Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Historian19/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

User:Historian19

[edit]
Historian19 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Report date January 19 2009, 03:08 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by Jayron32.talk.contribs

User Wiikiiwriter showed up at WP:ANI to comment on several cases. He has been especially interested in commenting on Historian19's case, despite the fact that he has never interacted with Historian19. They each make the same sort of grammatical errors, and Wiikiiwriter's sole article edit was a poorly worded change to an article about an ethnic group; this is EXACTLY the same sort of articles that Historian19 favors. Requesting a checkuser to confirm that these accounts are operated by the same person. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:08, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.
Comments by other users
  • WW has been arguing with Historian19 about the use of the word 'ass' on his page, and has a completely different posting style. It seems more likely that Wiikiiwriter is completely unrelated to this user (though probably another user's sock), and has apparently taken it upon himself to "defend" everyone he can on ANI. Not that this is less disruptive by any means. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 03:38, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    The similarity in writing styles in much more apparent in WW's only article edit to date then it is on the talk page comments, and, indeed, the difference in WW's tone and style between the article edit and the talk page discussion is interesting in itself. The fact that the two userIDs are having a discussion doesn't preclude them from being socks - it wouldn't be the first time two socks of the same person have staged a conversation to improve their believability. Ed Fitzgerald t / c 03:44, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Certainly, but it just strikes me as... unlikely. And not likely enough to warrant a checkuser. But whatever, that's all I've got. I'm sure he's someone's sock, and he's not acting constructively at all right now. -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 03:49, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    It looks like you were right. Ed Fitzgerald t / c 05:41, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Prior to seeing this report, I had a browse through WW's contributes and blocked them indefinitely as an obvious disruptions/troll account per WP:DUCK. We all know its possible to fool a checkuser so I'm not inclined to alter the block given the outcome of the CU Spartaz Humbug! 06:47, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
CheckUser requests
Checkuser request – code letter: F (Other reason )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by Jayron32.talk.contribs 03:08, 19 January 2009 (UTC) [reply]

Endorse - Xclamation point 03:09, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

 Unlikely. And no obvious socks for either account. Jayjg (talk) 05:24, 19 January 2009 (UTC) ( - OhanaUnitedTalk page 03:12, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note, making an edit here so the bot will accept the close - only clerks can close the cases. The Helpful One 19:08, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Report date February 22 2009, 20:43 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by FlowerpotmaN·(t)

Mysticshade, who is currently blocked, was active on Scottish and Irish related articles, especially Dundee, Dublin, Irish people, Northern Ireland and Republic of Ireland, making disruptive edits and adding images that proved to be copyright violations. Mysticshade's first edit to Northern Irelanddiff was to include the Ulster Banner in exactly the same manner as MarshVeld diff. The style of both editors messages on user talk pages is very similar. Dundean19 has only made six edits, on Dundee, Irish people and Dublin. Dundean was tweaking image sizes and adding images diff in a similar manner to Mysticshade three days earlier. A connection to Historian19, amongst obvious style similarities, interest in the GDP of countries, Scotland, Ireland and the use of copyvio images, can be found in the history of Largest urban areas of the European Union, where Mysticshade was removing images in a similar manner diff to Historian19 diff, including one particular image of Warsaw. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 20:43, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CheckUser requests
Checkuser request – code letter: B (Ongoing serious pattern vandalism )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by FlowerpotmaN·(t) 20:43, 22 February 2009 (UTC) [reply]

 Clerk endorsed Whilst the edits look somewhat WP:DUCKish, the appearance of an apparent flock gives rise to a worry that there may be more being hatched! Mayalld (talk) 21:06, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

Synergy 22:02, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date February 25 2009, 20:17 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by FlowerpotmaN·(t)

