Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Steverci/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Steverci

Steverci (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
19 February 2015
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


All accounts involved in articles, having to do with the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, displaying the same kind of disruptive behaviour pattern (edit-warring, contributing to discussions passively or not at all, removing or distorting references to Azerbaijan, POV pushing, redirecting articles about Nagorno-Karabakh villages under non-neutral names), all accounts either created or 'dormant' until 2014. Evidence of similar edits: [1] and [2] (adding the same category), [3] and [4] (removing mention of Bayram Safarov), [5] and [6] (removing reference to Azerbaijan), as well as moving articles about towns and villages in Nagorno-Karabakh under the same naming pattern (removing association with Azerbaijan): [7], [8], [9]. Parishan (talk) 12:47, 19 February 2015 (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]
  •  Clerk endorsed Diff #6 doesn't show the removal of Azerbaijan, however that's a minor point as the subsequent diffs demonstrate that with the page moves. I noted that Steverci also removed supporting information concerning Bayram Safarov and Hayordi and Harut111 also removed references to being Azerbaijani. Tzir-Katin and Steverci seem interested in bolstering the intensity of the 2014 Latakia offensive. All in all it's not the most conclusive behavioral evidence, but it's definitely a case where checkuser information will help. Mike V • Talk 20:21, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
​—DoRD (talk)​ 21:56, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

21 July 2015

[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

His "quacking" behaviour and reinstating virtually the same edits by User:Steverci made me open this. Steverci stopped editing through that account as it was hanging by a thin rope. (See the previous SPI case for example) Notice how both users have an extreme pro-Armenian stance to a degree of ethno-nationalism. This includes removing categories from ethnic Armenian people who were born outside modern-day Armenia, as well as having a noticeable obsession with removing anything that attains to Armenian Genocide denial, the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, and especially "foreign-country Armenia-related topics" (such as Armenians born abroad, ancient Armenian churches abroad, etc) amongst others.

I know that IP's don't get linked to users, but I'm simply adding it as I believe it's been used by Steverci/User:Хаченци, as they have virtually the same editorial behaviours, article interests, and reinstate the exact same edit done by each other. Look how User:Хаченци reinstates (for example; [10], [11]-[12]) the exact same edits done by IP 73 (f.e; [13]-[14]-[15])

Furthermore, look at how in general Hablabar's edits, interests, editorial behaviour etc. greatly overlaps on numerous other articles, with that of Xаченци's edits, as well as with Steverci's. I believe all three of ten have numerously edited on such closely related topics and articles, mismatch regarding Armenia/Azerbaijan/Iran/Turkey. [16] This in combination with the already established sock army of Steverci should give one it's doubts.

LouisAragon (talk) 19:06, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Vanjagenije, thanks for your prompt response. I mislinked those numbers of edits, but they are correctly inserted now. Will add some more diffs here then. I found a diff here that shows how IP 73, who has the exact same editorial behaviour like user:Хаченци as shown above, exactly reinstated the same edit done here by a confirmed sock of User:Steverci, namely sock Bacho74 with the exact same edit summary.[17]-[18])
On one of Steverci's known favourite topics, Armenian heritage in modern-day Azerbaijan, user:Hablabar reinstates virtually the same edit that was re-added by user:Хаченци, with furthermore both mentioning in their edit summaries that they had to because "it was done by an anon(ymous) user".[19]-[20]
Here, on Russian Empire, user:Хаченци/IP 73 made the exact same edit ([21]) as a CU blocked sock of Steverci (User:Keg12345) made on Russo-Persian War (1826-1828), ([22])

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]
  •  Additional information needed - @LouisAragon: In order to facilitate and expedite your request, please provide diffs to support your case. Please give two or more diffs meeting the following format:
  1. At least one diff is from the sockmaster (or an account already blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet of the sockmaster), showing the behaviour characteristic of the sockmaster.
  2. At least one diff per suspected sockpuppet, showing the suspected sockpuppet emulating the behaviour of the sockmaster given in the first diff.
  3. In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided. Around one sentence is enough for this.

