Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Shannon1488/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Shannon1488

Shannon1488 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
10 July 2011[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

The duck evidence seems to be sufficient to finger these (first) three and they have all been indef blocked as suspected socks. But it seems like Shannon1488 has been creating a lot of socks lately in a concerted attempt to attack people working on the Nair article, and I suspect he has more up his sleeve - so I'd like to request a CU check for sleepers (and confirmation of the above ones would be nice too, for the record, as this is likely to be an ongoing problem for some time). -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:43, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There is probably quite a tangled web of sockmasters, socks and meatpuppets here, and I've added a few more possibilities to the list above (not just fishing - they have all acted similarly and disruptively/abusively on related articles and talk pages) -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:01, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've only just see the SPI at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sumitkachroo/Archive - are there any connections between any of that group and the ones below? -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 05:16, 11 July 2011 (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 was looking when I saw that Hersfold was also looking at the same time. While I wouldn't have put it the same way as above, this is always a judgment call and I can't really dispute these findings either. One thing I would say is that attaching each of these groups to each other is, at the moment, a challenge. I make no representation one way or the other. I think there's little doubt there's abuse going on here; what's less clear is that all are socks of a single master. I also don't know that I'd put so many in the second group, but again...it's a judgment call, and again - there's clearly deception here.  Frank  |  talk  01:59, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Additional note: User:Anuraj 2009 and User:Anuraj 2010 are highly  Likely to be the same user.  Frank  |  talk  02:03, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Additional additional note: User:KoyilandySultan  Confirmed as User:KondottySultan.  Frank  |  talk  02:19, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • information Administrator note Um.. alright. I've updated the tags on all the groups, blocked the latest one Frank found, and one of the ones in the note before that. I think we're good for _now_, but relist if/when there are new developments. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 02:37, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Terrific work folks, thanks for all your help -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:32, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
24 July 2011[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Only just registered, first edit is to make the same groundless accusation with the same blog link as made by User:Cinnamon123 - see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive711#Muckraking by new user?. That user turned out to be a sock of User:Shannon1488 - see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Shannon1488/Archive.

  • Accusation by Cinamon123 aka Shannon1488 here
  • Accusation by DK.Bose7 here

There must be a possibility of sleepers too. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:35, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

PS: I've blocked DK.Bose7 on the duck evidence, but I think we do need a proper check. -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:37, 24 July 2011 (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 - Last time we looked at this case, there was a mess with multiple masters. I'll endorse to figure out which one this is. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 12:58, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Confirmed plus:

 IP blocked –MuZemike 02:54, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

01 August 2011[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Has been propagating the same defamatory blog accusing some Wikipedia editors of being paid to defame Indian castes, this time using the Wikipedia email system. (Though it's also possible this is actually the recently-blocked User:Yogesh Khandke, as he has been propagating the same thing too.)

All in all, this is part of a serious harassment campaign (which appears to be coordinated to some degree) against two very productive Wikipedia editors.

I'm not sure what CheckUser can do with an editor who hasn't actually made edits - don't know if registration and/or use of email can be traced.

I've already indef blocked based on the email actions, but confirmation would be good, and I do think we could do with another sleeper check if possible. And if it's one of the same old gang again, would there be any possibility of a range block? (Can provide a copy of the email this one has been sending, together with a link to the block, if required - but off-wiki). -- Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 18:25, 1 August 2011 (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 as being Shannon1488. The IP in question is already hardblocked and I saw no other accounts. TNXMan 18:39, 1 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

10 October 2011[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Similar behavior and POV. Along with the account various IPs have come in to chime on the same bits, quite like the behavior of the many socks before. We had three linked "groups" from the past SPI (July, August was more straightforward), don't know which of the groups this would go under, and also given the number of socks unearthed before, a sleeper check would be appreciated. —SpacemanSpiff 08:46, 10 October 2011 (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]
  • Actually,  Additional information needed. The named sock does not have the same writing style as Shannon, and has not actually edited the article. I also cannot ascertain what the "similar POV" is, because I do not edit this article and am unfamiliar with the whole situation. Please spell the connection out more plainly, or a check cannot be run—and also, the patrolling administrator won't have much to go for. Thanks, AGK [•] 11:48, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • no Declined per above. Kindly re-file if or when you can respond to the problem with this request, elucidated above. Thanks, AGK [•] 23:36, 12 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Shannon1488/Archive&oldid=1138679354"