Apart from obvious stylistic similarities with other Historian19 sock accounts (especially Mysticshade), examples of activity of GreyPoint on List of Scottish Americans (hist) and Irish people (hist), especially when adding an image subsequently deleted from Commons as a copyright violation diff, are of the same nature as Mysticshade/Historian19. Meepoo has only made two edits, but the first (diff was to update the GDP for the Republic of Ireland which is a classic action of the Historian accounts. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 20:17, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CheckUser requests
Checkuser request – code letter: E (Community ban/sanction evasion )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by FlowerpotmaN·(t) 20:17, 25 February 2009 (UTC) [reply]
Conclusions
--Kanonkas :  Talk   20:34, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Report date March 6 2009, 12:22 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by O Fenian (talk)

Rather transparent sock of Historian19, targeting usual articles such as Irish people that have been edited by many previous socks in the same way. Identically named account just blocked by a checkuser on Commons. O Fenian (talk) 12:29, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CheckUser requests
Checkuser request – code letter: E (Community ban/sanction evasion )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by O Fenian (talk) 12:22, 6 March 2009 (UTC) [reply]
Conclusions

--Kanonkas :  Talk  20:08, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date April 12 2009, 12:30 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by Blanchardb

I gave this person a warning for a personal attack. He replied by telling me this was done in retaliation for being called a banned user and (implicitly) a sockpuppet of User:Historian19. When I pointed out that personal attacks are not tolerated, he asked me to give his accuser the same warning I gave him. I will not do that. -- Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 12:30, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.

this is no sense ! stop this ! I am not here creating account for nothing ! I have rights like yourselfs ! stop accusating once and for all. Ecuadorian Stalker (talk) 12:35, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

Same articles, same edits, same edit warring, same abuse to other editors, someone please block the time waster so we can move quickly on. O Fenian (talk) 12:39, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Its an identical pattern to vandalism on Dundee and Dublin earlier in the year. --Snowded (talk) 13:02, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Same pattern and Ecuadorian Stalkers first edit, which was an edit to the Santiago, Chile article, restored the article to the last version by St Petersburgh (talk · contribs) who is already blocked as a Historian19 sock. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 13:14, 12 April 2009 (UTC) St.Petersburg also looks like another sock to me.MusicInTheHouse (talk) 14:18, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions
Report date April 12 2009, 22:44 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by Marek.69 talk

A new user Porto Madera is making edits in the same pattern as Ecuadorian Stalker as in this edit [1] on Buenos Aires, and this edit [2] on Santiago, Chile.

This edit [3] on Irish Canadian is in same style as St Petersburgh (another sockpuppet of Historian19)

Conclusions

Already blocked. Tiptoety talk 19:51, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date April 13 2009, 14:40 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by Marek.69 talk

A new user Andes Man is making edits in the same pattern as Ecuadorian Stalker as in this edit [4] (exactly the same edit as other sockpuppet Porto Madera) on Buenos Aires, and this edit [5] (again, exactly the same edit as other sockpuppet Porto Madera) on Santiago, Chile.

Same edit [6] on Irish Canadian again!, etc., etc.

Conclusions
Report date April 13 2009, 19:47 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by Marek.69 talk

A new user Andes Man is making edits in the same pattern as Ecuadorian Stalker as in this edit [7] (exactly the same edit as other sockpuppet Porto Madera) on Buenos Aires, and this edit [8] (again, exactly the same edit as other sockpuppet Porto Madera) on Santiago, Chile.

Same edit [9] on Irish Canadian again, etc., etc.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 Clerk note: Merged case here. Synergy 21:16, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date April 14 2009, 03:04 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by Marek.69 talk

Here we go again... A new user No Resign is making edits in the same pattern as Ecuadorian Stalker as in this edit [10] (exactly the same edit as other sockpuppets Porto Madera,Andes Man) on Buenos Aires, and this edit [11] (again, exactly the same edit as other sockpuppets Porto Madera,Andes Man) on Santiago, Chile.

Again, exactly same edit [12] on Irish Australian and exactly same edit [13] on Irish Canadian.

