Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MariaJaydHicky/Archive/1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


MariaJaydHicky

MariaJaydHicky (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:

14 November 2011[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


All blocked based on checkuser confirmation or self admission. Requesting a checkuser to look into a range block, as it's apparent that Maria isn't getting the point. —Kww(talk) 01:20, 14 November 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]

No rangeblock possible. I'm sorry to say that there will probably be no rangeblock possible for the future either. Elockid (Talk) 01:26, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

29 December 2011[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Passes the duck test with User:JentinaRoseChapman and 86.133.181.134 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). If it is possible please protect the pages Eyes Wide Shut (song), Take a Chance on Me (JLS song) and She Makes Me Wanna. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 00:26, 30 December 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]
  • The account is a  Confirmed match to a previously blocked sock. WilliamH (talk) 00:34, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blocked and tagged. -- DQ (t) (e) 02:21, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
26 January 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"

Same behaivour of Maria (genre changes), see Unexpected (Lumidee album)'s history as an example. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 19:27, 26 January 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]

The named account is a  Possible, bordering on  Likely, technical match. No comment on the IP. TNXMan 19:36, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • information Administrator note The behavioral evidence on this one is strong, so I've blocked and tagged the account. As to the IP, the autoblock has engaged. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 02:23, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A late note, but I've renewed the block on the IP based on this edit, where the IP directly claimed to be MariaJaydHicky. That and the autoblock clinches things.—Kww(talk) 03:19, 27 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
06 February 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"

Same behaivour of Maria (genre changes), in the same pages she has edited:

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 - The sock is already blocked, but I think we could use a sleeper check. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 04:38, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • No apparent sleepers -there is a lot of IP hopping going on. TNXMan 14:52, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not clear - is KenzieWilliamsPrice confirmed as a sock? He is asking for unblock. JohnCD (talk) 15:44, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about that -they are a  Possible/ Likely match to accounts in the archive. TNXMan 15:54, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
06 February 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"

Similar to last report (KenzieWilliamsPrice (talk · contribs)), nothing but genre changes on the same pages Maria has edited (Crashin' A Party, Merry Christmas (Mariah Carey album), All I Want for Christmas Is You (Mariah Carey song)). Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 19:27, 21 February 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]

 Confirmed match to KenzieWilliamsPrice. TNXMan 19:49, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked, tagged, reverted.—Kww(talk) 21:22, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
29 February 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"

Similar to lattest reports (KenzieWilliamsPrice (talk · contribs) and TheRealTings (talk · contribs)), undoing my edits (this time at Do It Our Way (Play)). Genre-warring. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 19:10, 28 February 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]

Tagged, blocked, reverted.—Kww(talk) 19:17, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

MoMoneyMoProblem (talk · contribs) as well. TNXMan 19:19, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Blocked and tagged. No edits to revert.—Kww(talk) 19:31, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
29 February 2012 (2)[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"

I believe that at Do It Our Way (Play) matches again. Genre-additions as well. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 20:55, 29 February 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]

 Confirmed match to MoMoreMoProblems (talk · contribs) TNXMan 21:20, 29 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

19 August 2012[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"

Last accounts to be checked are WhatChaSeeIsWhatChaGet (talk · contribs) and MoMoneyMoProblem (talk · contribs). Considering the edits to multiple pages, including but not limited to:

All of those pages have been edited in the past by Maria (e.g: MoMoreMoProblems (talk · contribs), ItsAUKThingThatIBring (talk · contribs), etc.), ConsideringHis/HerUsernames, the persistent unsourced genre changes, the unexplained reverts, that has continued by months and make obvious that whenever s/he edit the page s/he will be the same person (especially at Do It Our Way (Play), Give Me Your Love (album), Eyes Wide Shut (song), Take a Chance on Me (JLS song) and She Makes Me Wanna), there is enough evidence that both accounts are managed by the same person. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 17:39, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. You what? You don't even know me, I'm nothing like that person above, I've been on here for a month and not had any complaints (expect from a certain person who's name ain't getting aired on here 'cause that's how I roll!) He's accusing me of being someone that I'm not, I'm not gonna say I've never been on here I have as anonymous then I thought well I'm bored might as well get on here, if the person looks at my profile, before he accuses me of things, I've never had problems on here, if he thinks I am a Sockpuppet, my thing is "bruv get a life I ain't no fake, you think that fine think that you need to get out more!" So kindly look me up if you really need to, I think he should just stop being a little pathetic person really Tulisa Marshall '♥ Click On Me 20:22, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It refers to checkusers and is part of this process. As a clerk here, I have declined the request for checkuser for technical reasons.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 20:48, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  •  Clerk declined - as all of the contribs in the archive are stale for checkuser purposes. This will need to be decided based on the behavioral evidence.
     — Berean Hunter (talk) 19:40, 19 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
If the "obvious" won't help, the next time she decides to add unsourced information to articles, or "genre-war", this is going to be taken to ANI. She has been warned multiple times to stop, we have rules, and she has no reasons to ignore them. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 01:49, 20 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I looked at TulisaMarshall's contributions, and noticed no obviously problematic genre changes. In many cases, the change to the track/album article mirrored the genre given on the artist's biography. When you say "unsourced", you may mean "not discussed"--which does not equate to "wrong". Closing without action, but also without prejudice to re-opening this investigation should further socking be suspected, nor to the submission of a complaint at a *conduct* community noticeboard. (SPI is inherently unsuited to complaints about a user's edits or conduct.) AGK [•] 12:50, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked on behavioural grounds. Her contribution on this page alone clinched it.—Kww(talk) 13:52, 31 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

14 November 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

User:Miss.Dina Rae has since April been been making mass genre changes, mainly adding "Contemporary R&B" as a genre to a certain set of songs and artists. New account User:H.Mandem and IP sock 86.142.54.250 have been temporarily blocked for edit-warring these same changes. Now 217.43.164.89 has resumed making the same changes, as well as editing puppeteer's autobiographical AFC at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Dina Rae, pasting from her Facebook page in these edits. More diffs to follow. Ruby Murray 16:31, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

10 Nov., 86.142.54.250 again at [7]. 1 minute after that last diff, H.Mandem re-arranges the order of the new genres: [8]. 10 minutes later, following reversion by another editor, H.Mandem re-adds Contemporary R&B to the infobox with a new source at [9], then adds links to the genre in the article in subsequent edits minutes later in [10]. Edit-warring between H.Mandem and User:Tomica follows for several edits from [11] etc., with 86.142.54.250 adding another new source in [12] 9 minutes after H.Mandem, and tries re-adding the about.com reference soon after User:Dan56 removes it from the infobox in [13]
Note frequent use of flatlist template by all editors for adding genres to infoboxes.
11 Nov. H.Mandem continues in [14], [15], [16] ("Does that help?"). This continues for another day, with 86.142.54.250 taking over for the blocked H.Mandem.
12 Nov., Miss.Dina Rae re-adds the genres in [17] 30 minutes after I reverted 86.142.54.250's latest attempt. A few hours after 86.142.54.250 is blocked, Miss.Dina Rae undoes Dan56's revert of Contemporary R&B from infobox in [18], then adds more sources in [19], [20]. Miss.Dina Rae re-adding several more sources that are either blogs or don't mention R&B in the next few edits. On 13 Nov Miss.Dina Rae suggests a Billboard reference at User:Dan56#s talk page [21]. 14 Nov, IP sock 217.43.164.89 re-adds genre and new dodgy source not mentioning the genre in another revert at [22], but then has another go at [23] with the Rolling Stone ref previously rejected by another editor. Miss.Dina Rae never adds her suggested Billboard ref herself, but IP sock 217.43.164.89 does on 14 Nov.[24], and MariaHickment13 re-adds it minutes later in [25], and again at [26] and [27].
  • Loud (Rihanna album): Identical pattern on 12 Nov. 86.142.54.250 and Miss.Dina Rae alternating in [28], [29], [30] (after 86.142.54.250 is blocked). The next day new IP sock 217.43.164.89 picks up the task at [31], [32], [33].
  • User:MariaHickment13: created 14 Nov., new single purpose sock account's first edit was to post at Talk:Loud (Rihanna album) in [36] following repeated requests by other editors for consensus at the tak page. This was followed by identical re-addition of genre and source to article at [37]. Third edit minutes later was this pleasant little revert at Unapologetic: [38] (2 minutes after my revert of 217.43.164.89), followed by angry rebukes at my talk page at [39] and [40]. Ruby Murray 18:07, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

IP sock 217.43.81.17 has also been adding "Contemporary R&B" as a genre unsourced since July 2012.[45].

All of the sockpuppet accounts have been used exclusively for changing genres on musician and song articles, and puppeteer's account has been used for little else. Ruby Murray 04:23, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • J.Lo (album): similar pattern. 12 Nov, 86.142.54.250 makes an unsourced genre change, to Contemporary R&B as usual [46]. A day later, puppeteer formats it with a flatlist template [47]. Reversions of the unsourced change are then undone twice by 217.43.164.89 [48], [49], then once by 86.142.55.12 [50]. Today new IP sock 93.186.31.115 again undid the revert to re-add the same genres [51], and then four hours later by User:H.Mandem [52], who has now been reported on AIV by another editor for genre-warring. Ruby Murray 16:42, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • User talk:Ruby Murray: 14 November, blocked sock MariaHickment13 posts to my talk page "Like what I said, kindly MIND your OWN fucking BUSINESS, you want a war I'll give you a fucking war OK?!" [53], which was reverted as vandalism by another editor. 20 November H.Mandem posts "Why don't you just mind your own flaming business you don't own Wikipedia and IF I had my way you wouldn't be pon here" [54]. Ruby Murray 17:49, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users[edit]

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

  • Yeah, sooo funny right, the person who is accusing is a known sock puppeteer, what's the word for them? Moronic or something? H.Mandem (talk) 17:49, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  •  Confirmed with respect to the named user(s). no No comment with respect to IP address(es). Note that Greg2thaBosher is also a  Confirmed match.--Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 18:42, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Confirmed sock accounts tagged and blocked indef. Most recent IP blocked one week. Closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:02, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
16 November 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Mrwallace05 and Y45ed have recently !voted in agreement with each other at Talk:The Beatles#Experimental music. It appears that the two accounts are operated by the same person: They were both created in the same week of January 2013. They have both uploaded non-free images related to the band Klaatu.[55][56] The intersection of interests of these two editors is quite unusual: Klaatu (band) and related songs and albums, songs by the Beatles, the biography of Meat Loaf, and the Eagles band. At the Beatles song "Carry That Weight", Mrwallace05 changed the genre to Baroque rock in his only edit to that article. Other changes to the article followed, then an IP editor reverted Mrwallace05. In response, Y45ed changed the genre back to Baroque rock in his only edit to that article. Binksternet (talk) 15:34, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

This user may be still editing as Special:Contributions/86.137.5.99. Same articles and pattern of behaviour. ChakaKongLet's talk about it 13:12, 5 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
24 February 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

The editing patterns and edited content are identical or closely similar--Best examples: this by AlisaJay and this under The GTA Guy, both to the article Unapologetic. This by AlisaJay and this by The GTA Guy, both to Loud (Rihanna album). This by AlisaJay and this by The GTA Guy, both to Talk That Talk.

