Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Pararubbas/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

User:Pararubbas

[edit]
Pararubbas (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Pararubbas

Pararubbas (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Report date February 9 2009, 14:17 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets



Evidence submitted by NothingButAGoodNothing

It has happened:

User PARARUBBAS (at least the first account i acknowledge) had the custom of the following: removing, just because, links, references, sections ("SEE ALSO", "NOT TO BE CONFUSED WITH") and paragraphs, "gluing" all sentences (list of "contributions" here Special:Contributions/Pararubbas); i provide an example here (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Aly_Cissokho&diff=prev&oldid=226305530).

(Over)Duly warned (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Pararubbas#Blocked), including in what seemed his mother tongue, Portuguese (i am also from that country and did so), he, after having made zero edit summaries and responded to zero talkpage "interventions", was finally blocked indefinitely (see here User_talk:Pararubbas#Blocked).

Afterwards, the person logged in under the account PEP10 (list of "contributions" here Special:Contributions/Pep10), continuing with the same disruptive patterns (example here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jo%C3%A3o_Pereira_(Portuguese_footballer)&diff=prev&oldid=257327999). After a while and some reports, this account was blocked indef as well (User_talk:Pep10#December_2008), after a check user was performed by admin/user Satori Son (see here Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Pep10)

It did not deter this individual still, as he opened a third account, PASD08 ("contributions" here Special:Contributions/Pasd08), with same modus operandi (example here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Pawe%C5%82_Kieszek&diff=prev&oldid=265304604). After extensive reports (see here for instance http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=265562039#Disruptive_editors) a sock puppetry pattern was finally acknowledged and the person received its due punishment (User_talk:Pasd08#Sock_of_Pararubbas).

You'd think the vandal had had enough by now, would you not? Well, here is the FOURTH account, KAKD08 (list of "contributions" Special:Contributions/Kakd08), with the same patterns (example here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vitorino_Antunes&diff=prev&oldid=269312444). He has already been warned in this fresh new "vandalic adventure" (talkpage here User_talk:Kakd08#February_2009).

Attentively, VASCO AMARAL - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 23:31, 8 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

VASCO AMARAL - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 02:32, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users


CheckUser requests
Checkuser request – code letter: E (Community ban/sanction evasion )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by -- lucasbfr talk 14:17, 9 February 2009 (UTC) [reply]



Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Moved and formatted from Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations. The editing interests seem similar, I'm unsure whether a CU is warranted or if the latest user's contributions should be examined on their own merits. -- lucasbfr talk 14:17, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Conclusions
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.



Report date March 17 2009, 21:09 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Regarding this report (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Pararubbas/Archive),

Unfortunately, the "song remains the same". This "user" has opened a new account, Mnht08 ("contributions" here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Mnht08), and continues to: operate almost exclusively on Portuguese soccer, glue all sentences into one, creating a very pleasant-to-watch article and, much much more worse, remove all links and refs, just because.

Examples: Rio Ave FC (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rio_Ave_F.C.&diff=prev&oldid=277218083, only glued sentences here), Orlando Sá, Hélio Sousa, Bassey William Andem (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Orlando_S%C3%A1&diff=prev&oldid=277163912, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=H%C3%A9lio_Sousa&diff=prev&oldid=275588926, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bassey_William_Andem&diff=prev&oldid=275791155, here sentence were glued, infobox signs and external links were removed, just because)

I think a long-range is block could be in order. Attentively, Vasco Amaral, Portugal - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 21:09, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users

I have been asked for input from editor User:NothingButAGoodNothing on many of the previous occasons of puppet vandalism in this ongoing problem, and can appreciate his discomforture at it being a continued disruption to his work in improving the project. If some long-term solution were available, I would endorse it being considered. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 21:22, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Request for CheckUser
Checkuser request – code letter: F (Other reason )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below. Requested by EdJohnston (talk)
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

I have notified Mnht08 of this report. The evidence seems convincing, and an indefinite block of Mnht08 as a sock of Pararubbas seems right. Genuine socks who repeat their behavior usually don't bother to respond when notified, so let's wait a day or two. No objection if a checkuser wants to run a check, but the evidence seems adequate without that. EdJohnston (talk) 21:39, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see that Vasco has requested a 'long range block' (above). My translation of that request is: can a checkuser look for an underlying IP that can be blocked? Are there more socks in the drawer? Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 02:27, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Conclusions
  • The following are  Confirmed:
  1. Pasd08 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
  2. Kakd08 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
  3. Svz08 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
  4. Mnht08 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

