Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Xayahrainie43/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Xayahrainie43

Xayahrainie43 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

08 October 2019[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

[1] [2] Anita5192 (talk) 16:41, 8 October 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]

  • Yes, indeed. Unfortunately, they're all taiwanese mobile ranges, so a single IP block will do nothing and a range block is likely to have too much collateral. Page protection is gonna be the way to go here. ST47 (talk) 08:48, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

30 July 2020[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Friend505 is a fairly new account with a little suspicious activity on its own (flurry of activity, knowledgeable, requested EC perms here).

However, their subpage User:Friend505/math prime numbers is essentially identical to edits made to the Sandbox (diff) and disruptively by overwriting existing articles ([3], [4], [5], [6]) by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/61.224.102.199, which exhibits the same recent pattern of IP socks of Xayahrainie43: making very large additions and immediately reverting himself (probably to keep a record in page histories for himself). See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/220.132.207.146 for example. These IPs all geolocate to Taiwan. There was at least one rangeblock, but that was a while ago. See Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive996#Xayahrainie43 for more of the same block evasion via IPs and similar behavior that led to it. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 13:27, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I just added a second suspect (the Chinese characters). Their entire contributions have been to the Sandbox, and consist of the same type of crufty recreational math-themed large additions and removal. Oddly, the first edit from this account was about 12 hours after I opened this report. –Deacon Vorbis (carbon • videos) 19:52, 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.

Excuse me, would you like to know why I do that. I do that because I want to add a new part of the edit summary, since I forgot to add some things in the edit summary so I revert it and revert it again to add more edit summary. I will stop doing that. Please do not accuse me of being a sockpuppet of this bad guy. In fact, I live in Canada. Before I got an account, I edited under an IP address, and if you look at the IP address mentioned in my sandbox (which I copied from the talk page of my old IP address) and geolocate it, you will find out that it is located in Toronto, Ontario, Canada and not in Taiwan. I am interested in a wide range of topics, but currently, most of my edits are on Chinese dynastic history. I may start editing on other topics. I hope this information is enough to let you guys know that I am not a sockpuppet. You may also find that my English is pretty good. Sometimes, I make occasional typos, but still not a lot. Friend505 (talk) 12:06, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should block the bad guy above. I think he's already blocked. I put all that load of stuff into one of my subpages since I just wanted to store it when I found it in the Wikipedia general sandbox and I thought that it was interesting so I saved it for later to look at it. I am not a sockpuppet and I DO NOT OPERATE SOCKPUPPETS. I HAVE NEVER DONE IT IN MY ENTIRE LIFE AND WILL NEVER DO IT. Friend505 (talk) 12:12, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The bad guy is already blocked, and that's a good thing, since he looks like he's bad. He used multiple IPs to edit Wikipedia, a thing that I've never done. Friend505 (talk) 12:14, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi guys, why didn't you notify me when the investigation started? (Note, yeah, my mood's changed a bit, without the all-caps posts, since I think being rude isn't a good way to defend myself.) Please notify me when something else occurs on this sockpuppet investigation. Thank you. Friend505 (talk) 12:22, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I am not a sockpuppet of the guy. Please stop. Thank you. I hope you have noticed my posts. Friend505 (talk) 19:55, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Guys, I perodically check the sandbox and find interesting stuff to add into my subpages. Please stop accusing me. Thank you. Friend505 (talk) 19:57, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have copied the stuff that that user added into one of my subpages. Note: It just seems interesting; I only knew about it after you mentioned it here, since I do not as often check the general sandbox as this page. Please stop. Thank you. Also, note that I have not started an edit war on Deacon Vorbis' talk page. I wanted to do that, but I decided not to do that, as he must have already seen what I wrote. Friend505 (talk) 20:00, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have not been limited to the sandbox. In fact, I am a good-faith Wikipedian (maybe a Wikipedeholic if you take a look at my Wikipediaholism test score on my userpage). I never lie. So, you see, I have said that I am committed to fighting vandalism. I will try my best to do it, although I still patrol for improvements to be made when I read Wikipedia articles. Thank you. Friend505 (talk) 21:09, 1 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Also, to the checkusers, my IP address changes periodically. The IP address that I've mentioned about in my sandbox is one of my old IP addresses. You checkusers are probably able to see my current IP address. Thank you. Friend505 (talk) 00:47, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Although I try my best to fight vandalism, I am only limited to fighting vandalism in articles that I am currently interested in and am editing. For example, right now, my focus is mostly on Chinese dynastic history, so I mostly specialize in fighting vandalism and editing articles about Chinese emperors. This is just a little bit more about me on Wikipedia. Thank you. Friend505 (talk) 20:50, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I am now here to give a comment about the user with the Chinese characters. Almost all of this user's contributions were to the general sandbox, just like Deacon Vorbis stated. However, I did find out that the user made edits on a few other articles starting on 6 August 2020. The user made a series of edits on the article letter frequency ([7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20]. The user even made an edit on one of my subpages, the math prime numbers subpage. The user's edit summary for that edit was "Corrected". The only thing I notice is that the user changed "NA" to 9339. Here's the diff: [21]. I don't know whether or not I should revert the user's edit. I guess I can just leave it alone. However, I think someone, like another checkuser, needs to attend to this sockpuppet investigation (SPI), since after Ivanvector, who is a checkuser, deemed me to be unrelated, it seems like there was not much more attention about the user with the Chinese characters, and this user continues to make edits on Wikipedia, still mostly to the sandbox, as I described previously in this post. @Deacon Vorbis: I would like you to attend to this case, since this user is strange. Most Wikipedia usernames are in English, or at least, the letters are in English. Thank you. Friend505 11:21, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • 俏綾 (talk · contribs) is  Possible; the case is stale so I can't give you any more than that.  Behavioural evidence needs evaluation.
  • Friend505 (talk · contribs) is Red X Unrelated, and not evidently related to anyone else.
-- Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:58, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