IPs may also have been used when one of the users had either been blocked or edited an article too often, in this case Unapologetic--12:41, 11 February 2014 by 82.132.221.233 (inactive after 11 February), 06:21, 12 February 2014 by AlisaJay (not active after 12 February), 18:52, 12 February 2014 by 86.142.51.177 (blocked on 12 February), and on 13 February THE GTA Guy (his first two edits to Wikipedia were on 19 December, then a period of inactivity, and started editing again near the end of 12 February, editing the same articles the three aforementioned editors had been editing). Forgive me if this report seems messy lol. Best example: this by AlisaJay and this by 86.142.54.16, identical edits to content in I'm Real (song) that was changed two minutes later by THE GTA Guy in this edit. Dan56 (talk) 01:26, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you comment/check please, DeltaQuad, or Callanecc? Dan56 (talk) 07:35, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users[edit]

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

This was an uncivil manner in which to inform the user that there was a sock-puppet investigation against them. BananaLanguage (talk) 12:00, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean? Their user names were linked and mentioned (WP:MENTION) above, which automatically notified them when I opened this investigation. Dan56 (talk) 12:54, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The pattern of this user matches with the one of User:MariaJaydHicky. CaptalizationOfNames, the usage of "Jay", genre-warring, sockpuppetry, his/her IPs' geolocation matches with those of Maria. I've been following her/him for several days. S/He has created accounts again. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 21:20, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

^^^Above thing sounds like a right loser, "CapitializationOfNames" AND I've been following her/him for several days. Get a life will ya? A LOT of people Captalise Names, It's the proper way and plus you're a dick THE GTA Guy (talk) 22:25, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This comment, in fact, give more evidence Alisa and GTA are socks of Mariah. The language is exactly the same Mariah gave with his/her account TulisaMarshall (talk · contribs) Tulisa, acted like "I don't know what are you talking about" and I'm innocent, and all that stuff. Later Tulisa made comments based upon Mariah's behaviour, personal attacks and accusations of sockpuppetry, saying Kww (talk · contribs) and I were the same person (now s/he says I'm a sock of Dan. The comments left in my talk page while I was writing this ([57]) give more behavioural evidence of s/he editing one more time [58], [59], [60].
I also want to ask the editors of the constant targets of Mariah to simply ignore her/his edits, revert them, and if she start to sock in the articles ([61]) to request protection at RFPP, to revert under a summary indicating s/he is blocked, or to contact Kww to block the IPs. Generally they come from a 86.xxx. network or 217.xxx, all from London, England, and all are related to R&B artists. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 22:52, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

No doubt that it's User:MariaJaydHicky again. Blocked both accounts. The closing clerk needs to archive this under WP:Sockpuppet investigations/MariaJaydHicky/Archive.—Kww(talk) 02:39, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

10 March 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Fails the duck test, name, CamelCase name, edits to pages MJH has edited like Jentina. Checkuser may be needed as MJH tends to create other accounts © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 21:17, 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.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • Blocked and tagged as a sock. I can't see much evidence of sleepers being found in the archive so given the backlog I'm closing without CU. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:57, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
17 March 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Long-term pattern of undiscussed genre changes at articles about The Beatles; the most telling evidence is the addition of the genre Merseybeat by both the user [62],[63], [64]and the IP:[65],[66], [67]. Radiopathy •talk• 23:05, 17 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 concur. Mrwallace05 and 86.154.170.3 have the same stance on genre issues. At the article "Think for Yourself", Mrwallace05 added "psychedelic rock" to the infobox on 14 October 2013[68] but was reverted. Today, the IP restored psychedelic rock.[69] As well, both Mrwallace05 and IP guy have used the fairly unusual word "sourced" in their edit comments. Binksternet (talk) 00:02, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please block this guy long-term or indefitely. He's a serial genre warrior who's been caught socking multiple times to get his way on articles. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 02:29, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This is not an act of sock puppetry, it is me wrongly assuming that my account is always logged on, after ticking the "Keep me logged in" box. I would never attempt to deny that this IP account thing is mine; it is. I will be careful in the future. Mrwallace05 (talk) 23:34, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
And Spike Wilbury, please do not revert my completely valid edit on Air for no reason other than you suspect I might be a sock-puppet, which I'm not. It's just childish. Mrwallace05 (talk) 23:36, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • As Checkusers will only tie IPs to accounts in rare circumstances this will need to be reviewed based on behaviour. --Jezebel'sPonyobons mots 17:44, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • All blocked for 1 week based on evidence presented. Closing now. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 06:44, 22 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
30 March 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

At the article Let It Be, after Mrwallace05 was reverted (see diff), IP 86.142.177.209 restored the change (see diff). After being reverted again, a new account Beatlemanioose was created and restored Mrwallace05's edit (see diff). Both accounts continued a pattern of disruptive edit warring over genres at related music articles over the last month and block evasion since Mrwallace05 was blocked on March 20. Also, account You'reNotMyBrain was created hours after the SPI was opened on Y45ed and was used to evade the November 18 block of Mrwallace05. Piriczki (talk) 13:06, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Further interaction is evident at the article I Saw Her Standing There (album), created by Y45ed. An obscure album of questionable notability, the article has been edited by Y45ed, Mrwallace05, You'reNotMyBrain (following the the block of Y45ed), 86.165.114.60, 86.154.171.217, and most recently by Beatlemanioose. Also, at the article Symptom of the Universe (song), Beatlemanioose restored the genre jazz fusion for this Black Sabbath song (see diff) which was originally added by Mrwallace05 (see diff). That article has also been edited by Y45ed, You'reNotMyBrain and 86.159.132.91. Piriczki (talk) 14:14, 31 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 am not a sock puppet - the only one of these IP accounts that is mine is 86.142.177.209, and I was using that IP account before I created my current one. I have looked through the contribs of all the other IP accounts, (in case my computer has one of the changing-IP system things) and none of them are mine. In fact, my computer has a static IP address, not a changing one. Regarding the edits made to Let It Be, MrWallace05 added "rock and roll", and this was removed. I, as 86.142.177.209, restored the addition because it was reliably sourced. (If you take a look at my contribs you will notice that most of my edits are reverts of users who inappropriately mess with genres or music articles). Then, after being told to make an account, I made this one, and again restored 'rock and roll'. Beatlemanioose (talk) 22:28, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All of the IPs resolve to the East of England, specifically the counties of Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire. Is it really possible that those other IPs, which you say you didn't use, all represent editors with an interest in music genres? Radiopathy •talk• 00:39, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Beatlemanioose claims to have a static IP address but was clearly editing under various IPs at Talk:News of the World (album)#Rock and News of the World (album), using 86.142.177.209, 86.142.178.61, 86.165.113.217 and 86.172.245.41. Piriczki (talk) 13:14, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
At the article Klaatu (band), Beatlemanioose's admitted IP 86.142.177.209 took up the genre issue (see diff) following a series of genre related edits by Y45ed, You'reNotMyBrain, Mrwallace05 and his admitted IP 86.137.1.196 (see diff), plus the above mentioned IPs 86.165.113.217 and 86.172.245.41. Piriczki (talk) 14:13, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
After reviewing the edit history of Klaatu, it is obvious that all IP addresses apart from mine belong to Mrwallace05. I discovered that YoureNotMyBrain's edit was actually reverting the unscourced genre edits by MrWallace05 and his IP accounts, and restoring them back to Chakakong's version. My IP's addition of 'baroque pop' on this page was based on something I read in PROG Magazine - I've never even listened to the band. Beatlemanioose (talk) 17:40, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
IP address 86.172.245.41 belongs to Mrwallace05? Piriczki (talk) 18:33, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
22 May 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


WP:DUCK. Genre-related edits on pages related to the Kinks, Dream Theater and other metal acts. Account was created five days after the sockmaster was blocked.—indopug (talk) 07:40, 22 May 2014 (UTC) —indopug (talk) 07:40, 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.

  • A CU is in order here, as this sockmaster rarely – if ever – makes only one account. I.e. Please sweep for sleepers! GabeMc (talk|contribs) 15:54, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • Rejected due to insufficient evidence. If you re-file, please provide a detailed evidence submission that shows exactly how you know the accounts are related. AGK [•] 23:57, 22 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
23 May 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

The previous case was closed due to insufficient evidence; I hope the following will do. As User:GabeMc pointed out, a checkuser is needed to catch sleeper accounts.

  1. Both MetalicMadness and Mrwallace05 have argued for the inclusion of blues-rock in the Black Sabbath article. Also note how both MetalicMadness and Mrwallace05 indent comments made directly below their own. (i.e. the 23:51, 14 December 2013 and 17:00, 22 May 2014 ones)
  2. The MetalicMadness account was created six days after Mrwallace was blocked.
  3. MetalicMadness and Mrwallace05 have edited on 39 common pages. Note the unique combination of diverse tastes—Beatles, Kinks, Black Sabbath, Ozzy, Rush, Gorillaz and Dream Theater. Metalic has overlap with the other socks too ([70], [71]) including edits to the obscure Tristan Fry.
  4. Here Metalic restores a revert of Mrwallace's edit.
  5. Here Metalic adds 'heavy metal', just as You'reNotMyBrain did (another Mrwallace sock).
  6. Similarly [72], [73]
  7. Similarly for the IPs, they cover a lot of the same ground—Beatles, Dream Theater, Sabbath. Their Geolocate locations are very close by too, to each other and to the sock IPs above. —indopug (talk) 13:37, 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.

To reply to each accusation:

  1. About 50% of the population of the Black Sabbath talk page will agree on blues rock, and 50% will disagree. Naturally, there will be common agreements. MrWallace05 and I both initially agreed on blues rock. I say "Initially" because I have reconsidered my opinion and have now agreed that blues rock should be mentioned in the main text instead of the infobox, as another user sensibly suggested.
  2. MrWallace05 account was created over a year ago, whereas mine is relatively new.
  3. All those bands mentioned are very popular, and have many fans who wish to contribute to their pages. In fact, I believe some of my edits on these pages were actually reverts of edits made by possible "sock puppets" of MrWallace05. And regarding the Tristan Fry thing, I edited the page the day after being lucky enough to meet the man in person. This encouraged me to improve his Wikipedia page, whereas MrWallace05's "alter-ego" was just there to make a pointless genre war.
  4. This one I can apologise for; I saw that Binksternet had swapped the genres "hard rock" and "progressive rock" around, which I thought was pointless, so I reverted him. But I was stupidly not aware that Binksternet was actually just reverting the pointless swap by MrWallace05.
  5. I found a reference citing the song as Heavy metal, so I added it. Where's the problem in that?
  6. In this case I thought MrWallace05's edit was valid, and I saw that he had been reverted for being a sock puppet, not because it was an invalid edit.
  7. As I mentioned before, these are very popular bands with huge fan-bases, so obviously there are going to be more than one fans editing their pages. Not sure what the second part is on about though...

