Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PaullyMatthews

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

PaullyMatthews

PaullyMatthews (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Populated account categories: confirmed · suspected

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


12 May 2024[edit]

– This SPI case is closed and will be archived shortly by an SPI clerk or checkuser.

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

The usual.  Looks like a duck to me. I can send the evidence via e-mail if needed. — Kaalakaa (talk) 15:13, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Added Inscribeofscirbe. Same deal. Sinclairian (talk) 16:02, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Adding BanuKalabi. Despite the slightly different username pattern, they're repeating essentially the same edits as Adoptioncircle, a previous sock: compare [1] and [2] at Usama ibn Zayd, and compare [3] with [4] & [5] at Zayd ibn Haritha al-Kalbi. PS: I note that Compaionicbiography has also edited Zayd ibn Haritha al-Kalbi, which was edited by at least two other socks before this (Bigorophsy and Adoptioncircle). R Prazeres (talk) 16:53, 12 May 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]

14 May 2024[edit]

– This SPI case is closed and will be archived shortly by an SPI clerk or checkuser.

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

That was fast, wasn't it? Right off the bat the name tipped me off, so I went to previous sockpuppets – sure enough, found significant overlap with a previous sock's edits to Ikrima ibn Amr. (See [6] and [7]). Requesting CU, since we know how this goes. Sinclairian (talk) 15:40, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brand spanking new account just dropped. I will admit I'm only going off the name, since "Scholarlyaccount" is very similar to several other confirmed sockpuppets' naming conventions. Still, it's only made one edit as of writing and with only a naming pattern to in my corner, I'm a bit iffy throwing my weight behind an explicit accusation just yet. I'm going to keep it here for prosperity's sake. Sinclairian (talk) 15:49, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Added Surahenabler. Same deal. See [8] vs. [9]. Sinclairian (talk) 17:02, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Added Inspitemie. [10] and [11]. Further additions won't receive a comment like this – I feel the evidence is fairly obvious. Sinclairian (talk) 17:20, 14 May 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]

15 May 2024[edit]

– This SPI case is closed and will be archived shortly by an SPI clerk or checkuser.

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

This one seems to have evaded previous CUs I guess(?), but today's edits look very much like a WP:DUCK of the usual suspect. Examples:

R Prazeres (talk) 17:10, 15 May 2024 (UTC) R Prazeres (talk) 17:10, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This recent reply, by an editor who would have no previous interaction with me if they weren't a sock, is reminiscent of previous personal attacks (e.g. [24]). R Prazeres (talk) 16:22, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

I'd seen this user around previously, but avoided reporting them because of the account age. If this user is indeed another sock, would it not have been caught in any of the CUs that have been done since it was created? Sinclairian (talk) 18:18, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That was my first thought and question too. I'm not familiar with everything CU can do, I'm not sure if it's merely a matter of using a different device to change your IP, etc. The behavioural evidence is what I think to be most relevant here, but I am curious to see what CU will turn up. R Prazeres (talk) 20:19, 15 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Exact same edit with exact same obscure WP:VER citation [25] [26]. Looks like a sock to me, can all their edits please get rolled back? --HistoryofIran (talk) 18:22, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

HistoryofIran's diffs [27] [28] more or less clinch the matter. Contrib tags and edsum style are also a complete match (e.g. [29][30]). It's them alright. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 19:25, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's trivial, but if anyone wants to see a fun tidbit of petty intellectual dishonesty, look no further than this. R Prazeres (talk) 19:42, 16 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
They're continuing to make mass edits and essentially edit-warring over reverted edits (e.g. at Battle of Hunayn). R Prazeres (talk) 19:36, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yup... HistoryofIran (talk) 23:10, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A kind thank you to Izno for blocking this sock and also for reverting everything (the number of edits had ballooned even more today, wow). R Prazeres (talk) 18:04, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/PaullyMatthews&oldid=1224602733"