Conclusions

 Confirmed. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 04:22, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date April 17 2009, 09:20 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by Marek.69 talk

A new IP editor 41.249.37.203 is making edits in the same pattern as Ecuadorian Stalker as in this edit [14] (exactly the same edit as all the other sockpuppets Porto Madera, Andes Man, 41.249.70.238 and the rest of the menagerie) on Buenos Aires

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 Clerk note: Blocked for three months per CU. Synergy 02:35, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

Synergy 02:35, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date April 20 2009, 17:54 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by O Fenian (talk)

Usual articles, usual edits, just bringing them here to get them blocked. O Fenian (talk) 17:54, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Checkuser request – code letter: E (Community ban/sanction evasion )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.

-- Avi (talk) 18:15, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

 Confirmed Currently available technical and behavioral evidence indicates the following accounts are related to the above sockpuppeteer.

-- Avi (talk) 18:34, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date April 21 2009, 17:43 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by Marek.69 talk

User SoccerPlayer01 is making same edits [15] to article Irish Australian as confirmed sockpuppet of user:Historian19, user Scottish Monster !: [16]

NB It seems most edits to this article seem to be made by one sockpuppet or another of user:Historian19 (and reversions of these edits).

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

Speedy archive – already confirmed and blocked by checkuser Nishkid64 (talk · contribs).

Report date April 22 2009, 19:47 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by Marek.69 talk

A new user Darcy McGee is making exactly same edits [17] to article Irish Australian as confirmed sockpuppets of user:Historian19; 1. User SoccerPlayer01: [18] and 2. User Scottish Monster !: [19]

Conclusions

 Clerk note: All accounts blocked and tagged. Archiving. — Jake Wartenberg 20:44, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date April 27 2009, 08:37 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by Marek.69 talk

User Dog warrior is making same edits [20] to article Buenos Aires as confirmed sockpuppet of user:Historian19, user Moorish Lander: [21] and IP 41.249.37.203: [22]

Comments by other users

Suggest we follow the example of Moorish Lander and block Dog warrior CanadianNine 22:14, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

information Administrator note The IP address only ever edited for a two-hour period on 17th April. – Toon(talk) 12:52, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions
Report date April 30 2009, 17:46 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by Marek.69 talk

A new IP editor 41.249.90.135 is making exactly the same edit: [23] as 41.249.70.238: [24] and Ecuadorian Stalker : [25] (exactly the same edit as all the other sockpuppets Porto Madera, Andes Man, and the rest...) on Buenos Aires

Conclusions

Possible. The 41.* IP range is a /19, which I've blocked (AO, ACB) for a week. If there is any further disruption from that range, let me know and I'll extend it. Cheers, PeterSymonds (talk) 09:46, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date May 7 2009, 20:02 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by Marek.69 talk

A new IP editor 41.249.46.20 is making the same edit: [26] as as 41.249.90.135: [27] and 41.249.70.238: [28] and Ecuadorian Stalker : [29] (exactly the same edit as all the other sockpuppets Porto Madera, Andes Man, and the rest...) on Buenos Aires Also the same usual edits to São Paulo, Irish American - predictable behaviour...

Another IP 41.251.4.133 has just appeared, making edits to Irish American: [30] & French American: [31] (same edits es previous IP in the same range) -- Marek.69 talk 22:24, 7 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also same old edits/vandalism on Madrid and Buenos Aires today. Marek.69 talk

Comments by other users

Another IP added. O Fenian (talk) 01:29, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions
Report date May 8 2009, 18:14 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by MITH

User editing the same pages from the same Moroccan IP address MITH 18:14, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

IP editor is already blocked by nishkid. -- Marek.69 talk 22:43, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(sorry)..I meant blocked by Alexf - duplicate of above case filed on May 7 2009 -- Marek.69 talk 23:16, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 Clerk note: Blocked but not by Nish. Synergy 22:48, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date May 10 2009, 14:15 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by Marek69

A new IP editor 41.249.18.93 in the same range as the other sockpuppets is again making the same edits.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 Clerk note: IP was blocked one week for evading blocks. Icestorm815 • Talk 19:40, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

Synergy 20:00, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date May 11 2009, 00:15 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by O Fenian (talk)

Usual reverting to previous sock version. O Fenian (talk) 00:15, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions
Report date May 12 2009, 12:01 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by O Fenian (talk)