And I'd finally like to add that everytime I edit, it is with the intention of helpfully improving the articles, not to ruin them. I really hope you can understand! I'm not a sock puppet! MetalicMadness (talk) 10:42, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]


I really don't understand what I've done wrong... I have not made any disruptive edits and I only aim to edit helpfully to all the articles... Whatever it is, I will not do it again. MetalicMadness (talk) 10:47, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • AGK, I'm sure you realize that the more evidence editors present against this serial sockmaster of 2+ years the harder it gets to catch them? GabeMc (talk|contribs) 19:31, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • DoRD, are Kingslove2013, Progrockdude, and Ilovetopaint coming up as potential matches? GabeMc (talk|contribs) 16:48, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • Since those accounts weren't listed here, I didn't check them, so I don't have an answer for you. If you want them to be checked, please add add a new case for them so that a clerk can evaluate the evidence. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 17:54, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • Well, I thought that when you checked MM, any other accounts that are editing the same pages with a similar IP are flagged. Can you see how easily a sockmaster with enough time on their hands can create almost infinite amounts of work for good-faith editors? It would take hours to compile enough evidence to show that these accounts are most likely MrWallace, then there is a strong possibility that the clerk will disagree and no CU will be performed anyway. On the other hand, if I spent (read wasted) the time to compile enough evidence, and the accounts were checked and confirmed, the sockmaster could just make three new accounts in 15 minutes and we are right back to square one. That's why SPI is an ineffective time-waster that, IMO, is more entertainment for sockmasters than it is an actual effort to stop them. Don't get me wrong, I know that you do all that you can in good-faith to help, it just seems that this particular sockmaster is too seasoned in their craft to even be worth chasing. Does two years of disruption justify a range block? GabeMc (talk|contribs) 18:08, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
          • Range blocks are out of the question here - they're using multiple very busy ranges, and blocks would cause way too much collateral damage. These other accounts may show up in a check, but the data CU returns for this user is anything but unique. That is why picking out sleepers is extremely tedious, and why I would have needed these account names to specifically look for when I was running my checks. I understand your frustration with the process here, but sometimes the best we can do is to play Whac-A-Mole. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 18:31, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
            • I hear you. Thanks for all that you do to help combat this type of disruption. I still say I have a point that Indopug knew this was MW – he's usually quite obvious, perhaps intentionally so, and AGK required Indopug to spend (read waste) the time needed to compile this report. Now its confirmed that he was right and the sock will be blocked, but the sockmaster just picks-up with another sleeper, which he has dozens. I guess they are socking in an ideal way that maximises the amount of our time that is wasted while minimizing their exposure to "down-time". I think that the only way to reverse some of this advantage is to be more accepting of reports made by veteran editors that – on the surface – seem like little more than the basic WP:DUCK test. You get an instinct about these socks, and I've identified dozens. I knew MrWallace was a sockmaster/sock-troll after their fifth day editing, but nobody believed me. GabeMc (talk|contribs) 18:45, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • CheckUser requested - Self-endorsed by clerk for checkuser attention - Similar, worth a check. This user is  Likely but there are so many potential sleepers I'd like another CU to look at it. NativeForeigner Talk 11:02, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would call MetalicMadness  Confirmed, but picking sleepers out of the numerous busy ranges this person has access to is well beyond my patience threshold today. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:12, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • MetalicMadness blocked and tagged. IPs not blocked as they're stale. Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:41, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
05 July 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Mrwallace05 was created on 21 January 2013, and was interested in the band Gorillaz, with his first nine edits made to Gorillaz-related articles. Among these first nine edits, Mrwallace05 added the (unreferenced) alternative rock genre to Demon Days[74] and to G Sides.[75] The new account GorillazMonkeyZ, created a couple of days ago, in his first few edits added the "alternative rock" genre to "Revolving Doors",[76] "Stylo",[77] and Gorillaz.[78]
Mrwallace05 was also interested in the band Klaatu. IP 86.154.171.148 worked on Klaatu-related albums and songs in May 2014, adding the genre "baroque pop" to the band,[79] and also to the song "Sub-Rosa Subway".[80] Mrwallace05 was known to add "baroque pop".[81] The account HocolPrarum was created on 8 June 2014 and blocked on 11 June by DoRD as a checkuser result related to this SPI, but not listed. HocolPrarum's first few edits included ones to Klaatu-related articles, adding "space rock"[82] and "baroque pop"[83] He also added "baroque pop" to a Zombies song.[84]
IP 86.142.177.183 reverted the Badfinger album[85] to the same version which had twice been changed by Mrwallace05 to be a rock genre.[86][87]
I'm asking for checkuser to sweep for sleeper socks, as this person has been known for persistent socking. It would be helpful to get some lengthy blocks on the more heavily used IPs, especially 86.142.177.183, 86.165.113.99, 86.165.113.144, and 86.170.174.7. Binksternet (talk) 20:08, 5 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

At the article Heritage (Opeth album), new User:Lukejordan02, also editing as IPs 86.19.151.163 and 62.253.148.103 (which was used to evade the block of 10 June – 17 June 2014 by the way), resumed an edit war previously waged by User:Y45ed and User:You'reNotMyBrain, both blocked sockpuppets of User:Mrwallace05. Y45ed first removed the genre "progressive metal" and source "allmusic.com" saying it's not reliable (see diff) and again removed the genre and source saying it refers to only one song (see diff and diff). After Y45ed was blocked, You'reNotMyBrain removed "allmusic.com" saying it is an unreliable source (see diff) and again removed the source saying it refers to only one song (see diff). After Mrwallace05's most recent genre-warring sockpuppet User:MetalicMadness was blocked, Lukejordan02 began making numerous, contentious changes to genres at various rock music related articles. Just like the previous sockpuppets, Lukejordan02 removed the genre "progressive metal" and the source "allmusic.com" from the Heritage article questioning the source's reliability (see diff, diff) and again removed the genre, saying on the talk page that the source refers to only one song (see diff). The edit warring continued by removing the genre (see diff) and source (see diff) again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Piriczki (talk • contribs)

I don't know about that, Piriczki; it looks to me as if Lukejordan02 is not a sock of Mrwallace05. Luke likes to add "glam" to the genre parameter, but Mrwallace05 had nothing to do with glam. Binksternet (talk) 00:57, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing this, Binksternet. I started to do it yesterday, but ran out of energy, and your knowledge of this critter is far more complete than mine. —[AlanM1(talk)]— 09:09, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome! Binksternet (talk) 22:56, 7 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  •  Clerk endorsed - The range looks massive (/8) so rangeblocks probably aren't going to be possible, but could a CI please have a look at the listed accounts and sleepers. Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:56, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • information Administrator note Please note that HocolPrarum is already CU blocked and tagged. Also, the majority of those IPs belong to BT, so certainly no rangeblock will be possible there. A couple of the IPs originate in Israel - please double check the evidence on those. I will check the remaining accounts later if someone else doesn't get to it first. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:15, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • GorillazMonkeyZ and Thebeetle$321 are  Confirmed to each other, and are highly  Likely the same as the master. no No comment with respect to IP address(es). ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:18, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looking for sleepers here is impractical. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 16:22, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blocked and tagged. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 01:24, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
02 September 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

WP:DUCK. A quick look at the page history of 808s & Heartbreak shows the extreme sockpuppetry on this page to any uninformed admin. STATic message me! 20:15, 2 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]

information Administrator note I have blocked Harmony-n-Beatz for edit warring and as a probalbe duck sock. Other recent accounts include T.Wells kid and HH.Mandem. If we could get a check-user to confirm, that would be really helpful, as the user is now apparently creating accounts, performing 10 edits and waiting 4 days to become autoconfirmed so that they can edit through the semi-protection. Behavioural similarity is that all the accounts insist on a genre of hip-hop for the album and are prepared to aggressively edit war their preferred version. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:42, 2 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Filter 634 should help. Obviously, I can't reveal the details in a public forum.—Kww(talk) 18:49, 16 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

- Mailer Diablo 00:47, 19 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

29 November 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


  • This new user with the above two usernames has been doing copypaste moves of the article 808s & Heartbreak, perennial target article of the sockmaster's attention. Not sure on behavioural evidence alone, I request checkuser assistance. Thanks. Diannaa (talk) 23:54, 29 November 2014 (UTC) User may also have edited with IP 5.81.225.225, removing the report at ANI. -- Diannaa (talk) 00:02, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • One of the accounts has now performed this edit changing the genre at 808s & Heartbreak, like here, here, here, etc. Starting to look like a duck sock to me. -- Diannaa (talk) 01:41, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users[edit]

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

Rihanna was also a prior target. Looking thru the prior SPI's the limited focus on R&B and hip hop popular music seems suspicious. I'd almost say I heard a duck.-Serialjoepsycho- (talk) 03:55, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

CREAAMCheese was a friend of mine who was staying over; and the Che'Nellefan one is 'cause of Spyware issues Rihanna-RiRi-fan (talk) 14:21, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
  • Following are  Confirmed to the archive:
Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 11:46, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • All three accounts are now blocked, so the case is ready for closure and archiving. Thanks, -- Diannaa (talk) 00:08, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
05 December 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

User seems to have an issue with one editor Dan56, the same as the sockpuppeteer. Both are accusing Dan56 of genre warring and I honestly cannot see that he is. They are both also having the same issue with the genre at Hotter than July (album).

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Rationalobserver&diff=prev&oldid=636781379

You will see on my user page, they have actually altered the comment that Dan has left, almost like they were trying to hide Dan's edit from me:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:5_albert_square&diff=prev&oldid=636779777

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=636669984

This has happened after I locked an article, Hotter than July (album) last night so a discussion about genre could take place on the talk page. HJ Mitchell then blocked the sockpuppeteer for block evasion:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Ice%27dup-Blingking

After I blocked a previous IP that they were using:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:5.81.225.225

As you can see by this diff, I am not the only one that thinks that these accounts may be related either to each other or another user, User:Rihanna-RiRi-fan

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Hotter_than_July_(album)&diff=prev&oldid=636770876

I am going to indef block 51 penland road as I suspect that they are a sock, either way they are also trolling so not here to build an encyclopedia.

