Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Aimar120

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Aimar120

Suspected sockpuppeteer

Aimar120 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Report submission by

Enric Naval (talk) 11:05, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence

He first vandalized my user page using 220.239.82.136, doing ten edits on a row [1], then Aimar 120 did 2 more similar edits, starting 5 minutes afther the last IP edit [2]. His user page is built copying stuff from my user page [3], the current version lists me on his friend list, with my name striken, and his last addition was listing himself as an adpotee of mine [4]. That IP account has multiple vandalising of user pages, and was warned by User:Enigmaman until he got blocked for 7 days (he made the block warning, but not the block itself since he is not an admin).

The next day The.Amazing.Critical.Critic was created, and it proceeded to vandalize several user pages (the same type of vandalism as Aimar120), being warned and reverted by Enigmaman. He complained on Enigmaman page about his edits to other user pages being reverted (!) [5], and was later blocked. One of his edits was replacing a user page with an insult towards the user [6]. Seeing his later actions and the mail from Aimar120, I no longer believe he was a sock. Also, he's been undef blocked by unrelated reason.

After the block, an IP made posted on Enigman pages "meh, there's always proxies. ^_^" [7] unencyclopaedic tone bordering on adding nonsense [8]

Depor23 has a page strinkly similar to Aimar120's page, has also vandalized user pages.

Ídem with Depaultivo. His page creation is similar to the one from Aimar120 [9], compare with [10] + [11] from Aimar120. both creations were done with 5 days of difference.

Depaultivo also vandalized my user page [12], and also tried to alter my "i will not spam talk pages" list, like Aimar120 did unsuccessfully because of bad html syntax (tried to make font way bigger and failed) [13]. Previously, a few minutes before, the his IP sock tried to put a "cocky" template on my user page [14], and finally decided to change it for "offline" [15], which the same template used right now on Aimar120's user page.

Depaultivo and Depor23 also add the same identical POV text on Alfarnate, here by Depor23 [16], another one by Depaultivo [17], and then they add the POV tag on it. I reverted some of his edits, when I checke dhis contributions after him vandalizing my user page This account has been blocked for 7 days.

Depaultivo added the same wikidragon userbox as Aimar120 [18]

121.218.50.234 vandalized my user page [19] an hour after Aimar120 did[20]. after my labelling, it kept vandalizing Enigmaman's user page WARNING! Mind your own business, I've been kicked out of better places than this!! Happy Easter! I hope you choke on an egg!! [21] [22] [23] and Dycerdag's user page [24] and articles [25] (see his contributions). I labelled him as a posible sock of Aimar120, and he got blocked for 2 days.

User:John Reaves is also listed as a friend, and his user page has also been vandalised repeatedly by IPs, in this case the only contribution of 71.127.14.115 which consisted of labelling him (ironically) a sockpupeteer [26], another lone contribution from 195.194.162.49 [27] and 74.192.215.53 [28]. Page had never been vandalized before.

For proof of his vandalism and bragging of vandalism of user pages, Aimar120 user page has a warnign box saying "If you know aimar, you'd know for hell sure to never un-edit a page he has taken time to edit. Looks over at Enrico" [29]

Aimar120 names Depaultivo as his sheriff [30].

Dycedarg use page has been repeatedly vandalized by IPs. No diffs because it's not relevant and i'm tired of diffing, but I suspect it's Aimar120 too. 98.226.5.166 vandalized both Dycedarg page and Enigmaman page about the same days, that's the connection from Dycedarg's user page edits to Enigmaman's user page edits (see contributions).

Aimar120 lists me as his adopter [31], and so does Depaultivo [32], within several minuts of difference. He also listed himself as my adoptee on my user page

Also, Aimar talks to himself using Depaultivo (!)[33], talking about his coding skills, so maybe he is a friend of him, and not just a sock account.

I have labelled already two IPs that I suspect were used by Aimar120 as his IPsocks (mentioned already).

Aimar120 seems to have fun with my user page [34].

Adenda: well, doh, Depaultivo is certainly making my case for socketpuppetry really easy [35] and [36]. And he claims to change adoption from me to enigmaman [37], so now he is harassing another user. He also removs warnings [38]. He also tried to label himself as a wikitroll [39] before going for wikidragon [40]. He also puts his warnings on his user page (bragging rights just like Aimar120?) [41].

Comments

Multiple puppets, only vandalism contributions, shows no regret, brags about vandalising other user pages, talks on a user talk page about using open proxies on one IP after after a different IP was blocked by that user for similar behaviour. Shows no sign of regrets. IP blocks don't stop his edits. Harasses other editors with repeated vandalism. Makes up conversations and relationships between his different accounts as if they were different persons (maybe he has friends using that account? maybe a mate from his school?)

I didn't notify the IPs that had only one contribution, since they will probably never be used again (probably they are a dinamic IP).

Plenty of evidence. Find some way to block him. Any later comebacks will be reported by me to admins inmediately for block based on this evidence.