The rest are  Stale. There's far too much collateral damage to consider a rangeblock. Nishkid64 (Make articles, not wikidrama) 05:33, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: All confirmed blocked. MBisanz talk 05:39, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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




Report date March 26 2009, 01:26 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Pararubbas opens a new account, the 7th, still fresh, now named User:Thn08 (contributions here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Thn08), he has not edited much. However, it's "hot" enough to recognize some patterns: he has, so far, ceased to remove links and refs, highly appreciated by the community, but, at least here, he did what he usually does: glued all sentences into one (i still fail to see the point in this) and removed useful signs in infoboxes (i.e. →) (diff here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ant%C3%B3nio_Alberto_Bastos_Pimparel&diff=279235867&oldid=278414076). I kindly request a checkuser.

Attentively, Vasco Amaral --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 01:26, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users


Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

Similarity of account names, and similarity of interests suggests this is Pararubbas. However, checkuser was very effective in certifying that the previous accounts were him, so it would be helpful here too. If we have to rely on WP:DUCK we would have to wait for more edits to be sure it is him. EdJohnston (talk) 01:40, 26 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]


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

Please tag and close, all socks blocked indef. Its pretty obvious based on behavior and account names. —— nixeagleemail me 03:30, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]



Report date April 9 2009, 00:51 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


User:Pararubbas has returned, with the account User:Asz08 ("contributions" here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Asz08). I will only provide one example of this sad "user"'s deeds because the pattern is so striking it needs no more: gluing sentences, removing signs in infobox, links and refs just because...all in appalling English, with POV/WEASEL to spare. Here it is: (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Beto_(Portuguese_footballer_born_1982)&diff=282355808&oldid=280265401)

Evidence submitted by Vasco Amaral - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 00
51, 9 April 2009 (UTC)



Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users


Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
To make a behavioral case that this is Pararubbas, we don't need to show actual vandalism, just observe that he is making the same type of changes to Portuguese football articles as the previous socks. The distinctive points noted by NothingButAGoodNothing above are:
  1. Running all the sentences together into a single paragraph
  2. Removing the small right-arrow symbols from the infobox: "→", which show that the player was transferred to another team
  3. Removing reference links.
I'm satisfied of the resemblance to the other socks, and the user name fits the pattern Xxx08, so I'd be willing to block indef. I'll wait first to see if there are other comments. EdJohnston (talk) 03:56, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The new sock has been blocked indef and tagged. Can the report be closed? EdJohnston (talk) 15:21, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Conclusions

 Completed blocked and tagged Mayalld (talk) 15:34, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Mayalld (talk) 15:34, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]




Report date April 27 2009, 01:54 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


This "person" opened his eighth (!!!!) sock account, called User:Qaz08 ("contributions" seen here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Qaz08); this "person" continues with the attitude: gluing all sentences, removing signs in players (this "person" still works almost exclusively in Portuguese soccer) and, much much worse, removing all links and references. Three examples here: Flávio Meireles (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Fl%C3%A1vio_Meireles&diff=prev&oldid=286251335), Nilson Corrêia Júnior (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nilson_Corr%C3%AAia_J%C3%BAnior&diff=286252234&oldid=259044501) and Tiago Ferreira (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tiago_Ferreira&diff=285890310&oldid=285889972)

Several other things could be said about this individual, but i'll keep it for myself. Attentively, VASCO AMARAL, Portugal - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 01:54, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users


Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

I have indefinitely blocked Qaz08 as a sock of Pararubbas. This is presumably the only action needed. The archive of this case contains the behavior to watch out for, which I observed. EdJohnston (talk) 02:09, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]


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

Mayalld (talk) 13:02, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]