I am requesting CheckUser to see if these accounts are related and also because if the account has been set up to try and sway the consensus at the talk page of the article, it is likely that there are other accounts too, maybe sleepers. I suspect that there may be IPs involved, if a CU check confirms this, I would ask that CU consider a brief rangeblock if that's possible to try and get the message across. 5 albert square (talk) 19:37, 5 December 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 accounts are  Confirmed to each other:
Ta, fixed now!--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 23:47, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the CU @Ponyo:, I've tagged the socks--5 albert square (talk) 00:32, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Case merged, everything seems to be in order. Mike V • Talk 00:45, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
14 December 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Following on the heels of the last case identifying Rihanna-RiRi-fan, these two new accounts were created after the last batch of socks was blocked. Mstique and 5.81.225.225 are already blocked as socks of Rihanna-RiRi-fan. The very first edit of R&B and Hip hop Music was to continue the work of previous socks at the article It's About Time (Christina Milian album). Compare this edit by R&B and Hip hop Music to this edit by Rihanna-RiRi-fan, adding a hidden comment to the genre parameter. The next focus of R&B and Hip hop Music was to re-create the Dina Rae biography which had previously been created by blocked sockpuppet Bling$Bling$Blang$Blang$ as Dina Rae (singer). It's clear that R&B and Hip hop Music is yet another sock of MariaJaydHicky. I'm requesting checkuser because past checks have turned up sleeper accounts and additional socks. Binksternet (talk) 17:52, 14 December 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 I have blocked range 5.81.224.0/23 for two weeks; blocked user:R&B and Hip hop Music indefinitely; and deleted and salted the article Dina Rae, created in violation of a ban. Check-user to uncover further socks is a good idea. -- Diannaa (talk) 18:40, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • The two accounts above are  Confirmed to the archive, with no obvious sleepers. no No comment with respect to IP address(es). Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:49, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
21 December 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

I have to run out the door but let me get this investigation started. I'll provide diffs later. Both of the registered editors showed up at Kiss It Better (Rihanna song) to continue where the IP 81.148.240.191 was active, and the same article where Shaney Smith-Wilson was blocked as a sockpuppet of MariaJaydHicky. Requesting checkuser to search for sleepers. Binksternet (talk) 19:56, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Update

Muicfantasy has been confirmed as a sock by PhilKnight who said that the account was technically indistinguishable] from Shaney Smith-Wilson. Binksternet (talk) 01:00, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. Not a sock and just created my account today; I do not know why if anyone edits you have to accuse them of being a sock; it is harrasment and you should be blocked for continualy doing it Muicfantasy (talk) 21:16, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

information Administrator note Blocked User:Muicfantasy and User:Stanlyfe indefinitely and the IP for two weeks. The other account Binksternet is talking about was User:Shaney Smith-Wilson, which was confirmed by checkuser User:PhilKnight on the 19th. I agree check-user is a good idea both to confirm that my judgment is correct, and to check for additional socks. -- Diannaa (talk) 22:13, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

19 January 2015[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

These accounts were created shortly after User:Amamamamama was blocked. They made one edit outside of userspace, which was to create Category:Hetrosexual Wikipedians on December 22, after Amamamamama's Category:Straight Wikipedians was g5 deleted at Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2014_November_29#Category:Straight_Wikipedians earlier in December. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:00, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

  • If that category is suspect, perhaps it's worth a closer look at Lightgodsy (talk · contribs) - a recently created account, who added themselves to this category. Of course, there may be a benign explanation. bobrayner (talk) 17:50, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Bobrayner. I added myself to the category, after I noticed it was up for deletion, as I stated on the Cfd discussion page. I nominated a category for deletion on the 11th, and have taken to looking over the categories up for deletion on occasion. As I stated on the Cfd page, I am against the deletion on equality and the notion that other categories which also don't really aid or present themselves as a collaboration effort (and are broad-spectrum in the sense of majorities) are allowed to exist in other cases. I simply expressed my opinion and decided to add my name to the category because I am a heterosexual, and don't see why it shouldn't exist.
I welcome a closer look at my account, because everything I've done has been in good faith and with an upstanding manner. Though I think it's entirely ludicrous for anyone to be put under suspicion for simply joining a reasonable user category.
—Lightgodsy(TALKCONT) 18:15, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]
23 January 2015[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Genre warring at the same articles for the sock and the two IPs, one of which has been blocked and found to be MariaJaydHicky. At Killing Me Softly (Roberta Flack album):

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]
30 January 2015[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Genre warring at Hotter than July with the same revision made by the several socks which required the page to be protected:

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 2015[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Restored previous socks' preferred revision at Hotter than July, where several socks' genre warring required the page to be protected:

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]
01 March 2015[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


  • FanofUrbanMusic: Created Feb 27. The user is editing the same group of articles as the sockmaster, performing the same kinds of edits. Among the first edits are these examples: changing the genre of a song (Diff of Kid Sister); adding a hidden note (Diff of Beg for It (song)), something a truly new user would likely not know how to do.
  • Metrohmania: Also created on Feb 27. First edit is to add genres to an article using a flatlist template, something a genuinely new user would not know how to do: Diff of Draft:Rihanna's upcoming eighth studio album. Here's three similar edits by three different socks: Metrohmania, an IP, Taaffoo.

Like the sockmaster, these socks are interested in changing genres on music articles and focus primarily on Rihanna. Both accounts have edited the draft on her new album. I would appreciate a check for sleeper accounts for this prolific community-banned socker. Thanks, -- Diannaa (talk) 17:54, 1 March 2015 (UTC) Diannaa (talk) 17:54, 1 March 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]
  •  Confirmed, blocked, tagged: FanofUrbanMusic, Metrohmania, and one already blocked account. The sockmaster has access to various IP ranges, thus there maybe more that we missed. Materialscientist (talk) 23:58, 1 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I deleted the draft per G5. Otherwise, there's nothing more to do here. Bbb23 (talk) 00:24, 2 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
31 May 2015[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

I was reverted at Diva (Beyoncé song) [95] for reverting a confirmed account. Seems kind of obvious due to this, considering Maria reverts what I revert from him/her. Considering long-term, other accounts may exist. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 01:07, 31 May 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]
01 July 2015[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Three of the five edits of this seemingly SPA have been on the same three pages as blocked sock Kandiwell; two different deletion discussions and a related article. I know this is tenuous evidence, but with the socks apparently flying around the Dina Rae articles I thought it would be better to check. Note: I've added Kandiwell despite having already been blocked by Diannaa because I did not see the name in the SPI archives. Primefac (talk) 09:31, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

I have been following the MariaJaydHicky case since August 2014. I thought of posting to SPI but decided to block as a duck sock as the behavioural evidence is very strong. I am transferring my evidence here (copying from user talk:Kandiwell) so as to keep everything together.

  • The Kandiwell account was created at 18:48 on 6 June, about an hour and a half after the recent named socks user:KeziaMarshall and User:Kelisalicia were blocked.
  • There's quite a bit of overlap in interests, but I did not realize that this account was a sock until I saw this edit: Diff of Love? (note the deceptive edit summary: "Minor fixes, mostly disambig links"). What the edit actually does is change the genre from pop to R&B. This is the same edit performed repeatedly by named socks and IP socks:Sucka4luvin, Germania1001, 82.132.224.134, Bettina1992, and more. Various socks have used deceptive edit summaries in the past. Here's an example from "This Is Me... Then", where the edit summary states they "Removed extinct page protection template". But at the same time, they added their preferred genre (R&B).
  • Sockpuppet Sucka4luvin showed up (on their second day of editing) at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dina Rae (recording artist) to support keeping Kandiwell's article on this topic. The page Dina Rae was creation-protected by me as it was repeatedly re-created by socks User:Bling$Bling$Blang$Blang$ and user:R&B and Hip hop Music (both confirmed by check-user). This user re-created the page under a different title to get around the creation-protection. User:Sucka4luvin, which I blocked on June 19 based on behavioural evidence, voted "keep" at the AFD. Suspected sock User:Losthirsty also !voted keep at the AFD.
  • Further posts on this page confirm their identity as some of the language is in their distinct voice and uses some slang that is not used outside the user's known geographic area (England), and their antipathy to Binksternet has come out.
  • The fact that Kandiwell knows all about socking and checkusers is pretty precocious for a user with only four weeks of editing. -- Diannaa (talk) 21:02, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Bbb23: Here are additional accounts I blocked as duck socks in April, May, and June that do not appear on your list or Ponyo's list:

@Diannaa: All done. If you come up with any more, I get time and a half. --Bbb23 (talk) 00:17, 2 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

information Administrator note I am requesting checkuser assistance on this case please. Please see discussion at User talk:Kandiwell. Thanks, -- Diannaa (talk) 18:41, 1 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

19 July 2015[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

Genre-obsessed edits to a diverse but signature set of bands' articles:

Comments by other users[edit]

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

Here are some more suspected sockpuppets of Mrwallace05 editing genres within the Beatles, Black Sabbath, Eagles, Rush, Focus, Klaatu, Dream Theater, Opeth, Gorillaz, Enter Shikari, Sparks, Elvis Presley nexus.

Piriczki (talk) 15:30, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Per request, here are some diffs by Mrwallace05, confirmed and suspected sockpuppets, and Shikari 123.

  • Let It Be: Mrwallace05 and sockpuppets repeatedly adding genres blues rock and rhythm & blues.
  1. diff
  2. diff
  3. diff
  4. diff
  5. diff
  6. diff
  7. diff
  8. diff
  9. diff
  • Ringo Starr: Sockpuppets of Mrwallace05 repeatedly adding genre rock and roll.
  1. diff
  2. diff
  3. diff

Numerous changes to genres on albums by the group Klaatu. In the case of Sir Army Suit, a very obscure album, the bulk of the edit history is by Mrwallace05 and his sockpuppets.

  1. diff
  2. diff
  3. diff
  4. diff
  5. diff
  1. diff
  2. diff
  3. diff
  4. diff
  5. diff
  6. diff
  7. diff
  1. diff
  2. diff
  3. diff
  1. diff
  2. diff
  3. diff
  1. diff
  2. diff
  • Air (French band): Numerous changes to genres by Mrwallace05 and his sockpuppets for a very obscure French band.
  1. diff
  2. diff
  3. diff
  4. diff
  5. diff
  6. diff
  7. diff
  8. diff
  9. diff
  10. diff
  11. diff
  12. diff
  13. diff
  14. diff
  15. diff
  16. diff
  17. diff

One thing to keep in mind is that the genre warrior does not always push a particular point of view or insist on certain genres. For them it's not necessarily important what the genre is changed to, just that it is changed. If the genre field in infoboxes were to become stable or fixed, either by consensus or policy, the genre warrior would be out of business since he has little or nothing of substance to contribute. Piriczki (talk) 18:33, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, since I have heard this accusation before just the other day, obviously I can't ignore it. My aim on Wikipedia is to ensure that articles present fully reliable information, verified through citations from reliable web sources (see the Music Barnstar award on my user page). So you will notice that all of the edits of mine that are mentioned on this talk are all backed up by a reliable source - with the exception of the one on The Zone album, which I admit did not include a source, and instead included the very naive "explanation" that albums can have a "default genre" - this was one of my earliest edits I believe, and so I have naturally learned from my mistake. Regarding the other cited edits, surely you are able to see that through frequent editing, there will naturally be mutual edits with other users, including mass genre-warring sock puppets who have probably edited on almost every music article under the sun? I hope you will realise that there has been a mistake and allow me to carry on helping improve the content on Wikipedia. Thank you, and I apologise if my edits / behaviour has been a cause of concern, as I can see why this kind of problem must often be very frustrating. Thanks again, Shikari 123 (talk) 17:10, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by Binksternet

I have little to say about Shikari123 except that the commonly edited bands overlap quite a bit with Mrwallace05 and his socks. What I would like to do is add a list of IPs that I felt were Mrwallace05 evading his block, so that they become part of this case, and may be compared by checkusers if doing so is helpful.

