Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Marquis de la Eirron/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Marquis de la Eirron

Marquis de la Eirron (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

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

01 February 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


I know that you cannot comment on the IP I just added but I am putting it there for the record. The IP address has recently been released from a checkuser block related to Marquis and edits typical topics e.g. UK politicians who change parties[9]; politicians who commit crimes [10] and replacing edits made by previous socks e.g.[11] vs [12] Slp1 (talk) 19:50, 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]
  •  Confirmed with respect to the named user(s). no No comment with respect to IP address(es). - also;

- Alison ❤ 22:46, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

04 May 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Clearly not new to the site, and has one straight into categorising politicians by ethnicity and changing their photos. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:26, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Adding EndofAll2020, who has just added photos to long-standing Marquis de la Eirron target List of LGBT politicians in the United Kingdom. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:32, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

  • I noticed certain categories were missing from the relevant articles and some of the images had not been updated. Therefore I updated them, as similar editors, recently, had done the same thing. Indeed @User:Cordless Larry had also updated it, so I didn't think it would be a problem. HonkyDory64 (talk) 14:52, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I added the category to the politicians page as you had kindly added a link, which I followed, where he was described as such. So I wanted to thank you for your research. HonkyDory64 (talk) 15:02, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I do not see what is wrong with adding up to date information that is all sourced and appropriate. Especially when articles are out of date. It's not hurting anyone and its making wikipedia better. HonkyDory64 (talk) 17:36, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

IP User:193.60.159.61 (which has been mostly checkuser blocked for the past two years as a Marquis de la Eirron IP) was released for the latest block a couple of days ago. It has already started editing one of the usual targets [13].--Slp1 (talk) 16:48, 4 May 2020 (UTC) I will add User:EndofAll2020, created just after this SPI was created is continuing the same typical edits (changing pictures, focus on LBGT, ethnic minorities, tables etc). including readding material added by previous sock User:Emerginn e.g. [14] vs [15] Slp1 (talk) 17:30, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
  •  Confirmed:
-- Amanda (aka DQ) 21:46, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

31 May 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Rapid recreation of 4 articles previously created by socks of this person. e.g. [16] vs. [17]; [18] vs. [19]. The usual IP address has been blocked for 3 years (User:193.60.159.61 so I guess another one is being used. I am requesting a checkuser to see if any other socks are being used on this IP, and for the record. Slp1 (talk) 17:01, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As mentioned on User:RoySmith's page, I don't really have any doubt per Duck that this is the same person.
  • These lists of MPs who lost their seats are one of their primary recent interests (see the sockpuppet investigation for User: FollyAllAgain and User:Hollahoppings in August 2019, including [20]).
  • The chances that anybody different could or would recreate four of these identical tables and content in the space of 17 minutes is extremely small.
  • This person often uses their holidays or trips away to evade the IP blocks placed on their work/school. See the User:KoreanBill and User:183.96.203.13 (particular the latter's talkpage) for a trip to Korea this past fall. There are others too: see the 26 August 2011 sockpuppet investigation into User: 93.109.255.182 where they used an IP when they were in Cyprus, and there are also mentions in that and other SPIs about how they previously edited while on holiday in San Francisco and Las Vegas (as admitted by the editor themselves!!!). Slp1 (talk) 12:36, 2 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]

This case is being reviewed by RoySmith as part of the clerk training process. Please allow him to process the entire case (including admin actions against suspected socks) without interference, and pose any questions or concerns either on his talk page or on this page if more appropriate.

10 June 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

SallyWho registered on 5 June and has made 36 edits to 9 June. Their behaviour and evident knowledge of site procedures are not what you would expect of a genuine newbie. Their demands about the content and format of Churchill war ministry are suspicious and it is noticeable that this article has formerly been edited by the blocked Neveselbert and their proven sockpuppet AlbanGeller. It is possible that there may be some connection with the longstanding User:HarveyCarter syndrome which has been evident in several recent instances at Talk:Winston Churchill, the parent article. It is because of this possible alternative that I think the checkuser function should be deployed.