Report date April 30 2009, 23:32 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Since i don't have a watchlist, it was bound to happen: found another sock account of Pararubbas, User:Wsx08 ("contributions" here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Wsx08), the "person" has edited very little with this account (incidentally this account is previous to the one in my last report, Qaz08), and i have not seen - i only checked three or four "contributions" - any link/REF removal; however, you can be 100% it is him. Take this example (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rui_Orlando_Ribeiro_Santos_Neto&diff=283574872&oldid=283246021): the introduction is always the same, he writes capitals in middle of sentences, his English is appalling, he is also an especialist in over-linking and, as you can see clicking on the example (Portuguese footballer, as 99,9999% of his "deeds"), the sentences are all glued into one, another horrible pattern. Ah, and THERE WAS one removal: someone entered to place the tag that this article needed (did it ever!! I already took care of that) improvement, he entered anon and BANG! off it goes the annoying template (see here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rui_Orlando_Ribeiro_Santos_Neto&diff=283336467&oldid=283252473)

Hope this too can be blocked, it's him (what i find incredible is that the eighth account was not yet blocked, and he goes and opens the ninth...Very odd).

Attentively, VASCO AMARAL, PORTUGAL - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 23:32, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Signing off" again, VASCO - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 00:17, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence submitted by NothingButAGoodNothing (talk)



Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users


Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

User:Wsx08 blocked indef as Pararubbas. EdJohnston (talk) 01:16, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

Synergy 06:05, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]



Report date May 5 2009, 21:22 (UTC)
[edit]

Did not rest long; this "person" has a new account, User:Tgb08 ("contributions" here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Tgb08), the disruptive patterns are the same, clearly seen in this example i now provide (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Paulo_Jorge_Carreira_Nunes&diff=prev&oldid=287689400); i typed this player's name by a mere hazard, and when article displayed, sentences ALL GLUED, i did not have to scroll down to find out that....the link was missing, having been removed!! I already told this "person" PARARUBBAS i will not rest, he can open 500000 accounts, i will block them all.

Attentively, VASCO AMARAL - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 21:22, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence submitted by NothingButAGoodNothing (talk)



Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users


Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

Tgb08 has been blocked indef as a sock of Pararubbas. EdJohnston (talk) 21:46, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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




Report date May 20 2009, 00:48 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Not a surprise, this "person" has returned, now with the account Edc089 (what a genius move, add a "9" to the "8" and continue to vandalize away, that way people won't notice it's PARARUBBAS!!), and the modus operandi is, unfortunately, the same: sentences glued, links/refs removed ("contributions" here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Edc089; example here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bruno_Tiago&diff=prev&oldid=289681304).

Attentively, VASCO AMARAL - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 00:48, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence submitted by NothingButAGoodNothing


Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users


Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments


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

 Done PeterSymonds (talk) 00:53, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]



Report date July 25 2009, 17:19 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
  • This "user", Pararubbas, had, for a brief moment, the brilliant idea of having two socks open at the same time, and this one User:Edc018, went, apparently unnoticed, thus not being blocked. As far as i have seen, he has ceased to remove links and refs, but continues to insert POV/WEASEL, as well as, in player infoboxes (his sole interest continues to be football, 99,999999% Portuguese), remove signs and "destroy" club links (i.e club link is S.L. Benfica, he just writes Benfica, it redirects but it's not the same).

Another custom that dates from the first sock is that he glues all sentences in storylines (no paragraphs for this person); examples here (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=F.C._Pa%C3%A7os_de_Ferreira&diff=next&oldid=303911157, anon) and here (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rui_Bento&diff=303746064&oldid=300668721). If you don't want to take the first example in consideration, because it is anonymous (but it's Pararubbas, IP from England with same modus operandi), at least take the second.

Checkuser requested, please block this "user", as we have done in the past with the other 11 (!!) socks. Attentively, VASCO AMARAL, Portugal - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 17:19, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence submitted by NothingButAGoodNothing


Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.
Comments by other users


CheckUser requests

   Requested by NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 17:19, 25 July 2009 (UTC) [reply]



Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

Additional information needed: Please provide a code letter. SPCUClerkbot (talk) 17:20, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Checkuser request – code letter: B (Ongoing serious pattern vandalism )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below. – This is a pretty clear case where WP:DUCK would apply, especially considering the account name of the most recent vandal. No need for a check, someone just has to block. However, it was suggested that I change this to endorse, to check for sleeper socks. NW (Talk) 23:42, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Conclusions
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.



Report date August 30 2009, 20:34 (UTC)
[edit]

Regarding this investigation on User:Pararubbas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Pararubbas/Archive), i would like for a checkuser on this other account, Asde09, to see if it is the same person. So far, the contributions have not been disruptive (see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Asde09), but the name account is strikingly similar. If indeed it is the same person, i'll be on this case like a wild dog on raw meat, promise - or some good admin can block the account, i think it is customary for accounts which have proven to be socks.

