Trichome

thcscience_admin


Billiekhalidfan

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

13 November 2020[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

I was suspicious of this edit, but this edit makes me wonder if they are the same. Same style as Maria: new user adding genres, taking sources from other pages/archived edits and quoting what they are sourcing like in Paris or Monkey Business. (CC) Tbhotch™ 21:00, 13 November 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]

  • Katyqueenofpop is Red X Unrelated to MariaJaydHicky. However, @Katyqueenofpop: you need to explain why you are editing the same topic area from multiple  Confirmed overlapping accounts without disclosing the connection between them. This does appear to be a violation of sock. Could you please let me know which account you want to use and I'll block the rest, or connect the accounts using the instructions at WP:ALTACCN.-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:11, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Upon further digging and review the following accounts are  Confirmed to each other:
  • There is a strong behavioural overlap with Billiekhalidfan and what little technical evidence there is supports this connection.  Clerk assistance requested: Could you please double check the behavioural evidence and move this report to the suspected master, tagging the socks as suspected?-- Jezebel's Ponyobons mots 22:27, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Clerk note: Listing the denizens of Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Billiekhalidfan here, just to make some tool-based comparisons easier:
Billiekhalidfan (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Electricwater (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Enteryourusername101 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Dojazervas (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
-- RoySmith (talk) 15:56, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I certainly don't see anything to make me doubt the connection. I got as far as finding the common edits from Newbienewbie and Dojazervas on Post Malone and figured that was enough. I'll move this in a moment. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:34, 20 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

09 April 2021[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


Please see this case at ANI where VersaceSpace (VS) effectively admitted sockpuppetry by confirming prior suspician about a shared interest in Doja Cat. The attitude displayed by VS since joining in Dec 2020 is not that of a genuine newbie – too much knowledge, too confident, too familiar with site processes and procedures. The insults directed at Lugnuts prompted the ANI but before I completed the entry there, I decided to see if any blocked editors had similar interests and, after a search, I recognised a clear connection with both User:Billiekhalidfan and its sockpuppet User:Dojazervas. All three share interest in modern pop music and especially in Doja Cat and her work. There are other common interests such as Ariana Grande, Billie Eilish, Hailee Steinfeld and Pete Davidson, but the admission at ANI about Doja Cat is the confirmation. The breaches of CIVIL and NPA are serious enough but this sockpuppetry deserves an indefinite block. Please contact me if I can be of further help. Thanks. No Great Shaker (talk) 18:21, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

While I accept that the checkuser test is inconclusive re Billiekhalidfan, I would remind you that all five of the experienced editors who have contributed to [the ANI discussion strongly suspect that VS is not a bona fide editor. Can a wider range be scanned by the checkuser tool? Thanks. No Great Shaker (talk) 19:06, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

Not only is this case lousily evidenced, it's so clearly in bad faith that I'm surprised no one has pointed it out yet. Extremely disrespectful too that I replied to the false accusations, I even pinged No Great Shaker, and yet they never replied to me. Not only that, but they had the sheer audacity to ask for a second CheckUser test after the first one proved them wrong.

Shaker, if your accusation of me being a sockpuppet (to this person at least) is rooted in the thought that "well, they both edited the same page often so they must be the same person" then maybe SPI is not the place for you. And I have a valid reason to be upset. Your exact words were "VersaceSpace (VS) effectively admitted sockpuppetry by confirming prior suspician about a shared interest in Doja Cat." First of all, you never expressed that you felt I was a sockpuppet specifically to Billiekhalidfan. You could've been talking about any Wikipedia editor ever, but since an editor at the ANI discussion said they suspected I was DLThewave, I assumed that's who you were talking about, which is when I brought up Doja Cat (they have never edited that page). That's not even the worst of it though, ohhhhhh it gets worse. You also said that "There are other common interests such as Ariana Grande, Billie Eilish, Hailee Steinfeld and Pete Davidson." Wow. That is very embarrassing. Let's see... my two edits to Hailee Steinfeld were reverting problematic edits. I don't even remember editing Billie Eilish ever and Tools Forge is telling me I haven't, ever. My three edits to Pete Davidson are literally grammar edits. And my edits related to Ariana Grande are all related to a discussion about...Doja Cat except for a few where I was adding content about a song. Shocker. This information is available for free. Did you even look at the edits. You say we share an "interest" in these articles when it's so clear that we do not.