Sallywho restored an unsourced 47kB table to Churchill war ministry and then, after it was removed again, launched a series of vitriolic personal attacks in an astonishingly intense (for a newbie) campaign to have the table restored exactly as it used to be. For example, see this edit, complaining in the edit summary that they are "concerned by the vandalism that is going on on this page!" Immediately afterwards, they removed a different table, which has been in the article for several years, again shouting about vandalism and consensus in the edit summary. Since then, they have gone to ARV and ANI with obvious knowledge of and familiarity with the functions of each.

Additionally, some of their edits at other articles are questionable. On 6 June at David H. Rowe, there were two which constitute a potentially serious breach of WP:BLP. First, this addition categorises the subject as LGBT/gay. It is followed almost immediately by this statement that the subject is openly gay and cites a news report which does not itself confirm the statement. There is a chat facility within the news page where two of its correspondents asserted that the subject is gay. That is not a reliable source, especially as the news report is silent on the matter, and it breaches BLP as no reliable source has been cited. These two edits were quickly reverted by LuK3, who posted an "adding unreferenced controversial information about living persons" notice on SallyWho's talk page. SallyWho has subsequently removed that notice.

The above is a summary of the main concerns but please let me know if you need more information or additional edit records. Thank you. No Great Shaker (talk) 12:55, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

Dear whom ever comes across this investigation,

Please see this link: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Churchill_war_ministry#Moving_forward, which takes you to the Talk Page of the Churchill war ministry to see why the above editor is trying to report me. I should point out that No Great Shaker resigned from Wikipedia yesterday after being quite rude to other editors in the talk page of Churchill: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:No_Great_Shaker&diff=prev&oldid=961563035.

I readded the table, that No Great Shaker deleted in November, for the reason of not liking the table saying it was an ‘horrendous and unnecessary list’ meaning they deleted it because they didn’t like it: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Churchill_war_ministry&diff=927805078&oldid=927796948. Fortunately another editor called GraemeLeggett got involved and stopped No Great Shaker doing more reverts and also pointing out that all other articles about British ministries used that table: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard?markasread=192108292&markasreadwiki=enwiki#No_Great_Shaker_vandalism.

I don’t know who nevelsebert is but I’m not connected to their account at all, especially as I just checked and there is a Wikimedia user called Neveselbert: https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Neveselbert who also has another account called AlbanGeller who is currently editing on that site: https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:AlbanGeller. So me and him are not connected at all.

SallyWho (talk) 20:13, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly hope this mess is cleared up, as to whose socks are whose. GoodDay (talk) 03:41, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

15 July 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Successive edits at Second American Civil War and one at my talk page lead me to believe that this editor is by no means new to the site. Remembering the problems I had with User:SallyWho last month, I think the complaint made to me about my pending change revert is similar in tone. As Sallywho was found to be a sockpuppet of the Marquis, I think there is a probable connection here too. As I can't be 100% sure about that connection, I've requested the checkuser.

What I am certain about is that AquaBat is by no means a new editor. Their first edit as a member is obviously a follow-up to this one by the IP. The IP was twice reverted by Doug Weller and the member is responding to Doug by sounding off about alleged bias in a way that strongly suggests prior experience of the site. That impression deepens when you read this response to me after I rejected the edit at PCR and especially this message at my talk page, wherein a "new member" is talking with apparent authority about "what Wikipedia considers standard practice" and trying to invoke a suggested guideline called WP:NOTBUREAUCRACY which I have never seen before.

Three subsequent edits, here, here and here serve to reinforce my view that this account is a sockpuppet which is controlled by the Marquis or someone like them. Note also that Doug has rightly warned AquaBat about edit-warring.

Please let me know if you need more from me. Thank you. No Great Shaker (talk) 19:46, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your time, Amanda and AuH2ORepublican. I can't relate AquaBat to anything political so I may be barking up the wrong tree re SallyWho and the Marquis. It just seems very suspicious that I should again be shouted at by a supposedly new user who is clearly very knowledgeable about the site. The account has been quiet since Doug's warning so perhaps it might be best to set this case aside until such time as there is something more definite to go on. No Great Shaker (talk) 13:04, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

If these are Marquis sockpuppet, then the Marquis must have changed his interests dramatically of late. Prior Marquis sockpuppets usually can't resist articles about politicians, particularly those who are British, LGBT, ethnic minorities, party-switchers, or have been convicted of crimes. Are any of these two users' edits related to those areas? AuH2ORepublican (talk) 12:45, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