Also, he's not gracious. Any possible fun he could give is shadowed by his repetiviness, lack of originality and pretensions of being fun and pathetics attempts to claim having friends, obviously unconsciounsly caused by his evident lack of RL and of RL friends, which are probably caused by his pathetic humour, throwing him into a feedback cycle that compels him to edit wikipedia's article as way to scape reality. Also, again, you are not funny, drop the lameness with my user page already. --Enric Naval (talk) 11:05, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Aimar120 mailed me after reading this. He claimed that Depaultivo is his brother and that he didn't make many of the IP edits except the ones from 220.239.82.136. I'm going to answer him that I don't believe he didn't do the IP edits and that I will retire measures and requests for blocks as soon as he promises here that neither him nor his brother will vandalize wikipedia for fun again. Breaking of that promise will make me ask admins to indef block him and his brothers for only-vandalism accounts. --Enric Naval (talk) 01:39, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

sockmaster denies being The.Amazing.Critical.Critic. Checkuser could be necessary, altought the account is already blocked.

He claims also that Depor23 is his earlier brother's account. Seeing that it was created on August 2006 and doesn't appear to have been used for vandalism, I have striken it out --Enric Naval (talk) 02:08, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, he appears to have decided not to stop vandalizing [42].

I'm asking for:

Depaultivo: indef block for alternative account used only for vandalism
Depor23: a warning to not let his brother vandalize wikipedia and not use alternative accounts for vandalizing
Aimar120: depending on his behaviour. If he continues vandalizing, I ask for indef block since he doesn't appear to intend to contribute in a contructive way to wikipedia

Further socks

Depaultivo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) (friend)
{{user5|1=121.218.50.234}}
220.239.82.136 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) (7 days block for vandalism)
{{user5|1=71.127.14.11}}
{{user5|1=74.192.215.53}}
Enric=Homo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) (already indef blocked)

- Why don't we just block all the dark blue IPs for 120 hours. This seems like they might be trying to create more account with those IPs. They need to see WP:SOCK and stop creating extra accounts intentionally. If they just forgot to log in its okay, but constantly trying to create extra accounts is not. Thier behavior is consider cheating.--Freewayguy (Webmail) 04:13, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Block Airmar and Depaultive for 80 hours (both or one of them bas on your preference.) They need to see WP:SOCK and the rule is as simple as one person can only make one user account. No extra account, and fair is fair-that type of behavior is cheating by faking to be another identity.--Freewayguy (Webmail) 04:22, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Block 220.239.82.136 some 120 hours for account creation, so they are forced to use their main accounts to edit, and can't create more throw-away accounts. It seems that most of the time they are forced to use that IP for whatever the reason.

Depaultivo is an alternative account for vandalising without compromising the reputation of his main account, where he makes useful contributions to wikipedia. Knowing this, it probably needs undef block, since he can keep editing on his main account.

Aimar has not been used for vandalizing since the case opening, so I say to let it be in case he decides to make good edits one day. I don't want to be too harsh and WP:BITE a newcomer, even if he started like this. If he vandalizes again, I'll report him to AIV, point at this case, and ask for a long block for reincidence, depending on the gravity of the vandalism. He's quite young, so I'd rather give him the opportunity of changing ways as he grows up and matures --Enric Naval (talk) 08:51, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can an admin look at this please? Thanks, Enigma ^message 06:13, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear, where have the admins gone? Maybe they're off un-editing a certain someones admin-like behaviour -> User: Aimar120 —Preceding comment was added at 11:21, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He's doing it again from this IP [43] and this one [44]. I change my request to ban of Aimar120, since it doesn't seem like he has any intention to stop vandalizing --Enric Naval (talk) 13:45, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't the one who edited that on your user page last night enric -.-' You're too paranoid. - Aimar120 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aimar120 (talk • contribs) 23:36, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wish to point that the IP that vandalized my user page used exactly the same type of humor and edits that Aimar120 has used other times. --Enric Naval (talk) 02:29, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

how many ips do you think i have?? Im on a static ip plan, so not even modem resets give me new ip addresses :(

Checkuser request check if it's true that Aimar120 and Deapultivo have only ever edited from 220.239.82.136, as they claim, to assert if they kept vandalizing form IPs after opening of case --Enric Naval (talk) 00:08, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I can assure you that Aimar120 and I have not vandalised on wikipedia since the opening of this case. --Depaultivo —Preceding comment was added at 08:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- Well, the checkuser is intended to prove your innocence so that there are no doubts left and the case can be closed as stalled. This was also about the last thing left to do, and it would have been done anyways --Enric Naval (talk) 12:35, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

The evidence above clearly demonstrates an overlapping area of interest (with, I hasten to add, malicious intent), a common preoccupation with a single editor, and evidence of "logging in-and-out". Confirmed that Aimar120 = Depaultivo, No comment with respect to IP address(es). Anthøny 15:27, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]