08 August 2020[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Hi, guys, I am filing a sockpuppet investigation (SPI) of an IP user who has an IPv4 address of 111.253.196.134. This IP address geolocates to Taiwan, and although it does not geolocate to Taipei City, like other Xayahrainie43 IPs, it maybe that the user is using a VPN to hide their real location and redirect to the location of a city in southern Taiwan called Changhua. This IP user's contributions consist of three large edits to the general sandbox and one edit to Letter frequency. The last non-IP Xayahrainie43 sockpuppet, 俏綾, made edits on that article. MarnetteD reverted the edit, but this IP user undid MarnetteD's edit, returning the article to the status of the article as edited by 俏綾. This IP first started editing Wikipedia on 8 August 2020, and this user's edits in the sandbox have also been like those of 俏綾 and previous Xayahrainie43 sockpuppets, containing crafty mathematical nonsense, as noted here: [22], [23], [24], [25]. If a checkuser does see this SPI, please give a comment down in the CheckUser comment section. Thank you. Friend505 11:49, 8 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 October 2020[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

See contrib patterns and zh block log. 1233 ( T / C） 14:04, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

Could a CheckUser check this please so we can close this? This has been open for way to long. Heart (talk) 04:33, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: Both locked. --Minorax (talk) 08:59, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

  •  Clerk note: Account locked, closing as nothing left to do. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 07:31, 11 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

26 October 2020[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

See contributions in April and present. See also zhwiki block log. zh:Special:用户贡献/210.242.153.203 SCP-2000 17:29, 26 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]

  •  Clerk note: Looks similar. Had a steward block the IP for a few days, nothing else to do here. GeneralNotability (talk) 18:45, 26 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

06 December 2020[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Typical pattern: enormous edits to Wikipedia:Sandbox, then obsessive edits relating to minor mathematical sequences. For example, compare this edit from a previous sock with this edit by reported user (Sandbox, Riesel problem). Requesting CU to look for sleeper socks. JBL (talk) 22:19, 6 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. @Oshwah: and clerks, I apologize for the error — this should have been filed under Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Xayahrainie43. (Oshwah, there should be plenty of recent socks there to compare with.) —JBL (talk) 12:36, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • The master is too stale to run a check against. This SPI report will have to be examined using behavioral evidence. Declining CU... ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:50, 7 December 2020 (UTC) SPI report moved under correct master[reply]
  • JayBeeEll -  Fixed. No big deal. I've reset the CU request status. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 14:01, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Given the technical evidence and information, I'd say that this is  Likely. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 14:32, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Clerk note: Behavioral evidence agrees.  Blocked and tagged, lock requested. GeneralNotability (talk) 14:08, 9 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