30 July 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


See below.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 16:32, 30 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]

 Confirmed to each other and the master:

 Blocked and tagged.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 16:32, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

23 September 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


The usual MO:

  • crimes by politicians [21];
  • tagging people as LGBT [22][23][24],
  • people with titles [25],
  • politicians who lose their seats [26].
  • people with Covid [27]

I have blocked a few obvious ducks in the 3 months since the last checkuser. This one fits the bill too, but I think it would be good for another check to find any sleepers etc. Slp1 (talk) 16:24, 23 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]
  •  Clerk endorsed - similar behavior and other types of similarities to the socks previously blocked by Slp1 and CU confirmed socks in the archives. Endorsing for the reasons specified by Slp1 (a sleeper check). Last CU was run in July and there are still some non-stale confirmed socks. There is a history of this sockmaster using sleeper accounts. Dreamy Jazz talk to me | my contributions 13:51, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Same range, but I'm not willing to mark anyone as a sleeper right now. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 18:06, 24 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    AmandaNP, other than the lack of sleepers, did you find anything specific about ‎Sillysilly44? Does "same range" mean the same thing as "likely"? -- RoySmith (talk) 17:51, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    So I will wonder away from the regular templates when I think it's better to not use them as it gets us thinking in very certain terms when the whole picture should be looked at. The same range means two things 1) It's not just the same ISP, as an ISP can have multiple ranges, but it's actually the same range which means they are in the same geographic area most times. It is better than someone who is not on the same range, but on the same ISP. 2) It means the UAs don't match in an understandable way, which means I can't say for sure. What that basically means, is add it with some solid behavioral evidence (like similar talking styles, 2-3 different topic overlaps, something related to timing, etc. though not just editing in one topic area). Basically, I'd target for at least 50% certainty in behavior alone for you to consider a block. Given Larry's comment below, it seems like you would have that. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 23:42, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    AmandaNP, OK, thanks for the deeper insight. Based on their basic behavior, I'm convinced they are not the new user they appear to be, and more specifically, with your finding, that they're a Marquis sock. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:13, 3 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I'd block this as a WP:DUCK case. I addition to the behavioural evidence above, making requests of other users to get around barriers to editing, such as ‎Sillysilly44 did with El C here, is something this user has started to do - see this. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:31, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

24 March 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


I have wondered about this account for a long time but it has now checked all the usual boxes (as well as a few others that I won't mention per beans)

Interest in:
Thanks again Oshwah for this super fast work. Very interesting. This has happened before because Marquis seems to travel a lot, though that might be hard at the moment. I guess a close look at the behaviour is required. I will delve a bit deeper to be sure.. Slp1 (talk) 17:24, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I've taken a look again, and I don't think the behaviour is similar enough for WP:DUCK- the coincidences are extraordinary but perhaps that is what they are. So I would like to withdraw this for now at least.Slp1 (talk) 13:44, 27 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]

24 July 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]
I blocked User:BrendaJones54 a few days ago as an obvious sock of Marquis de la Eirron. The usual type and intersection of edits: politicians and crime,[37] tables,[38], lists of women politicians [39], tagging LBGT politicians[40] politicians who have changed parties [41] interest in Korea[42] Also, way too knowledgeable for a new user [43] [44].
I noticed the IP this morning, editing from the same general geographic region, I believe, based on the range blocks etc. Also editing the same topics.[45] [46][47][48][49][50] Also compare BrendaJones [51] and the IP [52].

