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hello19LB (talk • contribs) 18:10, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well it seems this person (Josh24B) can't give up oh dear any were i could assist with this? SlinkyT (talk) 21:40, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  •  Clerk endorsed Exactly the same contribution style and posted content agrees with Josh24B. Endorsing to find the sleepers too. Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:30, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Confirmed with no clear sleepers. — Coren (talk) 15:26, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • information Administrator note Hello19LB has already been blocked by Reaper, and since there are no sleepers left let's close this. De728631 (talk) 13:01, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
19 October 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


First edits are filling in the name and talk page (common for Josh's newer accounts), then comes here for absolutely no reason, then restores some of Josh's edits, and tries to promote the York Sport Village, one of Josh's new pet projects. CU for sleepers, please. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:37, 19 October 2012 (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]
  • Technically, only  Likely with no sleepers. It looks like someone moving around a mobile network rotating IPs quickly; that's a new tack. Perhaps a "productive" train ride? Either way, it looks obvious on behavior but any sleeper(s) would have been created on different IPs somewhere between Sheffield and Leeds. — Coren (talk) 00:23, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Contribs make this more than Likely. Blocked and tagged. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 15:30, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
21 October 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Slightly different behavior (avoiding York), but both accounts:

  • have the same tactic of filling out his talk and user page with "hello" or something like that in the first few edits (compare A, B, and C)
  • hold a grudge against me,
  • have the same writing voice:

In this post, you'll notice that none of his I's are capitalized, whether it's in first person, the start of a person's name, or the beginning of a sentence (see this, this, or this post by another sock of his, and another). Note also the doubled S in "misstakes" and "lissen," and the out of place doubled spaces (compare with this doubled M in "tommorrow", the doubled L in "sourcefull", and this post containing odd doubled spaces)

Finally, the name somewhat compares in pronunciation with the various "Bicker" socks Josh has had. CU for sleepers, as usual, and to compare with one of the "likely" results from last time. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:20, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

Given other behavior, and since Josh figured out creating accounts on a train ride makes it harder to track, and the name of the sock account, isn't safer to assume it's Josh? Ian.thomson (talk) 18:40, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Seems most likely extremely bad faith and personal attacks rather than civil and polite discussion. acording to ians history, he seems rather hostile and prone to bad faith : ″you'll notice that none of his I's are capitalized″ Interesting enough, people can say the same about people having I capitalized. again, bad faith.

WP:AOBF

″It can be seen as a personal attack if bad faith motives are alleged without clear evidence that the others' action is actually in bad faith and harassment if done repeatedly. The result is often accusations of bad faith on your part, which tends to create a nasty cycle.″Bekaro (talk) 14:49, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
24 October 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


First edits are filling in his user page with "hi" (as other Josh socks have done to blue-link the name to give less of an appearance of being a "new" account), editing Transdev related articles, then manually undoing Charlesdrakew's work bringing the article in line with WP:NOTDIR. CU for sleepers as usual. Ian.thomson (talk) 17:41, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notice that the only action Oldbagservice has taken is to put my name in the check user field, a foolish accusation previous Josh socks have tried to make. Also, same writing voice. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:12, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users[edit]

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

ian i havnt had time to do the user page yet, and so what that i have edited Transdev page and a bus page dosn't make it that i am a sockpuppet of Josh24B and also your reverts make it wrong and confusing i am from Yorkshire so i am aware of what buses they are— Preceding unsigned comment added by Oldbagservice (talk • contribs)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  •  Clerk endorsed Endorsing to find the sleepers and to determine if Bekaro is a sock. I've blocked Oldbagservice as a very obvious sock. Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:24, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Confirmed, with no unblocked socks left. — Coren (talk) 18:33, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looks like you are done here, closing. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 13:47, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
06 November 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Focused on transportation around Yorkshire, claiming to be something he's not (this time claiming to be an admin and a master editor, from the start), odd capitalization. CU for sleepers, as usual. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:58, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
25 November 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Exact same problems with capitalizing (especially the personal I) and spelling (see username), screwing up List of bus routes in North Yorkshire from the get go (as can be seen here that the #5 does not go through "York, Tang Hall;" and here that the #15 is still on the First York schedules). From the same area. CU for socks, as usual. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:23, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note the similarities between this edit by another one of Josh's socks and this one, the insistence that the #5 passes by York hospital and Tang Hall instead of just through the more general "Osbaldwick." Ian.thomson (talk) 21:46, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Notice that he restored his edit to List of bus routes in North Yorkshire that I reverted, but has left my reversion of his unsourced addition to Population Pyramid alone, despite his claim that he's mainly here for population articles. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:07, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. I am not a Bus page editor i tend to edit Geographic pages Such as Population although i may edit a bus page but i took off unrelated info and Ian.thomson (Who taged me) has also done this Connexsions (talk) 21:41, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And yet your first edit was to restore one of Josh's previous edits. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:46, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

