Jump to content

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

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by EPIC (talk | contribs) at 19:48, 2 April 2024 (→‎Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments 2: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

あすぺるがあすぺしゃりすと

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

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

This SPI case may involve cross-wiki abuse. Please consider reporting the results on Meta; checkusers can send an email to the interwiki checkuser mailing list if required.
This case's socks should have their talk page and email access revoked due to abuse.


22 February 2024

– This SPI case is closed and will be archived shortly by an SPI clerk or checkuser.

Suspected sockpuppets

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

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

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

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

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

The following accounts are ducky by username:

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

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

More suspicious accounts:

and the still unblocked ones here:

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

蕪誦北 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) just confirmed it. ClumsyOwlet (talk) 03:09, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

15 March 2024

– This SPI case is closed and will be archived shortly by an SPI clerk or checkuser.

Suspected sockpuppets

...Wow, OK, I'm going to do this in parts because it's breaking the template...

Non-obvious ducks here:

The first three socks (ਗੈਪ ਹੈ, Упгаз, ጋዝሉፔ) are tagged incorrectly and should be tagged to this case.

سپئا has a very similar username to a previous sockpuppet, سپئاە.

އަޕެގަރްޒުއާ އެވެ ("Apegaruza is") is probably an anagram of Asperger's and it's unlikely for anyone to register a Dhivehi name on the English Wikipedia.

AspergerNext is the oldest account tagged to Bulut on jawiki.

Everything else either is a WP:DUCK (editing their talk page), has some form of "Aspe" in their name, or is a rearrangement of previous usernames.ClumsyOwlet (talk) 02:38, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

...I'm going to try again and replace the above with the non-stale accounts so the CheckUser request will work. ClumsyOwlet (talk) 03:29, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
More showing up now. ClumsyOwlet (talk) 16:49, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Four more. ClumsyOwlet (talk) 14:25, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
More. ClumsyOwlet (talk) 01:57, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for checking this, HJ Mitchell.
Another list: 褪伝北, 豈攣北2024, 豈攣北'24, アスペ2024, アスペ'24, Aspe'24, 褪伝北2024. ClumsyOwlet (talk) 15:55, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

@HJ Mitchell: I don't know if all of those are ASPE. ファンウィジョは終わったな, 横山輝, マイペースなナマケモノ, 山田っち, 鶯乃理子, ぶるんぶるん, なもなも, 田中公侍|通りすがり69, 杉咲真尋, 大岡暁都, Issokiso, 長雄, 喵小爱, 嵯峨日暮, はにかむ幸三, にしざわけ, ジミー・北アイルランド, 小本祐紀, 臥龍點睛, and E5489 don't seem like ASPE's usernames (along with about 40 other accounts in the block log), and 青山貴弘, エオウプ, Сунгирь, 火乃狐 don't act like ASPE. Some in the log have also been blocked on itwiki. Can these be checked against ISECHIKA (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) and their sockpuppets? ClumsyOwlet (talk) 16:32, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's always possible you've got two sock farms on overlapping IPs, especially considering the proxy use. You can tell from the timings that the blocks were in clusters; each cluster roughly corresponds to one IP or range which in turn was detected by checking one of the accounts in the list above. For example, all the accounts blocked at 16:06 UTC would have been on one IP or range which they shared with ޕައެރޖަރއެސްވެސް, listed above. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:48, 1 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
網走本線 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) can probably be blocked again, along with
According to this, they are sockpuppets of Suzukitaro (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). You haven't caused any trouble, EPIC. ClumsyOwlet (talk) 16:59, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Did show up in any checks? They're DUCKS. (I've removed the checkuser template from some of the above comments because the template is now broken.) ClumsyOwlet (talk) 17:21, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • I have come here because I am investigating an unblock appeal for みたら on UTRS. The editor claims to be an innocent unrelated user caught by the block. So far they have edits on Japanese Wikipedia and on Wikidata, but not on English Wikipedia. The account was globally locked, but has now been unlocked, as explained above by EPIC. Unfortunately, checking numerous pages on Japanese Wikipedia via Google translate is far too troublesome for me to do anything remotely like enough checking to reach any conclusion, but I have seen nothing which looks to me as though it connects this account to any of the others that I have looked at. Also nobody on Japanese Wikipedia has, so far as I can see, raised any question of sockpuppetry. The evidence of abuse on en.wikipedia is nill, as the account has never edited. That leaves only the CU evidence, which must be regarded as inconclusive, as HJ Mitchell & Blablubbs read it differently. Under those circumstances I believe we have to assume good faith and unblock. The same may or may not apply to other accounts listed here, but I have not checked any others. JBW (talk) 19:38, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    @JBW if it helps, I am also rather unsure about lots of these blocks. I've not had a chance to review them in depth, but I trust Blablubbs to the point that if he says a CU block is 'unsafe' it probably is. firefly ( t · c ) 19:44, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I was pinged here, so I will also say that I support unblocking the accounts which are not likely to be related here. EPIC (talk) 19:48, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/あすぺるがあすぺしゃりすと&oldid=1216925807"