Note that Shikari123 has reverted several of these IPs, and several of these IPs have reverted Shikari123. This kind of think is not unknown in the sockpuppet world, but it merits a more cynical eye and a more thorough analysis. Binksternet (talk) 03:24, 20 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vanjagenije or Euryalus, I notice that Shikari 123 (talk · contribs) (and all these other guys) hasn't been tagged as a sockpuppet of Mrwallace05 (talk · contribs). Is more evidence needed for that?—indopug (talk) 02:05, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Indopug: they probably are but this isnt confirmed by CU, so requires someone to do the behavioural analysis to link the Shikari sock set with the Mrwallace one. If no one else wants to, I will in a day or so. -- Euryalus (talk) 14:17, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some additional IPs I suspect are Mrwallace05:

Piriczki (talk) 15:03, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A couple more possible sockpuppet accounts:

Piriczki (talk) 13:50, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

More suspected IPs:

Binksternet (talk) 15:55, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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

  •  Additional information needed - @Piriczki: 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) 16:05, 19 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Those are all blocked and tagged but the majority of editing from this master is IPs and the ranges are too big to block (meant to say above that I'm not making any comment on whether the above IP addresses are correct). Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:29, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Given how long this has been opened, it's probably worth closing this now and any new accounts can be reported in a new report. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:15, 13 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

02 August 2015[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

I was notified that I was reverted in multiple TLC (group) related pages where Maria constantly edits or is reverted, including Ooooooohhh... On the TLC Tip, 3D (TLC album), 20 (TLC album), or Crazy Sexy Hits: The Very Best of TLC. Besides that, Deneoak has the same pattern of adding unneeded {{flatlist}}s to infoboxes. (Deneoak: [113][114][115] vs. Maria's socks: [116][117][118][119][120][121][122][123][124][125]).

As Maria tends to create multiple accounts at the same time (see previous report), a checkuser is a good idea. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 19:37, 2 August 2015 (UTC) © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 19:37, 2 August 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]

information Administrator note I have blocked the Deneoak account. This diff of Jackie (Ciara album) is typical of the master account: the edit summary is deceptive, as it's not a straight undo; the genre of pop music was removed and her preferred genre of R&B left in place. The account was created the day after the last known sock was blocked. Suggest check-user is a good idea. Thanks, -- Diannaa (talk) 20:09, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Confirmed:
A Puppy Called "Dudley" (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Deneoak (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Mike V • Talk 23:10, 2 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

01 October 2015[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

Mind, Body and Soul is already blocked for abusing multiple accounts. Binksternet (talk) 18:06, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

MariaJaydHicky was known for inserting the genre of Contemporary R&B into multiple articles. These socks and the IP have been doing exactly that. Shaundice, Mind, Body and Soul, Kissmenleaveme, and the IP. Same as MariaJaydHicky, confirmed sock Deneoak, confirmed sock JoshPaulm, confirmed sock Anascombe, confirmed sock Rihanna fAnty, confirmed sock PINKSabrina, and confirmed sock A Puppy Called "Dudley".

MariaJaydHicky was also known for adding hidden comments saying don't revert this stuff. For instance, the IP added "do not change", and Nuffin'2lose added "do not alter". This is the same manner as confirmed sock Deneoak writing DO NOT ALTER THE GENRES.

CU requested as this person frequently creates a collection of socks. Binksternet (talk) 18:42, 1 October 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]

08 October 2015[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

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 accounts have been blocked as  Confirmed socks:

08 December 2015[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets


All CU  Confirmed socks. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:21, 8 December 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]

All blocked and tagged. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 01:21, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

27 December 2015[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

I was reverted here by this "new" user. The revert was because I reverted an already confirmed sockpuppet. I suggest a CU due to this user's background. © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 05:25, 27 December 2015 (UTC) © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 05:25, 27 December 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]

8 January 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

Recently, I've been reverted by these 82.132 users. All reverts are related to reverts I did to confirmed accounts. .83[126][127]; .59[128][129]; .224[130][131]. A rangeblock would be enough, it is 82.132.224.0/20 (talk · contribs) (up to 4096 users). © Tbhotch™ (en-2.5). 19:10, 8 January 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]

  •  Check declined by a checkuser We won't publicly run a check with only IPs listed. It appears HJMitchell has range blocked 82.132.192.0/18 for 3 days. Everything seems set here. Mike V • Talk 16:53, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

26 January 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets


CU run after evidence of socking; account and underlying IP blocked. Drmies (talk) 03:22, 26 January 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]

  • Drmies, you can close this kind of SPI yourself. Closing for you. Bbb23 (talk) 05:05, 26 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

12 February 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

Just look at the history of Only Girl (In the World) in the last 7 days. Diannaa blocked an account for being a sock account by MariaJaydHickey, and since then multiple IP addresses have made the same edits. Clearly sockpuppetry. Has also used 82.132.234.220 too.  — Calvin999 11:41, 12 February 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]

17 February 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

Cobnor performed the exact same edit as confirmed sock Deneoak: This a while ago, then this recently. Cobnor is doing the same genre warring stuff as all the other socks in this case. CU requested to sweep for sleepers. Binksternet (talk) 06:16, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Here's how 188.223.72.34 is linked to this case: Confirmed sock User:Estellalup added the "Contemporary R&B" genre to the song "Russian Roulette" using a book cite.[132] This was reverted as block evasion by Tomica and Diannaa. Next, confirmed sock User:Gucci and Burberry re-added the same genre but with a new book cite.[133] This was reverted by Tomica and Binksternet because of block evasion. The sock added another book cite, using a juvenile book published by Mason Crest.[134] This was reverted, so then IP 188.223.72.34 showed up and re-added the "Contemporary R&B" genre with the same juvenile book cite.[135] This was reverted but the IP restored saying about the Mason Crest book, "my brother has the book". Binksternet (talk) 06:37, 19 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looks like I confused Musicismylife21 with the MariaJaydHicky socks because of a couple of similarities in behavior. However, the Musicismylife21 account reverted a handful of MariaJaydHicky socks, so I retract my inclusion of that account. Binksternet (talk) 06:47, 19 February 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]

15 March 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

Same types of vandalisms Mario Maraschi (talk) 12:29, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

I have no connection to User:MariaJaydHicky at all. I'm not sure what User:Mario Maraschi is trying to pull here, but his bizarre vendetta against me stems from this dispute, where you can clearly see he is misrepresenting what the source states. Maestro2016 (talk) 15:15, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • A check is warranted here, but I think both accounts should be checked against the master. Maestro2016 was created a few days after the last batch of CU-confirmed socks were blocked and has a username very similar to one of them, and their first edits were adding a series of obscure genres to an article ([136]) and given the master's history this is close enough to be suspicious. On the other hand, Mario Maraschi was created quite some time ago but didn't edit until last month, has a very large number of intersects with previous socks, and has a talk page full of warnings for genre warring, also suspicious with this master. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 17:07, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
all my "warnings for genre warring" were misunderstandings solved in a easy way, but the Mr. Maestro2016 (which is clearly a MariaJaydHicky sockpupprt) starts insulting me without any respect, and now he's inventing a lot of silly excuses--Mario Maraschi (talk) 17:38, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not familiar with MariaJaydHicky, so it's just a coincidence. If there's any doubt, then I don't mind having my account checked against MariaJaydHicky for confirmation. But since Mario Maraschi suspects me of being this user, I would guess that he most likely knows this person, so it would also be useful to have Mario Maraschi checked if he has any connection to this user. Maestro2016 (talk) 18:03, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I repeat, stop inventing a lot of silly excuses--Mario Maraschi (talk) 18:13, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

25 April 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

New user name was registered the day the previous sock (I loves Meghan Trainor) was blocked. New sock has edited three articles, all of them directly connected to recently confirmed socks:

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, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:10, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

25 April 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

IP has arrived to restore edits of last sock (which had been reverted under WP:EVADE). Genre changes on Meghan Trainor, edits to Little Red (album) (see last sock case).

Requesting check user to catch others, due to accelerating pace of new overlapping socks. SummerPhDv2.0 16:26, 25 April 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]

  • The IP is blocked, and the CU request, no matter how you couch it, is still a privacy invasion. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 17:00, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

02 June 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

188.223.187.130, who is a confirmed ipsock, made this edit to Alesha Dixon, and then after they were reverted new user ThreepintsofFantaandtwopacketsofWalkers made a very similar edit that restored some of what the ipsock edited. Also another sock, Bowsha, has edited the page as well ([137]) Sro23 (talk) 04:43, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Added 151.231.155.64, this one might not need to be blocked but it has been making suspicious edits to genre Sro23 (talk) 05:33, 2 June 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]

 Confirmed, blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 11:12, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

14 July 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

"New" editor appears and immediately begins making unsourced changes to genres. Nothing new there, except that all of the articles, however, are also targets for IP socks of MariaJayHicky.

