Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mmbmmmbm/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Mmbmmmbm

Mmbmmmbm (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
04 May 2011[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

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

Rirunmot has been blocked on fr.wiki and it.wiki as a sock of Mmbmmmbm, see [1] and fr:Wikipédia:Vandalisme de longue durée/Mmbmmmbm. He appears to have used 88.254.131.185 as a sock once, compare his wording [2] with the IP's [3].

Rirunmot's writing style is similar to the style of other Mmbmmmbm socks. You can see this in pretty much anything in Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Mmbmmmbm, but compare Rirunmot's [4] for example with [5] or [6]: The English is inexperienced, there are occasional extra spaces between words and punctuation, a lot of line breaks, and above all there is an obsession with Boubaker polynomials (deleted three times; Rirunmot has recently started a DRV here). Rirunmot has invested a lot of effort into Boubaker polynomials: His user space contains copies of the recently recreated and redeleted French and Italian articles on Boubaker polynomials at User:Rirunmot/User:Rirunmot/subpage11, User:Rirunmot/User:Rirunmot/subpage10, as well as English versions that he's been adding references to at User:Rirunmot/User:Rirunmot/sandbox and User:Rirunmot/User:Rirunmot/subpage6. He has also been canvassing for support for Boubaker polynomials, see [7], [8], [9].

I mention User:41.224.107.74 as a possible sock because his lone edit was to create Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Boubaker polynomials, a request to recreate a deleted version of Boubaker polynomials. The IP doesn't appear to have been used before, but the idea that an innocent user would just happen to request the creation of a controversial deleted article seems absurd to me.

I am not sure a checkuser would show anything, as Mmbmmmbm seems to use many different IPs. (Again, see the French article on his vandalism.) In addition, at the top of his talk page, Rirunmot has an email confirmation notice that gives the IP 71.81.201.98, which Mmbmmmbm doesn't seem to have used before. Therefore I am not requesting checkuser. Ozob (talk) 11:38, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Added: I am adding Frerejak (talk · contribs) to the above list. After being created in 2009 and making a grand total of two edits, suddenly he has reappeared at the Boubaker polynomials DRV. See Special:Contributions/Frerejak. Ozob (talk) 11:42, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have added User:Dariocuccio, a new user all of whose edits are related to the restoration of the Boubaker polynomials article. Sławomir Biały (talk) 11:48, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's worth noting that fr:Utilisateur:Dariocuccio has been blocked as a sock of Mmbmmmbm. Ozob (talk) 11:51, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have added User:Darkomeko (another spa voting keep in the DRV) after the established user User:Darkoneko complained on the DRV about the similarity of names. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:53, 4 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]

 Confirmed that Mmbmmmbm (talk · contribs) & Dariocuccio (talk · contribs) are the same. Global lock request made. Pink clock Awaiting administrative action for whoever gets there first. -- DQ (t) (e) 18:22, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All globally locked. Ruslik_Zero 18:34, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have blocked here locally due to the fact that global locks do not autoblock IPs. --Bsadowski1 00:05, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
08 May 2011[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


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

Vituzzu (talk) 22:34, 8 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]

Already globally locked, although Canddide (talk · contribs) seems to be a match as well. TNXMan 22:49, 8 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • information Administrator note I've blocked Canddide. And if an account is globally locked, then it doesn't need to be blocked, right? — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 00:59, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Correct. TNXMan 11:22, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
06 June 2011[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


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

His campaign for Boubaker polynomials continues. This latest account uses makes the same accusations of racism; uses the same inconsistent formatting, unusual spaces next to punctuation, and poor English; compare his [10] to the known sock's [11]. He's canvassing for support just like he did before from the same people he did before [12] [13] [14]. He even makes his user pages look alike [15].

This particular account seems to be active only on en, so no global lock will be needed (yet?). Ozob (talk) 10:51, 6 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]

 Clerk declined checkuser request as unnecessary. This edit here made by a previously blocked sock is almost identical in nature to this edit. Additionally, the account displays similar editing patterns to the other sock accounts already blocked. Seems like the duck test passes here to me. Steven Zhang The clock is ticking.... 11:06, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

06 June 2011[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


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

This new sock has the same style as always, complete with accusations of racism [16]. I think checkuser would confirm that he's using the same IPs as the recently blocked sock User:Techala, but I think the style alone is sufficient confirmation. And who the heck creates an account and makes their very first edit an announcement that they're busy? [17] Ozob (talk) 20:56, 6 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]
07 June 2011[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


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

This is not as clear as the others, and I think a checkuser may be necessary. This user created a user page [18], giving himself a barnstar and links to a bunch of non-existent subpages. Then he went to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics#Notability of Boubaker polynomials?. But this time instead of accusing others of being racist towards Arabs, he acted as if he were racist against Arabs himself [19] [20].

It looks to me like he's attempting reverse psychology. I also think he's learning from my SPI reports here, as I've repeatedly mentioned his poor English, inconsistent formatting, boilerplate userpages, and accusations of racism; with this account he's trying to make all of those less obvious. But there's also the possibility that I'm just wrong, and that there's a new user (who needs a short-term block for those above posts) who just happens to have the same interests as a well-known sockmaster. Ozob (talk) 10:45, 7 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]

 Confirmed. TNXMan 11:28, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: the account has been blocked and tagged. Best, SpitfireTally-ho! 11:49, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

01 December 2011[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

See contribs and related history. -- DQ (t) (e) 00:11, 1 December 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]
01 July 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Disruptive continuation of M. Boubaker's tireless attempt to recreate the thrice deleted article Boubaker polynomials. For the latest evidence, see the edit history of Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Boubaker_polynomials, in which a number of new accounts have suddenly sprung into existence to defend the creation of the article. An extensive chronicle of this user's attempt to disrupt Wikipedia with his own research is documented at fr:Wikipédia:Vandalisme_de_longue_durée/Mmbmmmbm. Sławomir Biały (talk) 19:12, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also note the global block of this user and some of his older socks at meta:Steward_requests/Global/2011-05#Global_lock.2Funlock_for_Mmbmmmbm_.26_group. Sławomir Biały (talk) 19:34, 1 July 2013 (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: Obvious sock is obvious. Also blocked 197.0.156.4 one year as an open proxy. The other IP is no longer functioning but was likely an open proxy. Closing. Dennis Brown | 2¢ | WER 00:46, 2 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
22 August 2013[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Duck. This is standard operation procedure for Mmbmmmbm: Self-promotion of the non-notable Boubaker polynomials. Diffs: [21] [22] [23] Ozob (talk) 02:33, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also recreation of Lattice Compatibility Theory ([24]) after deletion discussion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lattice Compatibility Theory. Sławomir Biały (talk) 12:50, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The IP address 88.250.127.208 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) seems to be suspiciously leaping to the aid of the new account as well. Sławomir Biały (talk) 13:06, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I also found 62.29.74.82 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), who has also been edit warring on the side of the new account at LCT. The sock accounts and IP addresses are clearly being disruptive there. Sławomir Biały (talk) 13:15, 23 August 2013 (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]

Uskudargideriken and 88.250.127.208 are DUCKs, and I have blocked them. 62.29.74.82 looks very likely, but with only one edit it is impossible to be sure. In view of the history of this editor's sockpuppetry, a checkuser for sleepers would be helpful. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:32, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Self-endorsed by clerk for checkuser attention for a sleeper check due to past history. CUs, look at contribs of master if you are unfamiliar with history. Rschen7754 21:10, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Completed - No sleepers. Tiptoety talk 04:41, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nothing more to do. Rschen7754 04:45, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Mmbmmmbm/Archive&oldid=1079618871"