Be aware that your diffs no. 3, 5 and 6 are the same. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:01, 21 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

12 June 2016

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

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]

29 August 2016

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Recent activity at 2016 Armenian–Azerbaijani clashes shows pattern similar to the case of Steverci aka OptimusView. Back then many of his blocked accounts dabbled in the same topic area of 2016 Armenian–Azerbaijani clashes, but I didn't list Tiptoethrutheminefield among them. In recent days Tiptoethrutheminefield made at least four reverts in that article: [23], [24], [25], [26]. As that pool of Steverci's socks was disabled, Tiptoethrutheminefield and an IP are possibly ones still acting. Brandmeistertalk 17:00, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

I consider this to be a malicious accusation made in bad faith and presented as a result of a conflict between myself and the accuser over some content on 2016 Armenian–Azerbaijani clashes, [27]. I think if my edit history (which any serious spa accuser should have done) were to be looked at, it will show that I have had content disagreements with Steverci in the past. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 23:53, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

Red X Unrelated. Closing with no action.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:33, 29 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

22 November 2016

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Though this new "account" has made a very little amount of edits, theres already a massive overlap in the target articles with the earlier CU blocked socks + sockmaster. In fact, literally about every single one of his 78 edits were made on articles already targeted in the past by the ones in the archives, and those are solely Armenia-related articles as well as a few Europe-related ones here and there. Just a few examples; [28][29][30][31][32][33][34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45]. - LouisAragon (talk) 17:19, 22 November 2016 (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]

 Confirmed, blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:56, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

16 February 2017

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Another obvious one. Very few edits, created shortly after the last sweep, and has already a ridiculous amount of target article overlap, all of them on Armenia-related articles and a few European ones here and there (esp related to wars). Asking a CU to see whether there more sleepers somewhere (given usual tendendies by the long-term sock abuser in question). - LouisAragon (talk) 03:31, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Don't mind the petty edits on articles absolutely not related to the sockmasters editorial interest, e.g.[46]-[47]. They're just being made to rack up some edit count, in the feigned attempt to come across as a "legit" user, and not as a sock. This is a typical Steverci habit. - LouisAragon (talk) 03:31, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

On the overlap assertion, I think it is a false comparison. Most of the edits by this account to date are on food-related articles that have an Armenian connection, almost nothing edited by Steverci and the accounts decided to be his SPAs were done on food-related articles (but since the Steverci accounts made a huge number of edits on mostly Armenian-related subjects, obviously some, a tiny %, were on food-related articles). I think there are not enough edits done by Forsytor to date to extract meaningful connections. Evidence for a connection might be found by examining those edits that are not on food-related articles, and see whether their content compares to edits made by Steverci. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 16:47, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The accounts seem to have a similarity in that both take a maximalist approach to interpreting evidence (for example, we have an extreme assertion that pastirma is Turkish replaced by Forsytor with an extreme assertion that pastirma is Armenian, when in reality there is not enough evidence to support either such absolutist position). But many nationalistic or pov editors take that approach, so it is too common a behavior to make a spa connection out of it. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 16:57, 16 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

24 August 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Steverci is known to use sock accounts before. ZaniGiovanni is a relatively new account, created in March this year, and these two accounts very often edit the same pages. Usually when one is gone, the other one becomes active. In particular, it is very noticeable in Assassination of Galip Ozmen that as soon as one is away, the other takes his place. For a new user, ZaniGiovanni knew his way around too well when he started editing. This looks very suspicious, it would be good to check if these accounts are somehow related. Grandmaster 19:54, 24 August 2021 (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]
  •  Clerk note: I've taken a good look at the contribs, but I'm seeing too many differences to endorse a CU check here. There is some overlap in editing interest, but I can't see these two accounts as being controlled by the same user. Girth Summit (blether) 12:02, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

03 October 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Steverci has a history of socking in the AA2 area. He was unblocked in 2019 under the condition that he stops, yet there's some suspicious recent activity. He now appears to support at least two other accounts, ‎ZaniGiovanni and Kevo327. Zani in particular shows up whenever Kevo runs out of reverts. Here, for example, Kevo327 reverts the same place Steverci did. After that ZaniGiovanni appears to revert the same article. ZaniGiovanni and Kevo327 are also currently active in related Shusha massacre article. They also support each other particularly in Azerbaijan article by reverting the same text ([48], [49]). All this suggests that at least these two accounts may be interconnected. ZaniGiovanni also joined Steverci's thread elsewhere to advocate him. Kevo went particularly rogue by removing WikiProject assessments from talk pages of Azerbaijan-related articles: [50], [51]. Achemish appears to be related too, here, for example, Achemish was joined by Kevo327 to revert the same place. Brandmeistertalk 10:18, 3 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