Joesob: "hip-pop beats ≠ a hip-pop album"[138] IP sock: "what all pop should sound like ≠ pop album"[139]

Two of the IPs (2a02:c7f:de18:a800:545c:809b:7f1b:b007 and 2a02:c7f:de18:a800:f8f5:547:59a5:7233) joining in the socking on Black Eyed Peas genres also edited at "Thriller". Their editing neatly nests with Joesob's editing: One IP edits at 10:54 & 10:55, Joesob edits 10:57 - 11:10, first IP edits at 11:17, then second IP edits at 12:17, Joesob returns at 12:19. SummerPhDv2.0 17:14, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Adding "1st May 2007", another account making unsourced genre changes to Black Eyed Peas and "Thriller", again with edits that nicely nest within Joesob's. - SummerPhDv2.0 17:27, 14 July 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]

 Confirmed, blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:50, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

27 July 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

New account has appeared with edits to all of the Black Eyed Peas articles targeted by the last sock, Joesob. Edit summary "Removed alternative artwork as it was added by a sock of a banned user" does not indicate supposed sockpuppet account, all edits just happen to make Joesob's desired genre changes along with the supposed artwork undo and MariaJayHicky has repeatedly claimed their edits were reverting sockpuppetry. SummerPhDv2.0 01:29, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This report needs to be merged into the case for MariaJaydHicky (note the "d"). Pinging Bbb23 who seems to end up taking a mop to a lot of MariaJaydHicky's messes as the sockpuppeteer doesn't seem to be hearing they've been exposed yet again. - SummerPhDv2.0 20:57, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Adding 165.225.80.54, who suddenly also doesn't like that Black Eyed Peas is a pop band.[140] - SummerPhDv2.0 22:03, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Adding 2A02:C7F:DE18:A800:F5B7:4022:C1A5:91C8, who promptly showed up to fix 165.225.80.54's typo. Both geolocate to our little pop music fan's previously verified London area. - SummerPhDv2.0 22:06, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Adding 2A02:C7F:DE18:A800:99E4:D3C5:79A8:4AD4, another London IP defending 165.225.80.54's GWAR at Everything Is 4. - SummerPhDv2.0 22:20, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I realize the IPs are stale, I'm listing them in case any are open proxies and/or in case there is ever question about my reverts. - SummerPhDv2.0 22:20, 27 July 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]

28 August 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


MariaJaydHicky keeps creating so many sockpuppet accounts to genre war and be disruptive. This is the latest one, picking right up where previous puppets left:[141] [142] [143] [144] [145] Sro23 (talk) 16:51, 28 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]

02 September 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Quack.[146][147]

Also using multiple IPs, of course. Requesting CU due to extensive history of socking and sleeper accounts. SummerPhDv2.0 16:52, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just added MariaJaydHicky2, an account openly created by MariaJaydHicky to discuss an apparent olive branch offer by Anna Frodesiak. At User_talk:MariaJaydHicky the new account claims that the huge number of socks are not them and that they have not been editing. However, the NDublet account edited from 05:12, September 2, 2016 to 05:19. The new account was created 05:21, September 2, 2016 and edited until 05:33. That's one hell of a coincidence. - SummerPhDv2.0 17:23, 2 September 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]

  • The following accounts are  Confirmed:

22 October 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Quacking loudly at Rihanna, restoring the same material as previously blocked socks Addamchewy and Chevyoncé.

Requesting check user due to extensive history of sleeper accounts and on-going claims of innocence at User_talk:MariaJaydHicky2. SummerPhDv2.0 17:08, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Added 82.132.212.255, who has begun defending Maria's edits since this notice. - SummerPhDv2.0 17:15, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

The ironic thing is that Every bottle, the user Virgingirl has been edit warring with, also appears to be a sock (of User:Giubbotto non ortodosso). Sro23 (talk) 17:12, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sro23: Any thoughts on that IP? I added it as a sock of Maria as it was restoring her edits, but the edits are too closely timed to the Virgin account. Possibly Giubbotto? - SummerPhDv2.0 17:22, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'd say based on geolocation as well as edits it is MJH. She often edits logged out immediately (within minutes) before or after editing using a registered sock account. Giubbotto's mainly just interested in Chris Brown. Sro23 (talk) 17:27, 22 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

21 November 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

I'm listing these for ease of blocking and tagging and for the record. See below. Bbb23 (talk) 15:36, 21 November 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]


21 November 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

I believe that if you check IP users who's IPv6 grouping starts with 2A02:C7F:DE2E:EB00: that you will find that it belongs to the above named sockppuppet. Kellymoat (talk) 16:09, 21 November 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]

We don't publicly disclose the IP(s) of named accounts. CU declined.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:24, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

29 November 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Continuous addition of unsourced Metacritic links as was done by its countless socks. —IB [ Poke ] 18:50, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

The only reason I don't add the source is because I edit from my phone, and it's near impossible to source it. The MC score is sourced within the review summary on every page I've edited, so why does it need to be sourced twice? Don't you think that's a tad unnecessary? And if you really want it sourced, by all means go ahead and source it yourself. If I had my laptop on me I would do it, but I don't. HeheDNCE (talk) 19:05, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, being the sockpuppet, you very well know that wP:V curtails us to add source to anything we write, how many times its present in a different section does not matter. Next, stop vandalizing articles by changing release dates and artists. —IB [ Poke ] 19:15, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Um, I changed the release date because on the album page it says it was released on June 21, not August 8. And adding a featured artist is common practice on Wikipedia. Look at Telephone for example. HeheDNCE (talk) 19:17, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

Red X Unrelated. @IndianBio: Next time please provide diffs supporting your conclusion. I ran this check against my better judgment. Closing with no action.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:39, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

18 December 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Quack. One of Maria's sore points is the Black Eyed Peas being a Pop group when she wants them to be R&B. Typical pattern includes unexplained changes, edit warring, claiming reliable sources are unreliable, etc. In this case, she has decided that Robert Christgau writing for the Village Voice is not reliable at Elephunk. Also editing at Heartbreak on Hold under this account and as 2A02:C7F:DE2E:EB00:3DC8:C103:4607:59AF, 82.132.227.201, 2a02:c7f:de2e:eb00:448c:5010:3b6d:558, 2a02:c7f:de2e:eb00:ed09:615b:27e8:69be, etc., all with in Maria's ranges. Requesting CU to sweep for other accounts and sleepers due to Maria's extensive history of not getting the hint. SummerPhDv2.0 17:33, 18 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Dorabandora making similar genre changes at Black Eyed Peas and intersecting with other socks at Dorabandora. - SummerPhDv2.0 17:45, 18 December 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]


20 December 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Follows Maria's regular pattern of removing all mentions of "pop" in favor of "R&B" in Black Eyed Peas articles, including edit summaries with no connection to the change made and/or spurious claims of reverting vandalism/socking.[148][149][150] SummerPhDv2.0 00:52, 20 December 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]

information Administrator note I'm a little familiar with this sock so I'll take a look--5 albert square (talk) 16:26, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

 Blocked and tagged Going to close in a second.--5 albert square (talk) 16:37, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

14 January 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

IP account from the same location as the other IP accounts I have been edit warring with today. Editing the same pages. Making the same edits.

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/2A02:C7F:DE12:2400:BD0C:23A8:A4FF:4F6A Kellymoat (talk) 17:33, 14 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]

14 January 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

I am requesting just a short block on the IP range starting with 2A02:C7F:DE12:2400: and the other IP listed.

And, if confirmed as the same user, Xtinaty as well.

This is for edit warring under the IP and unreferenced changes as the account holder. Kellymoat (talk) 15:45, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Actually, a user just expressed concern that these are socks of MariaJaydHicky. So, maybe a long term block is best? Kellymoat (talk) 16:11, 14 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]

22 January 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


Copying this over from Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Shaniquewood, as one of the accounts was blocked as a MariaJaydHicky sock. As far as evidence goes... Before Shaniquewood was blocked, they performed this edit. After this account got blocked, they (assumingly) created Postcodez2k17 and evidently restored the same edit. In comparison to MariaJaydHicky, these two accounts appear to have a similar editing style/pattern to them. All are interested in song-related articles, though they all have a very long history of adding unsourced genres. 73.96.113.2 (talk) 00:39, 22 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]

 Confirmed and blocked with no tag. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:58, 29 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

21 January 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Shaniquewood was one of 7 accounts blocked earlier today from a check-user. After I reverted one of the edits, these two IP accounts came and attempted to re-add the reverted edits. Both IP's are from the same location. Kellymoat (talk) 18:55, 21 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]

Shaniquewood is a sock of MariaJaydHicky. Not tagging was intentional per WP:DENY. CU declined.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:21, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The IPs' edits are old. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:10, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

21 January 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Kellymoat (talk) 22:52, 21 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]

No evidence, although it's fairly obvious if you look into it, and this keeps getting filed in the wrong place. @Kellymoat: Please pay attention to what you're doing. CU declined.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:45, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know SW was a MJH sock when I filed it. And when I filed for 2k17, I figured that since the original SW report was still open that I would add this one to it. Plus, I thought that "DENY" might have been a recommendation for me to stop adding names to MJH. Kellymoat (talk) 13:14, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: Account is blocked. Please hist-merge this case page to the master's page (Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MariaJaydHicky) for archiving. TDL (talk) 16:36, 5 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Done and closed. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:11, 10 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

12 February 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Kellymoat (talk) 17:48, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

The evidence is the edit history. One account gets blocked as a sock, a new account arrives making the same edit. And the edit summaries are also a dead giveaway. Kellymoat (talk) 19:16, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

@Kellymoat: You cannot create an SPI without presenting evidence.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:22, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've blocked Vickiicarr on behavioral evidence, to wit repeating edits by previously blocked socks Postcodez2k17 and N'control. Closing, as there's probably nothing more to do. Favonian (talk) 21:04, 12 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

22 February 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Back with characteristic removal of references to Black Eyed Peas being pop with deceptive edit summaries to hide same.[151][152] SummerPhDv2.0 17:52, 22 February 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]

06 March 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Many IP addresses in the 82.132 IP range have been used by MJD for the past few days. At least one of them have been blocked. I think we should do the entire range. Kellymoat (talk) 19:39, 6 March 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]

18 March 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Similar edit pattern by using misleading edit summary that in reality adding more genres without consensus on [153]. Before that, this IP adding redirects to the pages without consensus. Stylez995 (talk) 22:23, 18 March 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]

16 April 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

edit summaries, reminiscent of MJH. same edit changes previously made by MJH. A little "good cop bad cop" with IP 82.132.213.73 on Always Be My Baby. Also being so quick to make the reports on me and the page, the same as MJH has in the past. Kellymoat (talk) 17:20, 16 April 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]

  • Account is now blocked. No explanation of why a CU is needed. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 20:25, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

10 June 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

These two new accounts have done nothing except to continue genre warring activities undertaken by past MariaJaydHicky socks and IPs. Binksternet (talk) 09:21, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • At Lickin' on Both Sides, Thinpat restored text[154] that had first been introduced by IP 82.132.186.35.[155] Note that the IP is in the same series that is often used by MariaJaydHicky.

Checkuser is requested to find sleepers.

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]

  • Thinpat and Airsidecrew are blocked and tagged. I also blocked the following accounts as extremely  Likely socks:

11 July 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Back to GWAR, restoring previously reverted edits by an earlier sock.[161][162]

Requesting CU due to extensive history. SummerPhDv2.0 13:47, 11 July 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]

22 July 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


Edits exclusively changing the genres of music in articles similar to previous socks. Any diffs will demonstrate a link; take these two token examples. Requesting CheckUser to look for other accounts. Basalisk inspect damage⁄berate 14:24, 22 July 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]


22 July 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

IPs were edit warring to establish one of master's main obsessions: removing the well-sourced fact that the Black Eyed Peas in general -- and especially this album -- are pop. The new account was registered specifically to defend that edit.

