Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mangoeater1000

Mangoeater1000

Mangoeater1000 (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:

• Sockpuppet investigations/Mangoeater1000/Archive/1

For archived investigations, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mangoeater1000/Archive.

A long-term abuse case exists at Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Mangoeater1000.

01 November 2012

– An administrator or SPI clerk requires more information to determine what action to take.

Suspected sockpuppets

• Paniraja (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.

Recently-created account making similar type of disruptive edits to NYU Poly-related articles. (diff 1, diff 2). -- Marco Guzman, Jr  Talk  16:21, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments by other users

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

I'll note that this user was created after CheckUser was last run and before any blocks or autoblocks were created. The last time CheckUser was run, 7 sockpuppets were found. I'm requesting CheckUser because there are likely to be more sockpuppets for this user. Ryan Vesey 16:40, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

I have been mistaken for a sock puppet and as a result, me and another user ( Martarius (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) )had to go through uncivil and unjustified edit summary (1) --Paniraja (talk) 19:36, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Nope. It's YOUR edits that were targeted. Don't try to drag someone else into the discussion. The sockpuppet investigation is about you, and not Martarius.-- Marco Guzman, Jr  Talk  19:59, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Similar behavior occurred in the Last SPI where Mangoeater1000 tried to add users to the investigation. Ryan Vesey 20:24, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Martarius (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) added more references to the informations I provided, user Marco Guzman, Jr (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) deleted everything without a justified reason or a talk page discussion.--Paniraja (talk) 21:38, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

It's funny you say that Martarius "added more references to the informations (sic) I provided" because the information you provided (1) is a verbatim copy of the peacock-ridden paragraphs (added by Mangoeater1000's socks) and who several editors erased from the NYU Poly article. (2, 3, 4). Also, Martarius actually didn't add "references". He/she was just adding cite web templates to the bare external URLs you used. -- Marco Guzman, Jr  Talk  22:53, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Martarius added additional references to the informations I provided at least once, that I know for sure(2). What you are showing is what other editors did with the edits of the proven sock puppet. I tried to scavenge all the sourced material and put them back. Some of the sourced materials need to be restored. The talk page is always there for discussion and improvements. After I am cleared, we can work together with other editors to improve the article! --Paniraja (talk) 01:16, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

The link you provided is, as stated by Marco Guzman, Jr, just a formatting of a reference, not an additional one. This is not about Martarius. 72Dino (talk) 01:38, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't know how this even matters, but since you(talk) said it, I am clarifying it again. I provided this link http://post.jagran.com/sam-pitroda-to-give-inaugural-address-at-nyu-engineering-school-1337055643 , Martarius added this link http://www.nyu.edu/about.html# . There is nothing wrong with this because all editors have the right to improve Wikipedia. Everything I added are also not verbatim copy of what the sock puppet provided. If you take a closer look, you will see that I actually clarified that Russ, Gordon, Draper and Turing prizes are not really noble prizes. I also removed the "according to NYC Economic D...." comment. I know that this is not about Martarius. This is just a total waste of time, which will be proven when the case closes. After this case closes, I will work with world-class editors like me, such as talk, to turn IIT Bombay and NYU articles into award wining articles--Paniraja (talk) 03:47, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Note that the user behind the sockpuppets may have changed locations, and/or uses different locations for different accounts (like Paniraja), to attempt to cover up their sockpuppeting. An IP address (108.97.191.186) recently edited my Talk page and Paniraja later signed it (http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Schiez&diff=520935020&oldid=520931911). The IP address is different from the 128.238.110.* addresses (and possibly others) previously associated with the sockpuppets, although the location is relatively close. The user's brazen behaviour despite the account itself being new, and the very similar content of the edits (including the obsession with similar subjects such as rankings and awards at NYU-Poly, the characteristic extra/missing whitespaces around parentheses, etc.) seem to suggest more than a coincidence, but we'll see what happens after the investigation. --Schiez (talk) 16:33, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

 Looks like a duck to me -- Marco Guzman, Jr  Talk  01:07, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

WP:TURNIP, this rule allows me to say a lot. Firstly, I don't give a flying duck about your(Schiez) alleged "insults", and rather find them to be quite humorous. The facts that you only edit the NYU article, keep and PRESERVE3 only the "high" rankings despite the fact that several editors complained about it4, always preserve the garbage added by the sock puppets 5 and have a desire to make the last edit, all seem to propound that you are a gloss over wittingly peserving the edits of the sock puppets even after the puppets get killed. I don't care about this case because IT IS NOT EASY TO IMPLICATE AN INNOCENT MAN! A REPUTED COLLEGE LIKE NYU DOES NOT NEED BALLYHOO--Paniraja (talk) 09:14, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

I wasn't attempting to insult you, just stating a few facts. And no, I don't do any of the things you quacked about. --Schiez (talk) 02:00, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Additional information request by CU

This is an edit from September 20, 2012 made by Mambo420 (a banned sockpuppet of Mangoeater1000). This is an edit from November 1st, 2012 made by Paniraja. Notice the portion on the non-existent "Nobel Prizes in Engineering" or "Nobel Prizes in Computing" added in both edits as they are identical. The chances that a new editor like Paniraja would come and specifically add this piece of information to the NYU article that had been removed from the NYU Poly article by myself on October 19, 2012 hints that this is not merely a coincidence. -- Marco Guzman, Jr  Talk  04:25, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Note also that even in the nonidentical additions, there is a consistent aversion to proper spacing before or after parentheses, which the sockpuppet accounts also practised. For example, there may be no whitespaces before, extra whitespaces after, etc. (e.g. 'word( word'). Although it's a minor syntax blemish, it's not a common one. Now, what are the chances of a user exhibiting the very particular syntax errors displayed by the sockpuppet accounts, editing in an excessive amount of details on the same narrow subject like the sockpuppet accounts had, with the account in question being created and disrupting in such a manner not long after the sockpuppet accounts had been banned, at a location a few hours drive from the location(s) of the sockpuppet accounts? --Schiez (talk) 06:09, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Although the talk page is the right place for discussing this, I am still doing it here. Because of the way the sockpuppets added the informations, it was natural for people to think that "Nobel Prizes in Engineering" and "Nobel Prize in Computing" exist, which in reality are not true. I clarified that they are not really Noble Prizes, but they are also known as Noble Prizes(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prizes_known_as_the_Nobel_of_a_field ). You shouldn't have deleted the information without a talk page discussion because other editors could help in this matter.--Paniraja (talk) 05:53, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

Mambo420 made a similar argument in regards to the "Nobel Prizes" in different fields. -- Marco Guzman, Jr  Talk  11:44, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

He/She did not; your attempts to destroy my credibility are wimpy at best.-- PanirajaUpgraded! ^{Tag me!} 10:13, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

•  Clerk endorsed - to confirm socking and check for sleepers.
   — Berean Hunter (talk) 23:10, 1 November 2012 (UTC)
•  Additional information needed - With this not being similiar to the original sock's naming of the university (which seemed to be persistant) and no diffs that connect this sock, with diffs of the previous sock, I need more info before I run a check. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 02:42, 4 November 2012 (UTC)

---