i removed the 15 as it was on there twice and the 5 not sure what i did there and the 6 had Osbaldwick Via Osbaldwick when it should be Tang Hall as that is next to Osbaldwick well it is on Google maps Connexsions (talk) 21:45, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia relies on sources, and the bus schedules from the actual company would be the most appropriate ones (others note that all of Josh's socks refused to understand this). The First York site still says they have a route running that you, like Josh's other socks, have removed. That you chose Tang Hall in particular is another sign that you're just another sock of Josh24B. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:50, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What Route was that? Connexsions (talk) 21:59, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here you remove the #16, as did another one of Josh's socks, along with having the #5 go specifically by York hospital and Tang Hall; despite the First York website having a #16 route, and despite the First York site saying "via city centre" for Osbaldwick for the #5 route; the exact same errors Josh's socks put in. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:03, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No i removed the 15 as it was on Wikipedia Twice in the middle and above the 16 and it is the 6 route to Osbaldwick you will have to click on the route to view the timetable Connexsions (talk) 22:07, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It Displays it as Alcuin Tang Hall but Alcuin is a Street but i recently past through York when i went to scotland in July and the Boards for what the Bus Displayed Was Osbaldwick Via Tang Hall or Clifton Moor Via York Hospital, on the website they All say Via City Centre Connexsions (talk) 22:11, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Source? Ian.thomson (talk) 22:14, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Another obvious Josh sock.--Charles (talk) 22:21, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am just making a point on one edit i don't even intend to edit this page all the time as i keep saying i mainly focus on Geographic pages. Connexsions (talk) 22:39, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

And yet, the majority of your edits are to bus articles. Not that it matters, Check User found you to be likely, which combined with behavioral evidence means you'll be blocked soon. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:41, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
28 November 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Same inability to capitalize the personal I and other troubles with grammar and spelling, named after a part of Yorkshire, edits focused on buses (especially Yorkshire), same insistence on listing the #6 as passing by Clifton and York Hospital (despite the site schedule giving a more general "via city center.") Ian.thomson (talk) 21:12, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Same style of run-on sentences, failure to address actual investigation (no defense beyond "I'm right.") Compare with this edit and this edit by previous socks.

Added a sock who quacked so loud dogs started barking in my neighborhood with this edit. Note the (Letter)(two-digit number) aspect of his name (common theme for a while with most of his socks), as well as the unusual capitalization seen with previous socks. Also, requesting CU for sleepers, as usual. At the very least, these are two socks of each other. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:36, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No real defense against charges of sockpuppetry for the TubZ18 either. Funny how Bolton_Percy quit editing when TubZ18 showed up... Ian.thomson (talk) 21:38, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
And notice how TubZ18 quits when Bolton_Percy comes back. Ian.thomson (talk) 21:41, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Whats that got to do with it, its was the end of a conversation and i said thank you. Bolton Percy (talk) 22:05, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Bad-faith accusations in line with Josh's previous socks, inability to grasp why he's being investigated, as with previous socks. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:14, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Compare: This attempt to add the same clock I have on my page with the one at User_talk:Oldbagservice. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:57, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What the Hell are you going on about you just can't accept I am right, Did you view the I Travel Site? Bolton Percy (talk) 22:23, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