Attentively, VASCO AMARAL - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 20:34, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]


Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.
Comments by other users


CheckUser requests
Checkuser request – code letter: B (Ongoing serious pattern vandalism )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 20:34, 30 August 2009 (UTC) [reply]
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Checking now. Contributions and name are similar enough this is a clear WP:DUCK that wouldn't ordinarily need CU, but a) past reports have included half a dozen other names, so there may be more and b) I'm new to the tool, so I'm still practicing with it and this should be an easy confirmation. Hersfold (t/a/c) 21:56, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How shocking. I was right, there's a nice little sockfarm growing here. Full list of accounts coming soon. Hersfold (t/a/c) 21:58, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Conclusions
 Confirmed that Asde09 (talk · contribs) == Asde22 (talk · contribs) == Satam55 (talk · contribs). All blocked and tagged. Hersfold (t/a/c) 22:08, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.




Report date September 14 2009, 19:27 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Evidence submitted by NothingButAGoodNothing

Pararubbas returns (even tough he has continued to "contribute anonymnously) with the 14 sock!! User:Fgh089 ("contributions" here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Fgh089) - note name similarity, edits in Portuguese soccer, etc, etc - I would appreciate some actions if possible. I also requested a checkuser earlier at the proper page, but it did not work for some reason. However, the outcome of any eventual checkuser does not fret me the least, since i know it is User:Pararubbas.

Take care, ty very much in advance,


VASCO AMARAL, Portugal - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 19:23, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.
Comments by other users


CheckUser requests
Checkuser request – code letter: E (Community ban/sanction evasion )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by NW (Talk) 19:27, 14 September 2009 (UTC) [reply]



Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Last time I found an extra sock or two on the IP; can't hurt to look again. Again, however, this is certainly a sock and anyone passing by before I finish the check is welcome to block the accused. Hersfold (t/a/c) 20:22, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
No other socks found, and a rangeblock is out of the question - the ISP being used holds a very large block of addresses, and there would be far too much collateral damage if we tried knocking out even a portion of them. Hersfold (t/a/c) 20:29, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Conclusions
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.



Report date September 27 2009, 18:42 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Here comes the 15th sock (at least)!! It is called User:Nji089 (contributions here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Nji089 - so far i don't think it has been disruptive, but it will).

Attentively,

VASCO AMARAL, Portugal - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 18:42, 27 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence submitted by NothingButAGoodNothing


Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.
Comments by other users


CheckUser requests
Checkuser request – code letter: B (Ongoing serious pattern vandalism )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 18:42, 27 September 2009 (UTC) [reply]



Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Conclusions
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.




Report date October 6 2009, 14:27 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Here comes sock 16!!! This guy does not understand and won't stop, well neither will i (contributions for new account, Qsx089, seen here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Qsx089)

Attentively, VASCO AMARAL, Portugal - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 14:27, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.
Comments by other users


CheckUser requests
Checkuser request – code letter: E (Community ban/sanction evasion )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 14:27, 6 October 2009 (UTC) [reply]


 Clerk endorsed to check for IP/range and sleepers. MuZemike 14:59, 6 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Conclusions
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.

Closing. PeterSymonds (talk) 13:58, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]



Report date October 25 2009, 13:55 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]


New account for User:Pararubbas, the 17th, called Zxcv089. I had noticed, in the last accounts, this person had ceased to remove links and refs, "only" ruining club links and gluing sentences in storyline and indulge in ridiculous overlinking, but i was preparing to "let this one go"...

Thank god i took a second look!! In Paulo Sérgio Bento Brito, nothing less than five (!!!) REFS were removed (see here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Paulo_S%C3%A9rgio_Bento_Brito&diff=320256898&oldid=320003679). Full list of "contributions" here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Zxcv089).

Attentively, VASCO AMARAL, Portugal - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 13:55, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence submitted by NothingButAGoodNothing
[edit]
Comments by accused parties   
[edit]

See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users
[edit]
CheckUser requests
[edit]
Checkuser request – code letter: B (Ongoing serious pattern vandalism )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 13:55, 25 October 2009 (UTC) [reply]



Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
[edit]

 Confirmed Nji089 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) = Zxcv089 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) = Qsx089 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Asde09 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) is probably Red X Unrelated.