Usual reverting to virtually identical version to previous sock version. O Fenian (talk) 12:01, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

All done, blocked, tagged. PeterSymonds (talk) 16:28, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date May 15 2009, 09:28 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by O Fenian (talk)

Account's version of Template:Largest cities of Argentina is identical to a previous sockpuppet's version (apart from the lack of inclusion of a reference), and there has been a similarly named sockpuppet before, Scottish Monster ! (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). O Fenian (talk) 09:28, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions
Report date May 15 2009, 09:28 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by O Fenian (talk)

Account and IP taking over editing of Copenhagen and Edinburgh where the last sockpuppet left off. Plus there is the usual obsession with Ireland related articles such as this edit to Dublin doubling the size of the article merging in content from an already forked article, which is the usual MO of Historian19.

Conclusions
Report date May 18 2009, 16:31 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by JohnInDC

Same edits to Copenhagen as prior puppets. Same general IP range. JohnInDC (talk) 16:32, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

Done. PeterSymonds (talk) 16:33, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date May 19 2009, 01:32 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by JohnInDC

Different IP range but same persistent, idiosyncratic edits on Copenhagen and Republic of Ireland. JohnInDC (talk) 01:32, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

All done. PeterSymonds (talk) 01:44, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date May 19 2009, 14:14 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by JohnInDC

Same IP range, same edits to Copenhagen, Republic of Ireland. JohnInDC (talk) 14:14, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

 Done PeterSymonds (talk) 14:16, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date May 20 2009, 01:13 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by O Fenian

Usual edits to the usual articles by the usual IP range. O Fenian (talk) 01:13, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions
Report date May 20 2009, 13:32 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by JohnInDC

IP range; usual Copenhagen edit. JohnInDC (talk) 13:32, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

 Done PeterSymonds (talk) 13:34, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date May 21 2009, 13:58 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by JohnInDC

Copenhagen edits, IP range. JohnInDC (talk) 13:58, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Elaborating a bit - this IP is from the same range of IPs previously determined to be socks of this user; and the editor is making the identical, idiosyncratic edit to the Copenhagen page that prior puppets have made. The archive will show many similar examples. JohnInDC (talk) 18:31, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Conclusions

 Done PeterSymonds (talk) 18:39, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date June 4 2009, 18:09 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by O Fenian

First IP in Historian19's range turned up at frequent target Berlin making the usual type of edit, and also went to Istanbul. The second IP turned up there, followed by the Baltic Seaman account. O Fenian (talk) 18:09, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 Clerk note: Since the IPs haven't edited in a few days, I don't think a block is necessary since Historian19 most likely will IP hop anyways. Icestorm815 • Talk 23:14, 7 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date June 10 2009, 09:56 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by O Fenian

Usual tactic of reverting to last sockpuppet version on regular target Copenhagen. Account name similar to the last blocked sockpuppet, Baltic Seaman (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). O Fenian (talk) 09:57, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

Looks likely. Blocked and tagged. PeterSymonds (talk) 15:32, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date June 10 2009, 23:14 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by O Fenian

Usual editing style, and based on this edit referring to this article history shows PRODUCER reverting IPs in Historian19's usual range, and the account taking responsibility for the IPs edits. O Fenian (talk) 23:14, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

Blocked and tagged. PeterSymonds (talk) 23:17, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date June 18 2009, 18:31 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by O Fenian

Usual articles, usual edits, seems very obvious. O Fenian (talk) 18:31, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 Clerk note: Account blocked and tagged. Icestorm815 • Talk 18:38, 18 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date June 21 2009, 10:54 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by O Fenian

IP is taking over where the previous sockpuppet left off on Berber people. I know Historian19 IP hops, but this is ongoing at present. O Fenian (talk) 10:54, 21 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

 Clerk note: All done; blocked. — Jake Wartenberg 19:37, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date June 27 2009, 14:52 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by O Fenian