My information is correct i even gave you a website that i got the new services from that will run soon the website is http://www.itravelyork.info/events/changes-to-sunday-bus-services and if you click on the 6 timetable you will relise that i am right and i am only putting things right on this page, your clearly not from England so how do you even know if it is right? Wikpedia check this site and you will relise that i am right also the First York Site only displays via City Centre but if you go on timetable it shows the route if you click on the route map. Bolton Percy (talk) 21:22, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've Checked the Information Added by Bolton Percy and it is All correct and even the #6 if you view Route map & Timetable and no information seems to be incorrect as Ian.Thomson Removed a Big Chunk of Correct Information. TubZ18 (talk) 21:29, 28 November 2012 (UTC) Ian just accept were right and your worng use the sites!!! to find the information Bolton Percy got and it is right. TubZ18 (talk) 21:38, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You at least you viewed the sites. Bolton Percy (talk) 21:40, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I know your information is correct it must be the fact Ian doesn't like Bus pages. TubZ18 (talk) 22:07, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It must be TurbZ18 as he just can't accept I am right if he can be botherd to even check the sites instead of thinking he owns Wikpedia. Bolton Percy (talk) 22:09, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I know you are right I will fight it until he just accepts it, Wikpedia is for anyone to edit and put Pages on TubZ18 (talk) 22:13, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oh Good Bolton Percy (talk) 22:14, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
02 December 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Alex-wilko130's only edits were to add the same sort of route information Josh would add, in contradiction to WP:NOTDIRECTORY. When warned, he dropped off this account and moved to Paddy400, who restored the info, then removed it and another part of the article, tricking someone else into restoring the directory, before copying an SPI notice I previously gave to Josh to cover his tracks. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:57, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will note that this set of accounts is not as verbose as the others and is taking care to capitalize his Is, as that has been one of the ways we've caught him in the past. However, considering the route deal and how Josh has used the SPI tags without ever filing a report to draw attention away from him, I feel a CU is warranted, as well as for sleepers as usual. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:12, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Now that he's talking some more, note the run on sentences and inability to use commas as with prior accounts. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:14, 2 December 2012 (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]
  •  Clerk endorsed - Endorsing for a sleeper check. I've already blocked the two accounts for sockpuppetry. Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:22, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
04 December 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Same obsession with buses, same writing voice (notice the lack of any punctuation at "...which are popular they serve Fulford...", no commas at all in "...Transdev York also provide the Unibus which is now the University of York main provider now that First York have changed the 4 route not to serve Heslington East..." and the odd capitalization in "...also they now run All low floor buses..."). Compare with 1 2 and 3. On the off chance someone unfamiliar with this fellow is handling the case, I'm an English major, secondary education minor (I have to know how to spot a reader's voice). CU for confirm and, as usual, sleepers. Ian.thomson (talk) 00:16, 4 December 2012 (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]
  •  Clerk note: Block, rinse, repeat ad nauseum.... Closed. Reaper Eternal (talk) 01:45, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
12 January 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Same semi-literate prose style with random capitalisation and obsessive interest in non-notable bus routes in the York area of England. Edits such as this and this. Charles (talk) 22:57, 12 January 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]
29 January 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Same style of Username, same poor grammar and same obsession with bus routes in the York area. Charles (talk) 20:47, 29 January 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]
22 February 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Has recreated List of Bus Routes in York, which was created by sockpuppet User:AnnexH[2], at Bus routes in York, United Kingdom. Noting also this edit[3] in which he places a sockpuppet [Josh24B] tag on an IP. Has used sleepers in the past so a check would be useful. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 18:35, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. I would like to defend my self here as I may have a created page which was not intended to clash and I had No reason to know that a page like this had previously been deleted, to my knowledge the page that I created (Bus routes in York, United Kingdom) is correct and has been developed by other users and has been categorized to Transport in York (I think that what it is called) and I have used all references most of which were used on the List of bus routes in North Yorkshire, but what I noticed is that what the information of the bus secludes/routes was displaying on the Websites of each bus company was completely different to what was on that page and all of which the information currently on Bus routes in York, United Kingdom is correct prior to the references of the bus companies and the City Council website under buses (I Travel York), my page is completely up to date with information and correct sources. Also I am a new user to Wikipedia since of February 2013 and have previously only used it for information of other things (eg. History & Companies etc.). Please take this into account. AskhamBogs (talk) 19:58, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Two new accounts, User:Ostman20 and User:Transdev are now editing the page - Transdev is the name of a company which has a subsidiary that operates bus routes in York. Peter James (talk) 20:49, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  •  Clerk endorsed for a check on Ostman20 and Transdev (these two accounts appear to be editing in concert, and Ostman20 clearly appears to be linked to Josh24B per similarity seen at [4] [5] and by the blanking of this page). I do not really think there is sufficient evidence to check AskhamBogs separately (at least from what's been presented), and they seem to have rather a different style. However, if they are a sock, they should show up in the sleeper check. Cheers! SpitfireTally-ho! 21:00, 22 February 2013 (UTC) Disregard this, they've now been blocked as ducks due partly to deleted contribs. Please check for sleepers. SpitfireTally-ho! 21:15, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Clerk note: I've blocked the three socks. Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:01, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can add Poppleton10 as a sleeper, but that's all. Courcelles 04:11, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blocked and tagged, closing. Rschen7754 04:13, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
01 March 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