19 January 2021[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

standard pattern: Workshopping their articles via enormous edits in the sandbox, widespread edits to mathematics articles about primes and open problems that do things like extend existing lists beyond the point of usefulness, etc. JBL (talk) 13:09, 19 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]

27 January 2021[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

All the usual signs: massive edits to sandbox workshopping their edits, OR and trivia on mathematics articles about obscure sequences and prime numbers. Requesting CU to check for sleeper accounts, which is SOP for them. JBL (talk) 13:03, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Oshwah and GeneralNotability: they have now returned as 220.132.207.146 (added above). Thanks for your assistance, JBL (talk) 13:50, 1 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]

  •  Clerk note: Uh, Oshwah, can we please not close the SPI while the IP hasn't been actioned? :) Requested a gblock on the IP from a steward, all set now. GeneralNotability (talk) 00:55, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
GeneralNotability - Oops! My bad! I'm not sure why I did that... Fixed. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 01:00, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

02 February 2021[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Literally just making the same edits as the last IP sock. Is there any possibility of a technical solution (range block, etc.)? JBL (talk) 14:54, 2 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]

  •  Clerk note: The IP has already been blocked, so closing. -- RoySmith (talk) 03:06, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

02 March 2021[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Similar edit pattern. Added original research in articles about Maths. Also tested in Sandbox. SCP-2000 06:12, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

  • Please see SRCU request result 1,2,3,4 (滄海77,Janet492,俏綾,Ahri6279,Janet492,紅神琦,鏟5敷儲1,リーダ昕哥,淺井39,胡蝶47しのぶ,Sweety439,彤蜜妡璃647),some data can try to match it,see below (Not stale) and archive via this LTA,

Above.--MCC214#ex umbra in solem 11:17, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

I think the most recent batch of editors blocked for acting like Xayahrainie43, in early February, consisted of 2402:7500:487:A54:950E:CA08:36D:1EFD (talk · contribs) example diff, 114.41.114.70 (talk · contribs) example diff, and 220.132.207.146 (talk · contribs) example diff. In this new case, the pattern of sandbox usage, interest in mathematical topics, and edits adding large numbers of unsourced calculations example diff matches past incidents, enough so that I'd be comfortable classifying this as the same repeat block evader. The specific targeted articles are different, in large part because the previous targets have been semiprotected against this editor. But the Checkusers are unlikely to tell us about matches between named editors and IP addresses. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:28, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
To which I would add, the behavior after their edits are reverted (systematically reinstating all the same edits without much comment) is also identical to past instances. If we didn't have an open SPI to go through, I'd have blocked them by now. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:41, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The three accounts are  Confirmed to one another, and appear  Likely to the master. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 22:02, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The three accounts above were already locked globally, but I've  Blocked and tagged them for local accountability. Closing. Mz7 (talk) 05:29, 5 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08 April 2021[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Similar edit pattern. Block maybe necessary. SCP-2000 03:47, 8 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 April 2021[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Similar edit pattern. SCP-2000 16:55, 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]

  •  Clerk endorsed - a check would be useful prior to requesting glock. There are non-stale confirmed in the archive. TheSandDoctor Talk 18:50, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •  In progress - Mz7 (talk) 02:24, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Confirmed.  No sleepers immediately visible.  Blocked and tagged. Redirect arrow Global lock(s) requested, closing. Mz7 (talk) 02:28, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

05 June 2021[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Similar edit pattern in sandbox SCP-2000 14:28, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