"New" account and a new IP in the usual Historian19 range turns up to reinstant the edits by a previous IP sockpuppet I had just reverted, it seems very obvious. O Fenian (talk) 14:52, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CheckUser requests
Checkuser request – code letter: E (Community ban/sanction evasion )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by Icestorm815 • Talk 18:44, 30 June 2009 (UTC) [reply]
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 Clerk endorsed While this is a simple case of DUCK, I think a checkuser would be helpful to remove any sleepers and to block some IPs. Historian19 seems to have quite a bit of socks recently so we may need to adjust our blocks. Icestorm815 • Talk 18:44, 30 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions
Report date August 3 2009, 18:49 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by O Fenian

They both seem rather obvious, with edits to Madrid and other common Historian19 targets. O Fenian (talk) 18:49, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence submitted by Marek69

Another probable sockpuppet of Historian19 following the same edit pattern Madrid Spanish people and making same edits as 41.249.17.51, who happens to be in the same 41.249.. range as original sockpuppeteer. Marek.69 talk 20:35, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Checkuser request – code letter: E (Community ban/sanction evasion )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below. - Per Nixeagle in IRC, it has been a while since a CU was run on this. Might as well check for any sleeper socks. NW (Talk) 21:57, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Conclusions
Report date August 3 2009, 22:35 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by Marek69

Another probable sockpuppet of Historian19 following the same edit pattern e.g. on Madrid

41.249.2.23 again happens to be in the same 41.249.. range as original sockpuppet master.

Conclusions

 Clerk note: No action needed. Entire range was blocked one minute after edit made here. MuZemike 22:40, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date August 18 2009, 16:31 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by O Fenian

Standard Historian19 type edits to Irish people, and also edits to 2009 World Championships in Athletics which has been edited by many Historian19 IPs recently. Also identically named account on Commons uploading copyrighted images for use here, which is a Historian19 trademark. O Fenian (talk) 16:31, 18 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions
Report date September 10 2009, 00:46 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by Marek69

Edits fitting the pattern of Historian19 and 'coincidentally' coming from the same IP range. [32] and [33] Marek.69 talk 00:46, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

41.140.0.0/17 blocked for two weeks. PeterSymonds (talk) 13:09, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date September 21 2009, 20:53 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by O Fenian

Usual editing style, in particular reverting Netherlands back to previous Historian19 version. O Fenian (talk) 20:53, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date October 12 2009, 09:39 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by O Fenian

Makes the same edit as a previous sockpuppet to Augustine of Hippo, and other edited article Averroes seems to have plenty of edits from IPs in Historian19's range. O Fenian (talk) 09:39, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

information Administrator note Blocked and tagged. MuZemike 20:46, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date October 24 2009, 03:47 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]
Evidence submitted by Marek69
[edit]

IP 41.249.84.86 restores an old version [34] of Copenhagen article, originally created by Historian19. (He also edits Augustine of Hippo article [35])

For old versions, please see:

Augustine of Hippo also restores an old version [40] of Copenhagen article,with an edit summary of (this is a clean version), again originally created by user:Historian19.

IP 41.140.81.197 repeats the same behaviour [41], [42] on same article.

IP is similar range, and editing behaviour very similar to Historian19 -- 03:47, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Added a new IP, which unlike the others is current and could do with being blocked. Thank you. O Fenian (talk) 09:48, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
[edit]

Obvious case, this is a known IP range that has been range-blocked because of H19 before (41.249.96.0/21, 41.249.0.0/18, 41.251.0.0/16). I've blocked the most recent active IPs and reinstated some of the range blocks. In future, feel free to also alert me directly in case of new attacks, for faster response. Fut.Perf. ¤ 07:37, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date November 30 2009, 17:39 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]
Evidence submitted by O Fenian
[edit]