All the rest are  Stale. J.delanoygabsadds 19:42, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions
[edit]
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.

PeterSymonds (talk) 19:50, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]



Report date November 12 2009, 16:01 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]

And counting!!! Almost 20 socks now, this one called (see pattern) Rdcv089, "contributions" here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Rdcv089), again, almost 100% Portuguese soccer, please kill it before it grows, nothing to add to WP from this individual, i have studied "his case" at length.

Signing off - --NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 16:01, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties   
[edit]

See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users
[edit]
CheckUser requests
[edit]
Checkuser request – code letter: E  + B (Community ban/sanction evasion and ongoing serious pattern vandalism)
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by NothingButAGoodNothing (talk) 16:01, 12 November 2009 (UTC) [reply]



Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
[edit]

 Confirmed

Also, Qsc089 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). There could be more, but he is editing from a very dynamic, very busy /14 or possibly /13. There is a lot of noise, so I am not sure of others. J.delanoygabsadds 01:09, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions
[edit]
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.
Report date February 18 2010, 16:44 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]


New account by User:Pararubbas (and i think i may have forgotten one or two socks), called User:Ghjkl890 ("contributions" here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Ghjkl890). User/admin NuclearWarfare had already blocked and reverted this "person", but he kindly asked me to request this action, because he wants to see whether it is possible to block the "person"'s underlying IP.

Attentively, VASCO - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 16:44, 18 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence submitted by VascoAmaral
[edit]
Comments by accused parties
[edit]

See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users
[edit]
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
[edit]
Checkuser request – code letter: E  + B (Community ban/sanction evasion and ongoing serious pattern vandalism)
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by Vasco Amaral (talk) 16:44, 18 February 2010 (UTC) [reply]
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.
Report date April 12 2010, 21:42 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]
Evidence submitted by NuclearWarfare
[edit]

Standard MO;  Clerk endorsed for CU attention. NW (Talk) 21:42, 12 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties
[edit]

See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users
[edit]
Checkuser request – code letter: B  + E (Ongoing serious pattern vandalism and community ban/sanction evasion)
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by NW (Talk) 21:42, 12 April 2010 (UTC) [reply]

 Confirmed. I couldn't find any obvious sleepers. J.delanoygabsadds 19:55, 13 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.
Report date April 21 2010, 03:59 (UTC)
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]


Evidence submitted by VascoAmaral
[edit]

User:Pararubbas with a new sock, this one called User:Iklop890 (and list above is somewhat incomplete, he is nearing 30 socks now), please note similarity in name (again!) - see contributions here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Iklop890); no refs or links removal as of yet, but they will start, as well as links "destroyed" and turned into redirects, sentences "glued", etc, etc.

After more than two years since the sockmaster came, this "person" still has not written ONE summary or responded to ONE talkpage message. Checkuser is "mandatory" i reckon. Only to comply, really, i am 100% sure it is Pararubbas.

Attentively - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 03:59, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties
[edit]

See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users
[edit]

I have indef blocked Iklop890 (block log) as an obvious sock based on contributions and username pattern. A sleeper check would still be warranted and helpful. Thank you. — Satori Son 12:44, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
[edit]
Checkuser request – code letter: E  + B (Community ban/sanction evasion and ongoing serious pattern vandalism)
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by Vasco Amaral (talk) 03:59, 21 April 2010 (UTC) [reply]

 Clerk note: it's not necessary to list all the accounts, only the ones that haven't been subject to previous SPI cases, I've removed all but the most recent from the "suspected sockpuppets" section, let me know if you have any questions about this. Thank you very much for reporting this case, regards, SpitfireTally-ho! 10:43, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk endorsed pretty standard MO and account name. Endorsing for a sleeper check and to check the link, please. SpitfireTally-ho! 10:43, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No sleepers. --Deskana (talk) 22:14, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.
16 May 2010
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]
Evidence submitted by NuclearWarfare
[edit]

Standard MO; not much more to say. NW (Talk) 21:27, 16 May 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]
Checkuser request – code letter: B  + E (Ongoing serious pattern vandalism and community ban/sanction evasion)
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by NW (Talk) 21:27, 16 May 2010 (UTC) [reply]