Not merely a similar pattern but precisely the same content. --JBL (talk) 17:32, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@RoySmith and Ivanvector: comparable diffs from the last 3 socks: [26] [27] [28] but really in this case it would have been enough to look at any of the past socks and see the 200000+ byte edits to the sandbox. --JBL (talk) 01:34, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Diffs = all contributions of this IP editor. Here, let me link them for you: [29] [30] [31] [32] [33] [34] [35] [36] [37] [38] [39] [40] [41] [42]. The edits to the sandbox are not themselves disruptive, but (because the editor is adding the same content as before to the sandbox in the same pattern of repeatedly adding and removing it) clearly identify this IP as the same globally-locked editor who in the past has repeatedly made disruptive edits to many other articles. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:24, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    You didn't even take the effort to look at the very first diff in the archive, which happens to be to the sandbox, did you? Nor do you appear to have noticed that I am not even the same editor as the one making this new accusation. Anyway, here is the archive diff again for your convenience: [43]. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:36, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • Same as what? Diffs please. Note that logged-out users cannot gain autoconfirmed, so I don't see what's inherently disruptive about an IP editor tinkering with the sandbox. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:05, 5 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    David Eppstein, When we ask for diffs, what we're specifically asking for is pairs of diffs, showing how one account (or IP in this case) is making the same sorts of edits as the other. To phrase it in computer science terms, if each account has n edits, then finding the similar ones is an O(n^2) problem. Since you've already observed similarities between the IP and Xayahrainie43, what's being requested is that you share that knowledge by providing pairs of diffs showing those similarities. That reduces it to an O(1) problem, or at least an O(n) problem for some small value of n, Simply listing a bunch of diffs from one actor doesn't reduce the complexity of the problem; it's the pairing of diffs between actors which makes things easier for whoever's handling the investigation. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:18, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @David Eppstein: I closed this a moment ago citing your aggressive behaviour. Clerks are here to evaluate the evidence given in the report, not to go chasing it for you. If you find it to be so obvious then you are fully capable of enacting a block yourself. Since you seem to want to abuse the process and the clerks involved instead, I have moved your comments to the appropriate section, and I invite you not to comment here again.
Thank you JayBeeEll for providing some pairs of diffs. IP blocked 31 hours. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 11:45, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

08 July 2021[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Same interest in math. Same type of edits to Wikipedia:Sandbox. Blocked on zh.wikipedia as a sock. Eostrix  (🦉 hoot hoot🦉) 13:31, 8 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]

10 September 2021[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Obvious identical pattern (recreating Kynea number, dozens of edits to List of prime numbers, etc.) -- surely 100% overlap, plus the typical initial edits in the sandbox. CU requested for sleepers. JBL (talk) 16:31, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Apologies for this redundant posting; based on past experience, I will leave it to clerks to clean up after me rather than trying to do it myself. Sorry. --JBL (talk) 16:33, 10 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now moved on to an IP, restoring the correctly reverted garbage edits of the sock. --JBL (talk) 16:47, 10 September 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]

The following account is  Confirmed:

21 September 2021[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Immediately after last sock was blocked, restores its edits. JBL (talk) 20:40, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Post-closure (sorry @RoySmith:) I wanted to remark that disruption continued after the report from at least these two IP addresses: [44] (September 23) and [45] (September 24). (Most of the pages recently targeted are now semi-protected.) --JBL (talk) 01:23, 29 September 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]

Blocked and tagged. The previous go-around uncovered (but failed to block) a sleeper, so maybe another checkuser check is warranted. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:16, 21 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • There was a sleeper check done about 10 days ago which didn't find anything. Plus, the CU queue is getting pretty deep, so I think skipping another check makes sense for now. Closing. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:05, 29 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

04 October 2021[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


Obvious duck sock is already blocked. Requesting CU to search for other sleepers (this account was created one week ago, just before a previous request for a sleeper check was declined). --JBL (talk) 21:30, 4 October 2021 (UTC) JBL (talk) 21:30, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The edit pattern of this one involved making a sequence of sandbox edits and then waiting a week to obtain autoconfirmed status before starting in on the abusive edits of articles that had been semiprotected against past attacks of the same nature. When I blocked this, I did take the time to look for similar patterns of sandbox edits that might have been made by other sleepers, but didn't see any. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:14, 4 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]

  • Nothing immediately showing, but I'm also looking at a lake with ducks of the same color, so there still could be one lurking. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 03:29, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

16 November 2021[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Similar edit pattern in sandbox. Was blocked in zhwiki. SCP-2000 08:38, 16 November 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]

  • IP blocked for a year by David Eppstein. Closing. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 03:15, 18 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19 November 2021[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Standard pattern for all socks. I note that all edits from both IP addresses are Xayahrainie -- in the case of 210.242.153.201, that dates to January 2018. JBL (talk) 15:12, 19 November 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 December 2021[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Just for the record, they're back as 210.242.153.203. Pretty static. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 10:25, 29 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]

05 January 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Quack. See filter log. Blocked, just making a report for the record. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:18, 5 January 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]

09 January 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

This edit restore this edit by another similar IP sock. @ToBeFree: @David Eppstein: as recent blocking admins. JBL (talk) 16:45, 9 January 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]