Requesting CU due to extensive history. SummerPhDv2.0 17:44, 22 July 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]

Account and one IP blocked, no tag as per WP:DENY, closing. GABgab 21:47, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

23 July 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

New user edit-warring to restore content added by blocked socks. [163] [164] [165] [166] Sro23 (talk) 22:32, 23 July 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]

This case is being reviewed by Sro23 as part of the clerk training process. Please allow them to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on their Talk page or on this page if more appropriate.

  • Pink clock Awaiting administrative action Please block. Sro23 (talk) 22:33, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

25 July 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Typical: Removing "pop" from Black Eyed Peas article, adding "R&B", claims to be reverting sock.[167] SummerPhDv2.0 22:56, 25 July 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]

31 July 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Quack. Restoring edits of two prior socks.[168][169][170][171]. Requesting CU due to extensive history. SummerPhDv2.0 00:11, 31 July 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]

This case is being reviewed by Sro23 as part of the clerk training process. Please allow them to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on their Talk page or on this page if more appropriate.

​—DoRD (talk)​ 02:32, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pink clock Awaiting administrative action Please indef OntheJ.Lothisrebirth. Kaylee Procter appears to be someone else. Sro23 (talk) 02:41, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sro23 -  Done. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:43, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks, Sro23, after a second check, it does look like Kaylee Procter is a false positive. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 03:03, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]


31 July 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

All edits by Lauriah_Osbrey are a part of an ongoing sockpuppet war between Elmodivot/Kellymoat and MariaJaydHicky. All edits are restoring content by earlier Maria socks: [172] [173] [174] [175] [176] [177]. The IP address is just more of the same. Requesting CU due to extensive history. Cjhard (talk) 08:59, 31 July 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]

This case is being reviewed by Sro23 as part of the clerk training process. Please allow them to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on their Talk page or on this page if more appropriate.

  •  Clerk declined as CU was just run. Pink clock Awaiting administrative action - Please block Lauriah Osbrey. Sro23 (talk) 10:17, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sro23 -  Done. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 10:20, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, closing. Sro23 (talk) 10:24, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]


31 July 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Quack. New account immediately goes to two articles to restore edits of prior Maria socks.[178][179][180][181] SummerPhDv2.0 12:55, 31 July 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]

03 August 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Quack. All edits are restoring edits of previous sock, OntheJ.Lothisrebirth. CU requested due to extensive history. SummerPhDv2.0 20:07, 3 August 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]


11 August 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Restoring edits from previous socks. --Ronz (talk) 18:22, 11 August 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]

 Blocked and tagged. @Ronz: please don't copy from the archive (assuming that's what you did), your report was missing an important template which sorts cases, and the old format is difficult to edit. Please file using the form at the top of WP:SPI or use Twinkle. I have fixed it for this one. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:32, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. --Ronz (talk) 20:18, 11 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

16 August 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Obvious duck again 66.87.69.251 (talk) 01:58, 16 August 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]

  •  Clerk endorsed - restoring genres of past socks, but also maybe just passerby genre warriors, or good-faith editors caught up in a pretty significant revert war on this article. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 02:14, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Forgot to note I added an account to check. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 02:15, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This case is being reviewed by Sro23 as part of the clerk training process. Please allow them to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on their Talk page or on this page if more appropriate.

  • No tags per WP:DENY. Closing. Sro23 (talk) 22:59, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

31 August 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Quack.[182][183] SummerPhDv2.0 15:38, 31 August 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]

 Clerk note: Merged from Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Overcomerules. Sro23 (talk) 17:55, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Named account blocked by another admin; IP stale. I'm guessing we don't block the socks per DENY? If I'm wrong, you can tag the account as "proven". Closing.--Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 18:04, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

03 September 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Edit warring on Umbrella (song) and Love on the Brain and accusing another editor (SummerPhDv2.0) of socking without base. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 21:54, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk assistance requested: Requesting that this investigation be moved to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/MariaJaydHicky. I accidentally tagged this report for Elmo when I meant to tag it for the former. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 22:15, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

I'm not so sure this is Elmodivot, I was halfway sure it's MariaJaydHicky. I don't know. In any case, this IP is clearly also 2A02:C7F:DE21:1200:B522:5FF7:E0AD:D86A and Bettysketty. As with several other GWAR socks, the page protection will buy us a bit of quiet until they pop up again; lather-rinse-repeat. - SummerPhDv2.0 22:03, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for clarifying. This investigation should actually go to the appropriate page and Elmodivot should have no involvement in this investigation. jd22292 (Jalen D. Folf) (talk) 22:05, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

176.24.22.66 is another. - SummerPhDv2.0 22:26, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

 Clerk note: This is copied from Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Elmodivot. Pink clock Awaiting administrative action - Please indef Bettysketty. Thank you. Sro23 (talk) 03:14, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Sro23:  Already done ~ Rob13Talk 16:03, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

08 September 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Back to her most recent target, Unapologetic. Before most recent blocks, she was there using 2a02:c7f:de21:1200:2416:c315:90f:7419, 2a02:c7f:de21:1200:b522:5ff7:e0ad:d86a (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/MariaJaydHicky/Archive#03_September_2017). More recently, she has been there using 2a02:c7f:de55:6400:70e6:a53:d5dc:b95, 2a02:c7f:de55:6400:80bd:b004:5755:78c5, 2a02:c7f:de55:6400:ed0a:7187:7ead:4283.

Requesting CU due to extensive history of sleepers. SummerPhDv2.0 13:52, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Tinaaquas is a precocious new user making many corrections typical of the master account who has now joined the fray at Unapologetic. - SummerPhDv2.0 13:59, 8 September 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]

11 September 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Quack (note edit summary here.) Requesting CU based on extensive history. SummerPhDv2.0 18:32, 11 September 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]

This case is being reviewed by Sro23 as part of the clerk training process. Please allow them to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on their Talk page or on this page if more appropriate.

  • IP is blocked. @SummerPhDv2.0: Please only request CU for sock accounts, not IP's. For privacy reasons, accounts and IP's are almost never publicly connected. Sro23 (talk) 23:06, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've tended to think that connecting accounts and IPs is one of the consequences of socking: "on-project exposure of all accounts and IP addresses used across Wikipedia and its sister projects" (WP:SOCK)
In any case, the intent here was the CU as this frequent flyer has an established history of using lots of sleepers in addition to all of the IPs. - SummerPhDv2.0 00:19, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

27 October 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Another obvious MariaJaydHicky sock: GWAR on Black Eyed Peas articles, declares me a sock/GWAR only account/etc.

Requesting CU due to extensive history of sleepers. SummerPhDv2.0 18:48, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

No, I did not refer to you as a sock, I refered to you as a vandalism and GWAR account and you have been warned numerous times, Ad Orientem has now been messaged about it Bridgethefunk (talk) 18:49, 27 October 2017 (UTC) (Bridgethefunk has been blocked as yet another sock. 115.164.222.176 (talk) 03:28, 28 October 2017 (UTC))[reply]

I added OGwastemandemz - see [184] [185]. MariaJaydHicky has been persistently trying to add Contemporary R&B as a genre in Thriller (Michael Jackson album). Sro23 (talk) 18:58, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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

28 October 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

[186] All of the articles mentioned are recent targets and Maria has been making a habit of accusing me of sockpuppetry. Playing an innocent newbie for a fool is a new low.[187] SummerPhDv2.0 22:25, 28 October 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]

  • IP blocked, closing. Widr (talk) 22:30, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

14 November 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


While digging into a range for an unrelated unblock request, I found a couple of blocked socks of the master and able to find a couple more. The above are all  Confirmed.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 00:30, 14 November 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]

This case is being reviewed by Sir Sputnik as part of the clerk training process. Please allow them to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on their Talk page or on this page if more appropriate.

25 December 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


This is a fairly new account whose main activities have been changing genre categories on music artists' pages. What tipped me off with Cowselba was this edit restoring an edit of a prior sock (that I had reverted). The user's brief contribution history shows a lot of genre changes, see [188], [189], [190], [191], and [192]. The user is not afraid to genre war. The restoration of the edit at Grace Jones makes it seem like a WP:DUCK, but I'll defer to an admin on their judgment. Requesting a checkuser, in case it can find sleepers. 青い(Aoi) (talk) 09:16, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the page history -- the fact that the troll/user is actively trying to interfere with this SPI screams WP:DUCK. 青い(Aoi) (talk) 09:35, 25 December 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]


25 December 2017[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


After the blocks earlier today, I reverted the majority of the socks' genre warring edits. A new account that was created earlier today whose sole edits were reversions of my reversions. Requesting another checkuser in case an endorsing clerk thinks MariaJaydHicky created other new accounts at the same time. 青い(Aoi) (talk) 22:18, 25 December 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]

08 January 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


$Springfield is a new user whose only edit so far was to change genres in the Louise Redknapp article; the edit looks suspiciously close to edits by previous socks. See this edit from December vs this edit from earlier today.

Louisefan has been editing for a little less than a week. Yet, despite being a new user, the editor almost immediately started genre-warring and edit-warring with snippy edit summaries that are similar to those from earlier socks. Like previous socks, this user is targeting articles related to pop music. The user throws around the terms "unsourced content" in a way that makes it clear they're familiar with WP's reliable source policy. Note also that the user name is very similar to another sock that was just blocked two weeks ago, LouiseRedknappfan.