You claim that "the insults against Lugnuts prompted the ANI". Is that so? The comment I made was sent on April 2, while the ANI discussion was formed about a week later. I can't see how you would've found the comment nearly a week after it was made, and even so, discussion took place at WikiProject Cricket two days before the report about how Lugnuts has a "hate train" because God forbid one sentence stubs about Turkey get deleted! On the other hand, I added a template to the deletion discussion about how you were canvassed into the deletion discussion (because you were) and suddenly, less than a day later, there I was at ANI! I must've struck some sort of nerve because it's clear there was more than one motive to reporting me there (and here too). Also the fact that you with-held who you thought I was the sockpuppet of is...weird to say the least. It felt like a set up, almost. You said you felt I was a sockpuppet, knowing I would respond to such an accusation, but never said who you thought I was the sockpuppet of until your actual report (which wasn't well-evidenced to begin with). Not to mention both you and AssociateAffiliate have made comments that also are a breach of WP:5P4, in regards to the now closed ANI. Hold yourself to the same standards you hold me to. versacespaceleave a message! 04:55, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You quack too much. You'll slip up at some point. StickyWicket (talk) 08:32, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@AssociateAffiliate: "the duck test does not apply to non-obvious cases" - essay you linked. regardless, i'm not sure what you mean. versacespaceleave a message! 03:01, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@VersaceSpace: Quacking is what a duck does. They're saying that, even though you say you're not a sockpuppet, habits of the sockmaster (Billiekhalidfan) will eventually come out, and you'll be blocked indefinitely as a sock puppet. This can be translated to "Even though you say you're not a duck, you'll quack soon enough and we'll know you're a duck (sockpuppet)". By the way, the accusation isn't that AGF of them, especially when CU evidence came back possible/unlikely. D🐶ggy54321 (let's chat!) 12:26, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Doggy54321: at this point I think we're putting more thought into this than they are. versacespaceleave a message! 12:55, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

  • All of those topics are fairly popular subjects; given the CU result and the fact that there's no evidence of socking aside from the topical overlap, I'm closing this with no action. --Blablubbs|talk 20:30, 21 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

15 May 2022[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

RoseAnarchy showed the behavior of an experienced user right from the beginning. RoseAnarchy and Billiekhalidfan share the same interests in song genres and more, and their article intersection is telling.[18] Both of them edited Eastside (song) to remove the genre.[19][20] Both of them edited the Room 93 genre to trim it down to electropop or electronic pop.[21][22] Both of them put dark pop genre into the article Badlands (Halsey album).[23][24]

At You Should Be Sad, RoseAnarchy and sockpuppet Dojazervas both removed the genre of country pop. One of them removed it entirely,[25] the other replaced it with country.[26]

Checkuser requested to compare with recent cases. Binksternet (talk) 03:14, 15 May 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]

  •  In progress - -- RoySmith (talk) 04:07, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Everything is stale, this will need to be decided on behavioral grounds only. -- RoySmith (talk) 04:13, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • The diffs that Binksternet has presented are compelling. I also found another pair of identical diffs [27] [28]. I found them in the course of conducting a long edit-summary analysis, where I noticed a number of tells indicating that RoseAnarchy is the same person as Billiekhalidfan; I'm happy to discuss them privately with any inquiring clerk or admin. All in all, the number of coincidences required for this to be a different person is too high to believe.  Blocked and tagged. Closing. -- Tamzin[cetacean needed] (she|they|xe) 04:15, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Billiekhalidfan/Archive

Leave a Reply