12 January 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Same edit pattern in sandbox. Was blocked in zhwiki as confirmed sockpuppet.SCP-2000 09:04, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

This is pretty obvious: They re-added the Smarandache numbers, and restored a mass addition by a previous sock 威士忌迴旋曲 (talk · contribs). –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 16:25, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

14 January 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Editing in maths related pages. See also 2402:7500:910::/44 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · block user · block log) contribs. SCP-2000 13:34, 14 January 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]

15 January 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Similar edit pattern. Was blocked in zhwiki. SCP-2000 10:10, 15 January 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]

17 January 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Similar edit pattern. SCP-2000 11:34, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

Added another IP, probably a long-term range-block is needed (it was clearly the same person making edits back in August, chemical elements are another of their hobbyhorses). --JBL (talk) 12:08, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • These IPs are under a global and local block, respectively. Closing. Spicy (talk) 15:18, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

19 January 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Obvious as usual (the 61 IP is already blocked, which led to the creation of the account, which has all the typical hallmarks -- huge edits to sandboxes, restoring edits on a variety of math pages, etc.). Checkuser requested to look for sleeper accounts, since they seem to be back to named accounts. The 220 IP self-identified on the talk-page of the account. JBL (talk) 12:10, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

  • Interestingly I had happened to find a user (who is know globally locked) whose username is similar to the one that attempted to report JBL. I checked their contribs and didn't see any obvious signs of them being the same person so I just left it. I wonder if the accounts are connected in some way? ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 17:42, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Taking a look at both users I think it's safe to say they are the same person (both have the same block reasoning on zhWiki Even though I can't understand it and both have the english reasoning of "Long term abuse"). ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#6545 17:44, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Blocked a couple of these before I saw the SPI page based on the edit filter and AIV report. SpencerT•C 17:57, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • I don't have time for more, but I will confirm that 奪瞳妖乂百目鬼 is identical to 紅神苦力帕瑟雷西鏡音鈴草莓族妍欣野原小葵向日葵班野原小白 . Drmies (talk) 18:01, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  •  In progress - Mz7 (talk) 06:14, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • The two named accounts are  Confirmed. no No comment with respect to IP address(es), though I will note that most of them have already been blocked by other admins.  Blocked and tagged, closing. Mz7 (talk) 06:23, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

28 January 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Per geolocation and editing abuse at WP:RDMA.  --Lambiam 22:41, 28 January 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]

  • The IP hasn't edited in a few days - closing. There is some other sock activity on the /16 but there also appears to be significant collateral, so I don't think a rangeblock is feasible. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 14:58, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

30 January 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Abused IP range. SCP-2000 04:31, 30 January 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]

  • Pink clock Awaiting administrative action - all edits from this range since 2021 appear to be this user. Please block the range (anon-only, account creation blocked) for 3 months. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 15:01, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done [46] -- RoySmith (talk) 15:17, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

02 February 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Plz block for short term. Thanks. SCP-2000 03:31, 2 February 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]

14 March 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Vandalism since 2018. Static IP. Please block for long term. SCP-2000 08:26, 14 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]

  • The IP is now globally blocked. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 13:52, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

05 June 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Similar edit pattern. See also Stalktoy. SCP-2000 02:05, 5 June 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]

  • I believe that many of the contributions from this IP range were indeed Xayahrainie43. However, they haven't used this range for over a month now so there seems little point blocking it as there would be a certain amount of collateral. If the range starts editing about maths or variants of chess again, please come back (and feel free to ping me). Girth Summit (blether) 10:46, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

29 November 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

The username contains "妍欣", which is commonly used by sockpuppets of Xayahrainie43. Billytanghh (talk) 04:37, 29 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]

08 October 2023[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

The behavior is consistent (using the sandbox to draft documents on mathematics that will never have a place in Wikipedia, hanging out at the math ref desk) but specifically search for the string "Xayahrainie" in this and this diff. JBL (talk) 22:00, 8 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]

24 November 2023[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

See the history of the redirects Icosihenagon (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), Icosadigon (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), etc. All edits are to pages previously edited by the master, restoring things to the way the master had organized them in 2021 or so. JBL (talk) 19:40, 24 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]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Xayahrainie43/Archive&oldid=1187170505"