I am not sure whether this is definitely a Historian19 sockpuppet, so I would advise a checkuser actually make sure it is him before any blocks are made. There is editing to usual Historian19 target article Johannesburg and many copyright violations have been deleted from Commons. However the account seems very focused on just South African topics which is unusual for Historian19, so it may be a case of an independent editor also uploading copyrighted images and not actually Historian19. Thank you. O Fenian (talk) 17:39, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Code letter E, evasion of indefinite block. O Fenian (talk) 17:55, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
CheckUser requests
[edit]
Checkuser request – code letter: E (Community ban/sanction evasion )
Current status – Declined, the reason can be found below.    Requested by O Fenian (talk) 17:39, 30 November 2009 (UTC) [reply]
  •  Additional information needed: Please provide a code letter. Tiptoety talk 17:53, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Clerk declined - I am not seeing near enough conclusive evidence to justify a CheckUser being ran. The account in question appears to just be another copyvio up-loader and should be dealt with as such via another venue. Because of this, I am recommending this case be closed with no No action taken. Tiptoety talk
Report date December 2 2009, 19:24 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]
Evidence submitted by O Fenian
[edit]

Hitting all the usual Historian19 targets, in particular this large revamp of Copenhagen which is identical to the Historian19 version apart from the addition of one sentence alluded to in the edit summary. O Fenian (talk) 19:24, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions
[edit]
Report date December 17 2009, 21:30 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]
Evidence submitted by NuclearWarfare
[edit]

Opening to facilitate discussion. NW (Talk) 21:30, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CheckUser requests
[edit]
Checkuser request – code letter: B  + E (Ongoing serious pattern vandalism and community ban/sanction evasion)
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by NW (Talk) 21:30, 17 December 2009 (UTC) [reply]
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
[edit]

 Confirmed Historian19 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) =

 IP blocked - I reblocked one range that Future Perfect at Sunrise had blocked in October, and I blocked another range. He may have access to yet another one, but I am not sure. J.delanoygabsadds 21:55, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions
[edit]
Report date December 20 2009, 18:51 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]
Evidence submitted by Marek69
[edit]

Adding two more IP's to this case: 41.249.76.210 and 41.249.64.248, who are making same edits to Stockholm article as White Nights in Stockholm are are in similar range that Historian19 uses. -- Marek.69 talk 18:51, 20 December 2009 (UTC) Zyad El Jaziri has now turned up and is making same edits[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
[edit]
Conclusions
[edit]
Report date December 26 2009, 21:22 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]
Evidence submitted by Quibik
[edit]

The rest of the mentioned IPs have a consistent disruptive bahaviour: at the "Estonia" article, every few weeks they revert back to a very old "favourite revision" + maybe change a few small things, but at the same time discard many months worth of work by others. That "preferred revision" is a version by User:Apuleuis damnius and later, one of the IPs'. Diffs:

All of the IPs are from Morocco. I have also given out 2 warnings in reaction to the disruptive behaviour. —Quibik (talk) 21:22, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Report date December 30 2009, 17:09 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]
Evidence submitted by O Fenian
[edit]

Usual reverts of Stockholm and Economy of France to Historian19 versions. O Fenian (talk) 17:09, 30 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
[edit]
Checkuser request – code letter: F (Other reason )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.
Conclusions
[edit]
Report date January 12 2010, 16:25 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]
Evidence submitted by Marek69
[edit]

A new IP 41.249.92.66 (in the usual range) is reverting back [44] to a version of the Netherlands article created by Historian19's sockpuppets. The version he is reverting to is almost identical to [45] created on 14 August 2009 by IPs 41.249.39.154 and 41.140.84.28 - Usual pattern. -- Marek.69 talk 16:25, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
[edit]

Typical editing pattern. A bit too stale to block now. -- zzuuzz (talk) 21:45, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Report date January 14 2010, 17:22 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]
Evidence submitted by Marek69
[edit]

A new IP 41.140.85.153 (in the usual range) is reverting back [46] and [47] to a version of the London article created by Historian19's sockpuppets. The version he is reverting to is almost identical to [48] created on 20 October 2009 by IP 41.249.70.49 (Historian19 usual pattern of behaviour) -- Marek.69 talk 17:22, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
[edit]

Typical editing pattern. Blocked at the time. -- zzuuzz (talk) 21:45, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Report date February 5 2010, 17:18 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]
Evidence submitted by Marek69
[edit]