I know that checkusers don't comment on IPs, but since the editor seems back again possibly a sweep and a record of it is a good idea. Slp1 (talk) 15:26, 24 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]

12 August 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Both users have created messy articles of the people who died of COVID-19. User:CartwrightMoon and User:SegmentedTime2 have both acted as recently blocked user by the name of User:Ladislyzk77 who was indefinitely blocked permanently. I hope both suspected sockpuppeteers will be blocked indefinitely. Steam5 (talk) 06:41, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

Rdfffhm (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Cerrm09 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
  • CheckUser requested and endorsed by clerk - There's absolutely no doubt that CartwrightMoon and SegmentedTime2 are the same person, so I've blocked them. Comparing to Ladislyzk77 and BrendaJones54, I see some distinct similarities, but also some differences which make me unsure if they're actually Marquis. Asking for CU to confirm the connection before tagging and going off on a G5 spree. -- RoySmith (talk) 12:07, 12 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •  In progress - ~TNT (she/they • talk) 19:39, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Case still  In progress, just seen something funky ~TNT (she/they • talk) 20:02, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  •  On hold - Please do not process this SPI any further, will update shortly. Many thanks ~TNT (she/they • talk) 20:04, 16 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • These accounts  Blocked and tagged and Redirect arrow Global lock(s) requested:
  • These accounts not blocked as  Behavioural evidence needs evaluation:
UserBlue08 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
ExterningWiki (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
PlagueOfHeretics (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

29 August 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


A newly registered editor who's so far entirely focussed on the entries for politicians at List of deaths due to COVID-19 and who has strong opinions about the matter. This looks very similar to the behaviour of the last batch of socks discussed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Marquis de la Eirron/Archive#12 August 2021. Still, I'm not completely sure, so I'm requesting the opinion of Slp1 and RoySmith, who I imagine are more familiar with the case. – Uanfala (talk) 14:14, 29 August 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 September 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]
User:208.127.199.37 edits from the same known geographical area as Marquis de la Eirron (the Manchester UK area)[61].
User:TimeSprint acknowledged editing first as this IP before creating an account, days after the last sock User:1IfYouSaySo was blocked.[62].
Both the IP and TimeSprint edit Marquis’s usual targets: the current major interest is People who died of COVID (see previous socks[63][64][65] , but also lists, categories and British politicians and their photos. In the latter category is to restore an edit by confirmed sock user:BrendaJones54 Brenda [66] cf IP [67]. Another direct overlap is TimeSprint returning the same covid category as confirmed sock User:Ladislyzk77 cf [68] and [69]. I would like a sweep for socks as this sockpuppeteer usually creates multiple accounts. Slp1 (talk) 21:47, 24 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]

09 November 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Account has a singular focus on mass-restoring edits by previously confirmed socks (seemingly mostly CartwrightMoon - see EIA).

Requesting CheckUser as there is something of a history of other accounts being found during checks. firefly ( t · c ) 09:49, 9 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]

This case is being reviewed by Spicy 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.

19 April 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Five days ago, I blocked 78.147.85.85 as an obvious sock of Marquis de La Eirron. Same location, same predictable interests, including Covid, political who are committed of crimes, LBGT politicians. A couple of days later, User:ReinkoTu asks another editor to make an edit on List of LGBT politicians in the United Kingdom.[70], a pattern used this person in the past to avoid scrutiny.[71][72] But it didn't work!! ReinkoTu is too knowledgeable for a new user [73][74] and has the usual interests including LGBT politicians in the United Kingdom, [75][76]; British peers [77]

Since this person usually has multiple socks going at once, I am asking for a sweep for other socks. Slp1 (talk) 22:03, 19 April 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]

30 May 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Suspicious due to:

  1. Account created after last blocks in April.
  2. Editing the same COVID lists as previous socks: WIA with blocked sock Malig77
  3. As previous socks, creating stubs of politicians who died from COVID: Santos Adelmo Rivas, Juan José Martel, Sergio Jacobo Gutierrez Pikavoom Talk 15:00, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

Good catch. For what it is worth, I have absolutely no doubt that this is MdlEirron. They try to separate out their interests over different accounts but the overall picture is very clear. There is also the overlap in Caroline Henry: previous creation by confirmed sock Malig77 and unsuccessful AFC submission by HamiltonWest19, one of this batch [78] Slp1 (talk) 20:57, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

16 July 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Article Richard Beckford has been created twice by socks. Now a very similar/identical version has been published by the user EFMangs. – NJD-DE (talk) 14:49, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I saw that creation as well in the New Pages Feed. This account's overall editing pattern is also very similar to that of the blocked socks. ComplexRational (talk) 14:58, 16 July 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]

21 August 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Nearly brand new account, recreating a bunch of the masters articles, particularly, Neil Tirkey, which is a word for word recreation of Ladislyzk77's version, not to mention they joined just 10 days after the last sock block PRAXIDICAE🌈 23:33, 21 August 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]