@Brandmeister: I'm not sure how appears to support at least two other accounts is strong evidence of socking in and of itself. Until reading the above, I was unaware of the alleged master's past socking problems, which do raise a bit of concern. However, I'm not sure that the evidence provided against ZaniGiovanni is all that strong. The two editors may generally share a point of view within WP:AA2, but their writing style appears different and they appear to have differing secondary interests. On top of that, their time cards (Steverci's card, ZaniGiovanni's card) appear to indicate that, if this were a single person, that they would never be asleep. It's certainly possible that a sockmaster could be an insomniac who is very good at remembering to edit from certain accounts only at certain times, but I really don't think that the case as it pertains to ZG is strong. I'm not familiar with the other two alleged socks, so I won't make a substantive comment on their behavioral patterns. — Mikehawk10 (talk) 02:09, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't exclude the possibility that those accounts may be WP:MEATs and requested checkuser in that regard. However, I suspect that at least ZaniGiovanni and Kevo327 may be related to each other one way or the other, also note their common reluctance to participate in talk page discussions of articles that they revert. In Shusha, for instance, ZaniGiovanni and Kevo327 have reverted multiple times recently with relatively little talk page input. Steverci has been their primary advocate there. Brandmeistertalk 11:59, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've not noticed any obvious behavioural similarities between these editors, and I'm not seeing any compelling evidence in the report. There's nothing surprising about the fact that 3 active Armenian editors, who all watch and participate in the same AA2 disputes, frequently jump in to disagree with Azerbaijani editors and back up each other's arguments (or reverts). The same thing happens among Azeri editors, and it's not much to base a socking accusation on by itself. Jr8825 • Talk 16:47, 14 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think Kevo327 is a very suspicious account. This user mostly pops up to revert or vote, but otherwise it made no notable contributions. The account was created on November 15, 2016, but started editing one year later, on November 3, 2017. Looks like a sleeper. No articles created in 4 years. Note reverts on Kanach Zham, with no participation in talk: [52] [53] Same on Shusha massacre, turns up to rv article, no talk page participation to explain himself: [54] [55] Very often both ZaniGiovanni and Kevo327 revert same articles to "stable version", claiming "no consensus": [56] [57] Another edit war here: [58] involving both ZaniGiovanni and Kevo327 revert warring with a subsequently banned account. Again, no discussion at talk. Note both accounts claiming "no consensus" and reverting Shusha to a version that also had no consensus: [59] [60] Kevo327 looks like an SPA, it makes only mobile edits, and I think it needs to be checked for connection with other users. It could be someone's alternative account. Grandmaster 12:30, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

28 December 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

There is a long history of antagonism between Steverci and Grandmaster. Steverci was then indefinitely blocked for personal attacks. The IP filed a report at WP:ANI against Grandmaster, and has now been also blocked for edit-warring. Since both the master account and the sock are blocked, this report is filed for the record, and to document what may be a developing pattern of long-term abuse. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:13, 28 December 2021 (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]

27 December 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

A sleeper account that recently became active again seemingly with the sole purpose of editing AA2 with a very similar editing and comment style as Steverci. Both the LTA Steverci and Humanatbest account also have the same article interests (Steverci, Humanatbest; Steverci, Humanatbest) — Golden call me maybe? 16:34, 27 December 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]
  • There's no historical data for Steverci to compare against. I did run some checks to compare to a few other accounts previously suspected as Steverci socks, but nothing matched. The timecards for Steverci and Humanatbest sure don't look like the same person. Looking at Human's early editing history, it sure does look like gaming autoconfirmed then going into hibernation, but that's not enough to take any action on. And as for having a limited editing interest centered on AA2, that describes a lot of people. Closing with no action taken. -- RoySmith (talk) 04:58, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Steverci/Archive&oldid=1132010942"