A new IP 41.140.10.12 (in the usual range) is reverting back to an old version of the Estonia article created by Historian19's sockpuppets: 41.248.148.195. The version he is reverting to is almost identical. (This fits Historian19 usual pattern of behaviour) -- Marek.69 talk 17:18, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
[edit]

Quite obvious case, new IP blocked per WP:DUCK. Checkuser not necessary here, except to check for possible new sleeper accounts. Fut.Perf. ¤ 19:54, 5 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: No need to block the other IP. –MuZemike 19:25, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Report date February 13 2010, 09:16 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]
Evidence submitted by RashersTierney
[edit]

Same dynamic range - similar disruptive editing pattern. RashersTierney (talk) 09:16, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
[edit]
Checkuser request – code letter: E (Community ban/sanction evasion )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.

 Clerk endorsed New IP has been blocked, and the range (as always) is too wide for a block, but it's been a while since a check has been done for sleepers (31st of december), thanks SpitfireTally-ho! 19:20, 13 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

BochumHauptbahnhof is likely. Nothing else found. Dominic·t 04:53, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: accounts blocked + tagged where appropriate. SpitfireTally-ho! 10:46, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Report date February 24 2010, 04:33 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]
Evidence submitted by Marek69
[edit]

New user Halfwit Sock is showing common signs of Historian19 usual editing behaviour, i.e. reverting back to months old versions of articles: [49] on Zagreb article and [50] on Finland article. (Early stages - This editor needs to be watched.) Marek.69 talk 04:33, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

That edit says no more watching is needed, only blocking. O Fenian (talk) 16:35, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Report date February 25 2010, 13:57 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]
Evidence submitted by Marek69
[edit]

A new IP 41.249.67.142 (usual range) has reverted [51] Zagreb article back to one of Historian19's (Halfwit Sock) old versions. Comparison: [52] -- Marek.69 talk 13:57, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
[edit]

information Administrator note IP blocked. –MuZemike 02:07, 27 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Report date March 13 2010, 21:22 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]
Evidence submitted by Marek69
[edit]

New users Hannibal IX edits are equivalent to reverting [53] to an old version of Stockholm article, as edited by 41.140.34.219, who has previous Historian19 sockpuppeting history.

This is typical behaviour of Historian19 and IP range 41... also fits pattern

I reverted Hannibal's edits.

Then 41.248.151.67 (usual IP range) reverts back to Hannibal's version.

Again typical pattern of behaviour... Marek.69 talk 21:22, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
[edit]

information Administrator note Indeed, sock blocked indef, IP blocked 3 days. Range impossible to block, as always. Tim Song (talk) 05:56, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Report date March 16 2010, 06:07 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]
Evidence submitted by Jarkeld
[edit]

Changed the article Dutch people to an (nearly) identical version as previous sock-ip's of Historian19.

  • Dated 12/2, different 41.* ip id'd as Historian19 sock
  • Dated 16/2, Similar to the other Historian19 edit.
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
[edit]

information Administrator note IP blocked. –MuZemike 21:39, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

01 July 2010
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]
Evidence submitted by Zzuuzz
[edit]

I've blocked this account as a Historian19 sock, evading the current incomplete range block, and up to the usual disruption. Given the history I'm requesting a checkuser to confirm and to flush out any socks and see if the current block needs tweaking. Thanks. -- zzuuzz (talk) 20:13, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties
[edit]

See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users
[edit]

Added an IP and account that could do with blocking please, reverting to previous Historian19 sockpuppets' version on Uruguay. Thank you. O Fenian (talk) 20:40, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
[edit]

 Clerk endorsed to check for sleepers. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 01:35, 2 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

09 February 2011
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


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

So far, edits to Copenhagen, Casablanca and Economy of France, all frequent Historian19 targets. This edit to Copenhagen is most telling, where a major revert (back to Historian19's version from 1 June 2010, albeit with a slight change to the size of the infobox image) takes place to the article. Similarly a one year revert (excluding the formatting error) on Economy of France to a previous Historian19 sockpuppet's version. O Fenian (talk) 09:50, 9 February 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]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Historian19/Archive&oldid=1085549892"