For the record. User:HolletHO recreated copy of deleted page Bus routes in York, United Kingdom at Bus services in York, England with his first edit[6]. Blocked and page deleted. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 22:14, 1 March 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]
  •  Clerk note: Closing. The sockpuppet has already been blocked. Reaper Eternal (talk) 11:23, 2 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
07 March 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


For the record. User:ReevesWRL recreated a copy of the deleted page Bus routes in York, United Kingdom at Bus services in City of York with his only edit[7]. Blocked, tagged and page deleted. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 19:17, 7 March 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]
10 March 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


For the record. User:Watsondriver recreated a copy of the deleted page Bus routes in York, United Kingdom at Bus routes in York with his first edit[8]. He demonstrated the same interest in bus services/routes in York including edits to List of bus routes in North Yorkshire[9] and creation of page Transdev York route 44. Blocked, tagged and pages deleted. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 16:56, 10 March 2013 (UTC) Malcolmxl5 (talk) 16:56, 10 March 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]
23 March 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Same articles and content as usual, e.g. Yorkshire Coastliner, List of bus routes in North Yorkshire and most significantly has recreated Bus routes in York, North Yorkshire, a page title only ever used by this sockmaster. Charles (talk) 09:52, 23 March 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 Blocked and tagged (not checked). Elockid (Talk) 15:42, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

28 March 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Bus routes in the usual places such as [10] compared to this by sock HolletHO. The usual poor grammar and random capitalisation.Charles (talk) 20:22, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please check for sleepers. Charles (talk) 20:22, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

I have only just come across this on the York University page and don't see why I am tagged although I have created pages related to Villages and others and Yes I have added some travel information for any places but just a brief list or idea, I did add the routes on the Transdev Blazefield page for Transdev York but not as in detail as they are on the other Transdev Pages, if this is a problem with this I will re-think my ideas and try not to edit the same thing on other pages at the same time, also on the Osbaldwick page I don't see any random capitalisation as the capital letters are for places. DF2 (talk) 00:12, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • CheckUser requested - Self-endorsed by clerk for checkuser attention - Requesting checkuser to find sleepers as per above. Also note the account 888POP (talk · contribs) which tried to close this SPI. Reaper Eternal (talk) 00:42, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Clerk note: I've blocked the confirmed socks. However, I'm not a checkuser so I don't have the IP. Reaper Eternal (talk) 11:39, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
19 April 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Started off more cautiously but now in full flow with the usual pattern of edits on bus articles in the York area such as this. The usual dodgy English. Charles (talk) 23:04, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

I have edited other articles not just Bus articles although I did make Transdev York Unibus route 44, but if you refer Transdev Harrogate & District route 36 then you will see they are the same kind of thing which I have based mine on. BOT823 (talk) 21:46, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
23 June 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Similar J/B naming that he was using rather consistently until the past several months ago, same deal of adding unsourced and/or unnecessary directory-like additions to Transdev and related pages (see [11]) despite constant explanations and warnings (see his talk page). CU for sleepers, as usual. Ian.thomson (talk) 19:50, 23 June 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]
  •  Clerk endorsed - Obvious duck (cf. [12] from a previous sock), sleepers please. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:39, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Inconclusive. The data that would be useful to this case is stale. No immediate sleepers. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 18:31, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blocked, closing. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:33, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Josh24B/Archive&oldid=1079620775"