23 August 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

as per usual, reinstating sock edits at List of COVID-19 deaths in Oceania, already reported for glock but requesting a sock check anyway given their proclivity for multiple accounts. (Also see significant ip socking in the linked article) PRAXIDICAE🌈 16:10, 23 August 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]

I have blocked this user as an obvious sock of MdlE. Today's edits reinsert previous edits by confirmed past sock User:Khoroslive e.g. [79] and [80] vs [81]

I missed the IP in early September,[82] but it reinstated all the edits of Khoroslive here[83]. I know you won't comment but noting this for the record. I am asking for a sweep as there is rarely just one sock floating around. Slp1 (talk) 17:05, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. For what it is worth, Developigng (and confirmed socks) is, for me, definitely Marquis de la Eirron. Politicians convicted of crimes, asking others to proxy edit, LGBT politicians, covid deaths etc etc. Not sure that it makes a practical difference but in case it does.... --Slp1 (talk) 18:54, 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]

22 January 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

New editor who's cropped up at long-term Marquis de la Eirron target List of ethnic minority politicians in the United Kingdom. Same focus on Paul Scully as previous sock JimmyJoe87, plus similarities in edit summary style. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:51, 22 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]

31 January 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

The two suspected users have created non-notable people including some politicians from India. Despite both accounts are globally locked and already blocked. Both User:Malig77 and User:RioCap1 act as the original sockpuppeteer Marquis de la Eirron. Can someone perform the checkuser if Malig77 and RioCap1 both act as Marquis de la Eirron? Thank you in advance. 2001:569:74E3:4000:CD55:C2DE:330E:182D (talk) 23:29, 31 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]

16 February 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

The suspected IP user have continous make a large edit of people died of COVID-19. The IP user 81.102.16.11 is from Manchester, England, UK and User:Marquis de la Eirron is also from Manchester, England, UK. The IP user from Manchester, England User:81.102.16.11 acts as sockpuppeteer Marquis de la Eirron. Can someone perform the checkuser if User:81.102.16.11 act as Marquis de la Eirron? Thank you in advance. 2001:569:74E3:4000:75BA:B932:F8E7:1991 (talk) 01:46, 16 February 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]

23 April 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

political edits, inmcluding repeatedly adding an LGBT category to Tom Ross (politician) without source. diff, diff. See Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Marquis de la Eirron DuncanHill (talk) 13:47, 23 April 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]

1 May 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

The suspected registered user have continously creadted and make a large edit of people died of COVID-19. The registered user named User:AbeOska act as User:Marquis de la Eirron. Can someone perform the checkuser if User:AbeOska act as Marquis de la Eirron? Thank you in advance. 2001:569:74E3:4000:3566:761B:5177:6369 (talk) 23:03, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

I check User:AbeOska's contributions and User:AbeOska has created articles of people who died of COVID-19 including Indian politicians. Please block User:AbeOska who act as User:Marquis de la Eirron, it's urgent. 50.98.216.235 (talk) 09:27, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

27 May 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

I would have blocked straightway but a sweep for socks is often fruitful. The usual pattern: switching pictures[84], politicians who committed crimes [85] Lgbt politicians [86][87] Slp1 (talk) 23:46, 27 May 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]

18 August 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Editing in a similar behavior as they were when previously blocked. Last 3 month block expired in July, and their editing has continued since then. 2601:1C0:4401:F60:D587:449F:646D:BACC (talk) 17:37, 18 August 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 September 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Making similar edits as previous sock, Grey Gowrie, Rubina Saigol, Barthélémy Attisso etc, interested in politicians and COVID-19. Re-created Haru Rajwar (as Hare Rajwar) a previously deleted article created by sockmaster. Sohom (talk) 11:49, 27 September 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]