 Confirmed. Couldn't find any sleepers. J.delanoygabsadds 02:15, 21 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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


Evidence submitted by Satori Son
[edit]

Av9309 was recently blocked as a suspected sock, and shortly thereafter Antoniov93 was created and began making substantially similar edits. Checkuser confirmation, and a check for other new accounts, would be appreciated. — Satori Son 13:39, 27 May 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]
Checkuser request – code letter: E (Community ban/sanction evasion )
Current status – Declined, the reason can be found below.    Requested by — Satori Son 13:39, 27 May 2010 (UTC) [reply]

 Looks like a duck to me. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:29, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]


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

Incredible, INCREDIBLE!!!!! Vandal User:Pararubbas has two (!!) accounts running simultaneously, User:Av93089 and User:098av ("contributions" here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Av93089 and here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/098av), also found this IP, which has been active in several years, so it has a certain level of "dynamism" (here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/92.0.145.142), and this one just for yesterday (see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/92.3.220.59).

P.S. This message was originally sent to user/admin Satori Son, who blocks and revert on sight (he knows this "person" as well as i do, has nearly 50 socks now, and endless IP addresses), but he tends to have large periods absent from Wikipedia, due to out-of-site schedules.

Attentively - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 01:42, 17 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence submitted by VascoAmaral
[edit]
Comments by accused parties
[edit]

See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users
[edit]
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
[edit]
Checkuser request – code letter: B  + E (Ongoing serious pattern vandalism and community ban/sanction evasion)
Current status – Declined, the reason can be found below.    Requested by Vasco Amaral (talk) 01:42, 17 June 2010 (UTC) [reply]

 Clerk declined Socks already blocked by Satori Son. Also, there has been no sleepers from the last checks. Elockid (Talk) 18:49, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

information Administrator note The IPs look a bit stale to block. So not blocking. Elockid (Talk) 18:49, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.
14 September 2010
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
[edit]
Evidence submitted by NuclearWarfare
[edit]

Standard behavioral evidence, Self- Clerk endorsed for checkuser attention to get a double confirmation. NW (Talk) 03:27, 14 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:
  •  Likely that the following is related to the above group:

Being that Pararubbas (talk · contribs) is  Stale there is no way to confirm a connection, but after looking at the logs I would say the connection to the above two groups is highly  Likely. Tiptoety talk 06:42, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All blocked and tagged. TNXMan 13:47, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
06 May 2011
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


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

With the everappreciated help of user/admin Satori Son, i (WP at large) have been dealing with User:Pararubbas, who will most certainly reach 100 socks before the year has ended (take a look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Suspected_Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Pararubbas and here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Pararubbas)...

The new account is called User:Port9307890 (see "contributions" here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Port9307890). The user's contributions are not vandalic per se (that is from the 20th account onwards, because he removed LINKS/REFS/whatever and glued all sentences in storyline in his "olden days") but: he has been warned several times to stop creating accounts and start talking to people, which he does not not even in summaries (zero of those and zero talkpage interventions!).

I lie about the last bit: he did talk to someone ONCE, precisely with Satori, asking why were his contributions removed - but speaking nothing of his antics! - and leaving an e-mail to be contacted (please see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Satori_Son/Archive_11#Deleted_pages). If possible, i would like to know if a checkuser is possible, to dig up (more) possible sleepers.

Attentively, keep up the good work - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 00:46, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
03 June 2011
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

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

Can someone have a look as to whether User:Jimhellie09 (contributions here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Jimhellie09) is User:Pararubbas please? Some of his M.O. is strikingly similar and, to my reply if the former was/is the latter, he ceased all reply and started undoing me after i undid him.

Help please! Attentively - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 11:52, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
[edit]

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
  • No significant diffs. Also, as i found out, he started adding refs and links instead of removing them. The only thing that stays the same is: he continues to write in appalling English, overlinking and writing club names without the dots (i.e. SC Braga instead of the correct S.C. Braga). This account, as the other 60+, operates almost exclusively in Portuguese football.

Most interesting still: i confronted him - are you User:Pararubbas? - he did not respond, undid me after i undid him, and ceased all activity after that. Strange, or not (must be opening another account) - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 16:14, 3 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Pararubbas/Archive&oldid=1143402860"