– This SPI case is open.

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

Suspected sockpuppets

• Buhuhu (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Hobartimus (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Baxter9 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

• User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

I noticed edit of newly formed account User:Buhuhu and I partially reverted it, but my edit was then instantly reverted by User:Nmate and, therefore, I suspect that User:Buhuhu is an sockpuppet of User:Nmate. Behavior of User:Nmate looked suspicious to me in the past too and edits of this account are pretty much corresponding with edits of two other accounts (User:Hobartimus and User:Baxter9). All these accounts are helping each other in revert warring in various articles and here is an concrete example: Account User:Baxter9 was not active from 23 August 2010 to 10 March 2011 and in that date (10 March 2011) it was activated to help User:Hobartimus in his revert warring with User:Iaaasi: [1], [2]. Also, it is evident that User:Nmate and User:Hobartimus are often editing same articles and helping one another in revert warring, for example here: [3]. Also, knowing that all these accounts are describing themselves as Hungarian, it is very strange that most of their edits are related to Slovakia and not to Hungary: [4], [5], [6] (most edits of User:Hobartimus are not related to Slovakia, but Slovakia-related subjects are highly positioned in his edit count and his first edit was in Slovakization article: [7]). Finally, they all might be sockpuppets of banned User:VinceB who was blocked because of socpuppetry in 4 April 2007 and one of last articles that he edited was Slovakization article, which is also first article edited by User:Hobartimus. Having in mind fact that User:VinceB was blocked because of sockpuppetry in 4 April 2007 and that all these accounts having similar pattern of behavior like user User:VinceB and that all of them were created after User:VinceB was blocked (Hobartimus - 27 May 2007, Nmate - 25 September 2007, Baxter9 - 13 May 2007) there should be socpuppetry investigation about this case. I am surprised that nobody conducted this investigation after original account of User:VinceB was blocked. PANONIAN 12:18, 11 July 2011 (UTC) PANONIAN 12:18, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing, user:Buhuhu posted a comment on my talk page claiming that he is in fact user:Iaaasi and "one of Nmate's biggest opponents": [8]. However, I do not think that this is an evidence that user:Buhuhu is sockpuppet of user:Iaaasi and not sockpuppet of user:Nmate. Perhaps user:Buhuhu only wants to point this investigation into wrong direction and to prevent that his connection with user:Nmate is revealed. PANONIAN 14:10, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Here is another comment of user:Buhuhu on my talk page: "Logic isn't your strongest point, isn't it? You don't need to be a genius to realize that any of accounts listed by you isn't a sock of Nmate": [9] - I believe that this is a further evidence that this investigation is needed. If user:Buhuhu is an new user or sockpuppet of user:Iaaasi, how he could know that "any of accounts listed by me isn't a sock of Nmate"? I mean, he can know that he is not a sock (assuming that he really isn't), but how he could know that other listed accounts are not socks of Nmate? PANONIAN 14:30, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Because my IQ is not negative. You just have to compare the edit histories, they are more than eloquent. I think I start to understand why Nmate hates you (Buhuhu (talk) 14:46, 11 July 2011 (UTC))[reply]

Really funny. And who say that user:Nmate hates me? I think that only user:Nmate can answer what he thinks about other users. Or we have an confirmation of sockpuppetry here? Anyway, dear Buhuhu, you did admitted that you are indeed sockpuppet and we only have to see who is your sockpuppet master. And yes, I did compared edit histories and I concluded that there is correlation between them, especially in the cases where revert warring is included and where these accounts helping one another in revert warring. PANONIAN 14:53, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know neither of the persons/users mentioned by user PANONIAN (in real life). Of course as it was mentioned before, sometimes we edited the same articles (btw, about these "combined edits": I could tell the same about the users who made their remarks here...and all of them were under checkuser investigation filled out by user Nmate, therefore this action seems to be a vendetta to me... and of course if I would check the edit histories I would notice that these persons voted many times in the same cases -against each other...). Feel free to compare my IP address with these Hungarian users. I live in Budapest, Hungary, it will start with 89.???.2?3.???--B@xter⁹ 16:41, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

And your statement [10] that "their edits are related to Slovakia and not to Hungary"is oncorretc: György Szondy (Hungarian hero) Siege of Szigetvár, (Hungarian battle) Ignaz Semmelweis, (Hungarian Physician) Gabriel Bethlen (Hungarian prince), Battle of Mohács (Hungarian battle), Wolfgang von Kempelen (Hungarian inventor), Elizabeth Báthory (Hungarian countess) ,Franz Liszt (Hungarian composer), Joseph Petzval (Hungarian inventor), Ányos Jedlik (Hungarian inventor) etc.etc. is connected to Hungary not to Slovakia. I can only confirm your "accusation" in the case of article Slovakization and Slovaks, which is in deed connected to Slovakia.--B@xter⁹ 16:57, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Vendetta? Well, I do not remember being under "checkuser investigation filled out by user Nmate" (or there was one of which I was not aware of?). I opened this request because of suspicious revert warring that involved user:Nmate and user:Buhuhu and later one actually admitted that he is indeed sockpuppet. Nevertheless, you was also involved in such suspicious revert warring in some articles and I have legitimate right to ask for investigation of this issue and if you are not an sockpuppet or sockpuppet master then you have nothing to afraid of - your IP will not be same as IP of other mentioned users and you will not have any consequences. As for your edits, I simply referred to your entire edit count: [11] It is clear that most of your edits occurred in articles about Slovakization and Slovaks, much more than in any other article, and, as I said, Slovakization was very first article that User:Hobartimus edited and Slovakia-related subjects are also favorite subjects of user:Nmate. It is strange that 3 Hungarian users share same interest about Slovakia. PANONIAN 17:17, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Some time ago I wanted to make a similar report but but I guess user Panonian beat me to it :). I also believe that there is some connection here. There is definitely something wrong here because some of the mentioned users work to synchronized, like a team. I also suspect that user:Nmate`s account was taken over by somebody else because this person learned to speak advanced English in a matter of days. I also saw some examples where he could`t have a simple conversation. Links for bad English: [12]; [13]; [14]; and in a very short time he "learned" advanced English,(not by userboxes info but by talking to him). In a short period of time his English improved dramatically. Anyway I also suspect that these users are connected somehow if no sockpuppets are involved. I hope that this case will shower some light on all this.Adrian (talk) 13:34, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also user Fakirbakir have combined edits with Nmate and Baxter9: 1 2 --Omen1229 (talk) 15:40, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Buhuhu is indeed Iaaasi (talk · contribs) and has been blocked as such. However, I see no evidence that would warrant an investigation of the other mentioned users. If there some evidence for the others, please present it (above), otherwise, I'll mark for close soon. TNXMan 17:41, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]