3 December 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

An IP has repeatedly add too much people who died of COVID-19 in the List of deaths due to COVID-19. The IP 114.34.184.219 has evade a block and act as the original sockpuppeteer Marquis de la Eirron. I put the IP 114.34.184.219 in the AIV. 2001:569:74E3:4000:D8C7:7204:41F7:BEF2 (talk) 02:13, 4 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]
  •  Additional information needed - In order to facilitate and expedite your request, please provide diffs to support your case. Please give two or more diffs meeting the following format:
  1. At least one diff is from the sockmaster (or an account already blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet of the sockmaster), showing the behaviour characteristic of the sockmaster.
  2. At least one diff per suspected sockpuppet, showing the suspected sockpuppet emulating the behaviour of the sockmaster given in the first diff.
  3. In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided. Around one sentence is enough for this. Vanjagenije (talk) 13:06, 4 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

20 December 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Huge overlap in articles, and same kind of edits. E.g. they deliberately misspelled names at an article[88] and then created the resulting redlinks: at the same article, previous sock Dellington1 had done the same with the same name (but changed to a different wrong name)[89]. This also follows a similar Dellington1 edit (for more of the same, see here). Considering the subtle and not so suble vandalism, please revert or G5 delete all their edits. Fram (talk) 16:21, 20 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]

17 January 2024

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Recreating the deleted creations of the sockmaster, such as Arif Atilla Osmançelebioğlu and Francisco Datol Jr.. SailingInABathTub ~~🛁~~ 14:09, 17 January 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]

16 February 2024

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Matches the area of interest, in that, they're focused on government officials that pass WP:NPOL but died of complications from COVID-19. Writing and style matches up with the deleted articles from recent socks. They also recreated 3 articles that had previously been G5 deleted (Mikhail Beskhmelnitsyn, Arnaldo de Sá, and Süleyman Gazi Erçel). Hey man im josh (talk) 17:24, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Looking at the edits I would say very likely, close to a duck. For what it is worth for the checkuser that I blocked User:80.169.148.141 as an obvious sock. It seems like there was a trip to London for the weekend for a hotel stay? The timing coincides with when HelpmenLondon started editing. A sweep for other socks might be good. --Slp1 (talk) 18:16, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have created articles of individuals who are notable and have their own pages on other wikipedia pages whether that be the Russian, French or Portuguese. All of my edits are sourced and accurate. Please don't delete them as I work really hard on these articles so that they are correct and they are important to wikipedia for knowledge purposes. 14 years ago an account called the Marquis de la Eirron was blocked because a young editor didn't understand copyright for images and adding sources for content, but since then they have. Many of those who blocked that editor 14 years ago either later got blocked themselves or no longer edit.

What can I do to get unbanned as to say that someone cannot edit wikipedia for the rest of their life is not fair, especially when all of the edits, relating to the Marquis account, have been accurate and correct for many, many years, indeed you can check the previous blocked accounts so that you can see for yourself. HelpMenLondon (talk) 19:34, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just to be clear @HelpMenLondon, you're confirming that you're Marquis de la Eirron? Hey man im josh (talk) 20:32, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Hi..You have been told before what you have to do. See User_talk:183.96.203.13. Follow instructions at WP:CBAN and WP:OFFER. No edits for at least six months. No socks, nothing. And then request unbanning. If you can forgo editing for a year, I might even support. What gives me pause, however, it is not true that your edits have been correct for years. Quite often you have claimed someone died of Covid when the sources don't support it. Slp1 (talk) 20:37, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

19 September 2024

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

WP:DUCK based on what I've come across in the past while doing NPP work. Matches up pretty much exactly with them based on the past behaviour and areas of interest. All 13 of the articles this user has created were previously created by socks of Marquis. Hey man im josh (talk) 13:16, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Apparently hoping to pass as uninvolved editor User:DotCoder this time. Wikishovel (talk) 10:35, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And has now blanked this SPI nine times (so far), a sure sign of innocence. Wikishovel (talk) 10:44, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

05 November 2024

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

New account exhibiting remarkably similar behaviour to previous Marquis socks at Lists of ethnic minority politicians in the United Kingdom, including adding Boris Johnson to the list and statistics not supported by the source cited. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:20, 5 November 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]

10 November 2024

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Looks like a WP:DUCK case, with new account restoring edits of last sock to edit List of LGBT politicians in the United Kingdom, but past experience suggests a check for sleepers would be worthwhile. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:47, 10 November 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]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Marquis_de_la_Eirron/Archive&oldid=1257229125"