Requesting a checkuser as the user tends to have sleepers around. 青い(Aoi) (talk) 18:59, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

  • Both of these accounts are worthy of checkuser. Gut feeling. Binksternet (talk) 19:26, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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

13 January 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

See below. Bbb23 (talk) 20:09, 13 January 2018 (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]

02 February 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Confirmed by CU, filing for the record. Courcelles (talk) 17:29, 2 February 2018 (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]

  • Blocked. Closing/archiving my own report now. Courcelles (talk) 17:30, 2 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

03 February 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Same edits to the same articles as the last sock. See Special:Contributions/LeonaLewis$fan. Requesting CU per extensive history of sleepers. SummerPhDv2.0 21:34, 3 February 2018 (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]

  •  Blocked without tags. Looks like Courcelles ran a check yesterday, so closing. GABgab 21:59, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

15 June 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


Quacking at Everything Is Love, see [193], [194], [195], [196], [197], [198], [199] Requesting a checkuser, in case it can find sleepers. 115.164.213.173 (talk) 06:32, 19 June 2018 (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 June 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

New user (Putitdownoneachother) whose edits consist almost purely of genrewarring to the same articles as previous socks. Obvious WP:DUCK; just looking at the editor's three most recent edits compared to prior socks:

Requesting a checkuser to see if there are any sleepers. 青い(Aoi) (talk) 21:02, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Also adding in Soulsurvivor2k18, for same reasons. See, for example, this old sock vs current suspected sock. Soulsurvivor2k18 also has a pretty wide overlap of editing interests with prior socks, editing and genrewarring a number of articles that prior socks or suspected socks edited, including: Ring Off (song) ([200] and [201]); What's It Gonna Be (Beyoncé song) ([202] and [203]); Dangerously in Love ([204] and [205]).
Also adding Helloitsme97, for same reasons. See, for example, [206] vs [207] vs [208]; [209] vs [210]. (removing this user from report. On reflection, this user appears to be a sock of another blocked user rather than MariaJaydHicky, though I could be wrong.)
Both users' edits have been almost entirely made up of genrewarring over the same types of articles. 青い(Aoi) (talk) 21:23, 25 June 2018 (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 July 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

CU requested to look for sleepers. Cabellotorr performed the same edit as 82.132.238.104[211] and 82.132.239.228[212] who were genre warring. Cabellotorr came along two weeks later and inserted the same material.[213] IP 151.229.235.165 also edit-warred to keep it in.[214] The 82.132 IPs are the same carrier as MariaJaydHicky socks, and the genre warring is the same style, obsessing about the modern R&B genre. Binksternet (talk) 05:38, 29 July 2018 (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 August 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


Same concern that genres be alphabetized.[215][216] Same addition of a wikilink:[217][218] Same removal of a genre.[219][220] Checkuser requested because this sockmaster is prolific. Binksternet (talk) 14:09, 18 August 2018 (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 and blocked. No other accounts seen. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:56, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

19 August 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Sock continuing to genrewar at Woman in Me (Louise album), a frequent target of this user. Username suggests an interest in the same genres prior socks have added to articles. Requesting a CU for sleepers. 青い(Aoi) (talk) 17:28, 19 August 2018 (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 + IPhone7rosegolduser (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). Blocked, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:34, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

10 October 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

added same material as previously blocked IP: 1, 2, 3. Also previously blocked as 2A02:C7F:708D:B600:0:0:0:0/64: 4. -★- PlyrStar93 →Message me. ← 23:55, 10 October 2018 (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:
AGK ■ 19:27, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@AGK: We haven't tagged socks of this master per WP:DENY for quite some time.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:59, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

30 October 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


Genrewarring on two articles that were targets of prior MariaJaydHicky socks. Specifically, see:

Requesting a checkuser in case there are sleepers. Aoi (青い) (talk) 19:47, 30 October 2018 (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]

02 November 2018[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

From first edit, the user went straight back to continue genrewarring at E=MC² (Mariah Carey album). See this edit from the user versus this edit from a prior sock. Aoi (青い) (talk) 20:49, 2 November 2018 (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]

  •  Blocked without tags. GABgab 21:53, 2 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

04 January 2019[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


This user's edits have consisted largely of genrewarring, like prior socks. For example, looking just at the editor's first ten edits after registering on December 30, eight of them are genrewarring. Like prior socks, this user has consistently added the term "and songwriter" to Beyonce articles [221][222][223][224]. The targets include some of the same articles; for example, Dangerously in Love was edited by Finemusiclover and at least three prior confirmed socks of MariaJaydHicky in the last six months alone (Putitdownoneachother, Soulsurvivor2k18, and Barbz v. Kenz). Also, like prior socks, this user has gotten into edit wars with other editors, calling one established user a "vandalism-only account" and genrewarrior.

Note that this user's account was previously named "FanofRnBMusic", which is similar to prior sock names (see, e.g., User:FanofR&B-hip-hop-soulmusic and User:FanofUrbanMusic. The account was renamed to "Finemusiclover" within the last hour.

Requesting a CU to see if there are sleepers visible. Aoi (青い) (talk) 19:31, 4 January 2019 (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]

09 January 2019[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


Both VisionofCaution and Trescrun made their first edits as restorations of the edit warring of IPs in the troublesome range Special:Contributions/82.132.192.0/18, which was recently blocked for a month. Here is VisionofCaution following such an IP: IP genre swap, VisionofCaution genre swap. Both of these were reverted as socks of MJH. Here is Trescrun following such an IP: IP genre warring, Trescrun genre warring, restoring the same problematic reference while adding a second one. Checkuser requested to ferret out further socks. Binksternet (talk) 03:56, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

I also want to add Elouisica (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) to the list of socks. This user's account was created a few hours ago and immediately began to edit war at Elbow Beach (album), with the same pattern of genre changes that Blinksternet described above. See this edit by Trescrun and this subsequent edit by Elouisica. Aoi (青い) (talk) 19:17, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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

 Confirmed. No other accounts seen. Blocked the unblocked accounts without tagging. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:57, 9 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

27 February 2019[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

The usual genrewarring at the usual pop related articles, including those relating to Mariah Carey, Ariana Grande, Meghan Trainor, etc. A CU might be useful to see if there are sleepers. Aoi (青い) (talk) 08:51, 27 February 2019 (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 + Wilmabeast (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). Blocked, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:01, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

03 April 2019[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


ImaArianator

Che'Nelleandothersfan

I think the evidence is clear, but I am requesting a checkuser to see if any sleepers are evident. Aoi (青い) (talk) 19:30, 3 April 2019 (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 + Trappishmonk (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:43, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

22 April 2019[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Pure Shorez was blocked as a sock of MariaJaydHicky after making essentially the same genre-warring edit as AllSaintsfan1, a previous sock.[240][241] Diamongeeza99 made the same genre-warring edit as blocked sock Soundcrate99.[242][243] A series of MariaJaydHicky IPs including 82.132.224.253 had been edit-warring for two years at 3LW (album), trying to get the genre to say hip hop and R&B.[244][245] XxChristinaxX came along and did the same thing.[246] Checkuser requested to look for sleepers. Binksternet (talk) 19:03, 22 April 2019 (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]

XxChristinaxX and Superstarfan19 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) are  Confirmed. Diamongeeza99 is Red X Unrelated but  Confirmed to Substitute336 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). I blocked the first two without tags per the usual WP:DENY, and blocked the latter two without tags but for different reasons.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:14, 22 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • This case is being reviewed by Cabayi as part of the clerk training process. Please allow Cabayi to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on Cabayi's Talk page or on this page if more appropriate. Cabayi (talk) 08:12, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Closing. Cabayi (talk) 08:12, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

09 June 2019[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

New user's edits have consisted mostly of genrewarring ([247], similar to an edit by a prior MariaJaydHicky sock ([248]) and changing the nationality of British music artists to refer to them as English instead, much like prior socks. One edit was to continue genrewarring that prior IP socks participated in ([249]). Requesting a checkuser to look for sleepers. Aoi (青い) (talk) 05:30, 9 June 2019 (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 + NevagetEnuff (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki).  Blocked without tags. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:43, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

06 July 2019[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

This user's contributions consist solely of changes to music genres, like previous socks. The changes made by this user are similar to changes by earlier socks. For example, see:

A lot of this user's edits are to Chris Brown articles, and I understand there is another LTA user who focuses on those articles (Giubbotto non ortodosso), so it might be possible that this editor is related to that user instead. I'm requesting a CU to verify (as well as to detect any sleepers). Aoi (青い) (talk) 02:43, 6 July 2019 (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 compare to recent socks in the archive. Sro23 (talk) 03:00, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Confirmed, blocked, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:35, 6 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

11 August 2019[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


As with prior socks, this user has engaged in basically nothing except genrewarring since registering their account. At least three of the pages the user has edited were targets of prior socks, including

Requesting a CU to check for sleepers. Aoi (青い) (talk) 10:32, 11 August 2019 (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, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:44, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

07 September 2019[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Like most if not all prior socks, this user immediately began genrewarring upon registering. Some of the articles that the user is editing were prior MJH sock targets, see [250] and [251], as well as [252] and [253]. Per the latter diff, user is arguing about whether a source refers to "elements" of a genre versus an express mention of a genre, like prior socks. Requesting a CU to see if there are any sleeper accounts. Aoi (青い) (talk) 10:25, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Adding Iwannasingmysong due to similar behavior (genrewarring; registered at same time as other account) and similar user name. Aoi (青い) (talk) 10:26, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I lost the password to Iwannasingmysong so I had to recreate it. Iwannasingmysongtoo (talk) 10:49, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Aoi: did you mean "MariaJaydHicky"? "MariaJaydHickey" doesn't exist Blueberry72 (talk) 11:15, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. That's what I get for a filing an SPI using Twinkle after working 13 hours straight. Sincere apologies to the clerks and CheckUsers. Aoi (青い) (talk) 18:43, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
ClockC Requesting histmerge... –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 06:53, 8 September 2019 (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 assistance requested: Please fix.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:50, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

08 September 2019[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Genrewarring and accusations against other users [254] [255]; same behavior of other sockpuppets [256] [257]. Blueberry72 (talk) 08:01, 8 September 2019 (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]

09 September 2019[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Same edits of MariaJaydHicky's sockpuppets [258] [259] [260] [261] Blueberry72 (talk) 12:36, 9 September 2019 (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]

09 September 2019[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

User is continuing genrewars that prior socks started. See this edit by the user vs this prior sock edit; and this current edit vs this prior sock edit. Given the relatively large number of socks created in the past few days, I'm asking for a CU to look for sleepers. Aoi (青い) (talk) 16:49, 9 September 2019 (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, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:45, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16 September 2019[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Genrewarring and accusations against other users [262] [263] [264]; same accusations of other sockpuppets [265] [266] [267]. Same edit of another sockpuppet [268] Blueberry72 (talk) 10:15, 16 September 2019 (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]

  • This case is being reviewed by Cabayi as part of the clerk training process. Please allow Cabayi to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on Cabayi's Talk page or on this page if more appropriate. Cabayi (talk) 15:20, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pink clock Awaiting administrative action Please block the IP for 2 weeks in accord with the previous IP's block. Cabayi (talk) 15:20, 16 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18 September 2019[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

AlexandraBurkefan2008 restored the edit of 185.100.172.54 in the page The Truth Is (Alexandra Burke album) and both doubt the reliability of the source [269] [270]; this page was previously targered by MariaJaydHicky's sockpuppets [271] [272] [273] and Maria often doubts the reliability of sources in the edit summary [274] [275] 185.100.172.54 previously made an inappropriate edit on the page The Beginning (Black Eyed Peas album) [276] as many Maria's sockpuppets [277] [278] [279]. AlexandraBurkefan2008 has an user name similar to other Maria's sockpuppets (Jentinafan, Jameliafan, Raven-Symonéfan, Realmusicfan)

Blueberry72 (talk) 12:14, 18 September 2019 (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]

 Blocked without tags going to close-- 5 albert square (talk) 10:26, 20 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/MariaJaydHicky/Archive/1&oldid=1142508524"