Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/あすぺるがあすぺしゃりすと/Archive/4

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


あすぺるがあすぺしゃりすと

あすぺるがあすぺしゃりすと (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

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

28 January 2024[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

For the Dhivehi name / "Sspae erger", see these two edit summaries.

For the Georgian name / "Spisergera", see these two similar edit summaries.

For the Amharic name / "Complexity", see two MORE similar edit summaries.

I believe this should be filed under another sockmaster, however, the original name is evading me. General pattern of accounts with non-Latin alphabet language names making two edits to their talk pages in Japanese.  Looks like a duck to me. Schrödinger's jellyfish ✉ 02:59, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/あすぺるがあすぺしゃりすと32.220.205.180 (talk) 03:17, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much - and as I thought, ja:利用者:სპისერგერა. Schrödinger's jellyfish ✉ 03:20, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • Case moved under correct name. Adding more socks per similar user talk page behavior, caught with edit filters. Self-endorsed by clerk for checkuser attention for sleepers, thanks. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 06:59, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • These are them:

Spicy (talk) 14:25, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Blocked and tagged, Redirect arrow Global lock(s) requested, closing. Spicy (talk) 14:27, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

02 February 2024[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

For "3", see characteristic diff - compare to previously blocked socks at Special:Contributions/სპისერგერა & Special:Contributions/UKɔƒE.

Second user is a potential sock - more edits than would normally happen & mobile ones at that to talk page, but identical first three characters. CU requested for sleepers, and maybe someone who can view edit filters with what was found in the previous report. Schrödinger's jellyfish ✉ 03:52, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"アスペ3", per machine translation, is "Aspie 3". "アスペツー", also per machine translation, is "aspe two". Schrödinger's jellyfish ✉ 04:12, 2 February 2024 (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]

  • Not that many today.

04 February 2024[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Characteristic diffs for #1, #2, and #3. Usernames all Asperger's related.

Likely sleepers, CU requested. Schrödinger's jellyfish ✉ 03:49, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

#4, also Asperger's related username. Schrödinger's jellyfish ✉ 03:56, 4 February 2024 (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. Also added more socks caught with the edit filter. (Japanese edit summaries, adding numbers to user talk page, blanking own talk page, username differences) Please check for sleepers. (Also, OP: it would probably be better if reports for this sockfarm are filed less frequently, it is probably more satisfying for CUs to catch 50+ socks in a week or more instead of doing this repeatedly each day, since we already had a CU check yesterday, also the disruption this sockmaster does is minimal) 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 05:38, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  In progress Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 13:26, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Confirmed:
Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 13:33, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

10 February 2024[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

WP:DUCK, just taking out some trash. Zoe Trent Fan🎤💍 02:53, 10 February 2024 (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]

Spicy (talk) 10:40, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Blocked and tagged Redirect arrow Global lock(s) requested etc. Spicy (talk) 10:42, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

14 February 2024[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

More obvious socks, either writing Japanese edit summaries or writing numbers before blanking. There are some more username-based suspicious accounts that were brought up on my talk page, like އެސްސްޕައެވެރޖަރ (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) which translates to "Esspaerger" (phonetically similar to asperger). I'm wary of them being less obvious so have not listed all of those here (hopefully they appear from CU checks) 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 10:11, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

Vanamonde93, you've tagged the socks as sockpuppeteer, not sockpuppet. 32.220.205.180 (talk) 19:50, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • Self-endorsed by clerk for checkuser attention Please check for sleepers, as per above. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 10:12, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • All of the accounts above are  Confirmed to each other and to some previously blocked socks. I can't help but wonder if we're being trolled here; there's no effort being made to edit content, or indeed do anything except register the username, and it's more effort to check each account than it is to create each one. I rather think these should be blocked on sight going forward. Perhaps someone cleverer than me can create an edit-filter that finds these. Vanamonde93 (talk) 18:06, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Have an idea for abuse filter, can I email you? -Lemonaka‎ 05:33, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    A filter for this exists. I will block them on sight the next time I encounter them instead of SPI. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 06:27, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • retagging as CU confirmed socks under あすぺるがあすぺしゃりすと. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 09:00, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

22 February 2024[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Quack quack quack, あすぺるがあすぺしゃりすと is back. (This week's sock report)

The following accounts are CU blocked but need tags and a lock request:

The following accounts are DUCK blocked but need tags and a lock request (and possibly CU):

The following accounts are CU blocked and tagged, but need a lock request:

The following accounts have been blocked without CU confirmation or edits, but locks have been requested:

The following accounts are ducky by username:

There are other accounts that are slightly less ducky, and are listed here. ClumsyOwlet (talk) 21:11, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, more ducks were spotted at the sock pond. Note the username similarities. ClumsyOwlet (talk) 04:09, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Don't forget 嫗瑰蘋嫗 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). ClumsyOwlet (talk) 01:52, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Log says that 檢摑檢 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) was created by 嫗瑰蘋嫗ピオラ. ClumsyOwlet (talk) 03:17, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And another one, 嬋點嬋ブイ (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). Actually caught them in the process of blanking their user talk page. ClumsyOwlet (talk) 04:46, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And they're back: ClumsyOwlet (talk) 02:35, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, could a CU look at the already blocked to make sure?
سرنئپ (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) also did something a bit different on their talk page. ClumsyOwlet (talk) 03:15, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And another one blanking their talk page just now: देंकृध्यानपया (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). ClumsyOwlet (talk) 03:27, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind, there is ነሜንገቀን (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) now. ClumsyOwlet (talk) 03:29, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

More suspicious accounts:

and the still unblocked ones here:

ClumsyOwlet (talk) 02:47, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

蕪誦北 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) just confirmed it. ClumsyOwlet (talk) 03:09, 3 March 2024 (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 - please check for potential sleepers. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 15:07, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Based on the edit filter, I also found:
    0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 15:10, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have to ask, because I keep wondering. Is there any indication that systematically seeking out, compiling, checking and blocking these accounts is ultimately providing a tangible benefit from an abuse prevention perspective? As far as I can tell, many of them never edit enwiki, and the ones that do only do so on their own talk pages. Basically all of them are long gone by the time they are blocked. Now, it is undesirable for someone to constantly produce these accounts, no doubt about it. But considering that getting blocked by the hundreds for years on end has done nothing to dissuade them, I'm not sure whether it's worth our time. Ultimately, it seems that the outcome remains essentially the same whether or not we end up investing our time: The accounts still get made, they still post a few words about building renovations or somesuch on their talk pages, and that cycle still repeats, with basically no reader-facing consequences. --Blablubbs (talk) 19:28, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I very much agree. There's no point to blocking them and I'd even argue that even just blocking them would go a bit against WP:DENY. Though won't they run out of IP addresses? They seem to be really good at block evasion. I think in the case where the occasional user vandalizes and removes mentions of Aspergers syndrome, we can always use protection. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 04:15, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Though won't they run out of IP addresses? - the history of this case should indicate that that is very unlikely. Spicy (talk) 16:09, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I"ve run the sweep and blocked what I found, all my taggings from 19:02 to 19:09 today are them. Courcelles (talk) 19:09, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Case closed, doesn't seem to be anything else to do for now. Courcelles (talk) 19:47, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/あすぺるがあすぺしゃりすと/Archive/4&oldid=1220916863"