Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/The Penfield Homunculus

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

Populated account categories: confirmed · suspected

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

• Panenkazo (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• JJibin (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • SPI Tools

First, I think it is clear that these two accounts are socks of each other. Account Panenkazo was created on 4 July, and made no edits that day. Account JJibin was created in February but has only edited on 4 July. Shortly afterwards, the article Lamine Yamal had its semi-protection removed, and the sequence of editing by JJibin was thusly taken over by Panenkazo both at the Lamine Yamal article (JJibin, Panenkazo) and Pedri (JJibin, Panenkazo). Quacks like someone tried to register a new account to edit an article they knew was about to lose protection, realised they were a few minutes short, and used a sleeper sock for a bit instead. JJibin has not edited since 10 minutes after the Yamal article was unprotected.

Panenkazo has also added the same text from above verbatim (that JJibin initially introduced) at the talkpage of Gavi (footballer) here.

It seems possible if not likely to me then that they are socks of The Penfield Homunculus based on area of interest (FC Barcelona); the fact that it seems like a sleeper sock to edit a semi-protected page had been ready and prepared and only a repeat puppetmaster does that; and the "no necessary" in their edit reasons being the same brand of 'shorthand' (or poor) English demonstrated by other socks. Knowing about sourcing and specifically lead sourcing in seemingly the first few edits is a giveaway, too. Kingsif (talk) 23:00, 7 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

It is also clear to me that "Panenkazo" (and possibly "JJibin" as well) is a sock of The Penfield Homunculus, looking at their written texts (often poor English with similar mistakes, e.g., "vandalic" by Panenkazo and TPH) and interests (pro-Catalonia). Most strikingly, Panenkazo admitted to have used an IP Address. This IP is located at "Ciutat Vella" in Barcelona. Some other IP Addresses put on this page were e.g., "185.124.29.38" and "81.184.63.174". Both addresses lead to the same location: "Ciutat Vella" in Barcelona. The accounts reported by Kingsif are thus very likely to be socks. Eem dik doun in toene (talk) 15:03, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

An interesting comment on Talk:Catalonia from 30 March: [1]. A sock of The Penfield Homunculus added "a historical European nation" on the Catalonia page, as did Panenkazo. Eem dik doun in toene (talk) 16:23, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have a feeling Panenkazo is also a sockpuppet as they tried making the page say “European Nation” in the infobox, and Panenkazo is on this list on the sockpuppet investigation of ThePenfieldHomunculus.. Plus doesn’t anyone find it a little suspicious that both Panenkazo and Penfieldboth start with a P—N? Plus in the filter logs of Panenkazo and JJBin both have a list of stuff involving removing references or putting improper references, and they both edit the same things of category, Catalan topics. And as I am writing this, I had to undo an edit by Panenkazo in Catalonia not once, but TWICE, as Panenkazo keeps undoing a edit which was brought back for the reason of “We're not here in Wp to determine who is "a nation" and who is not. Read WP:NPOV” by User:Jotamar. After I had posted this Panenkazo had messaged me ( [[2]] ) which examining how Panenkazo and ThePenfieldHomunculus write messages in talk pages, their style of writing and how they word it are very similar.

These are my words to this case. — SnowieLuna1212 (talk) 17:23, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A pro-independence Catalan like you pretend to be, would never accept being told indirectly that Catalonia is a nation. It is the first time in my life that I have come across a case like this, and I live in Catalonia.. I am convinced that this account of yours is a sock of another and you are connecting depending on the interests you are finding on wikipedia. Your edit history is very suspicious. You just logged in to review my edits and you already knew there was an investigation. Panenkazo (talk) 17:49, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What a coincidence! Today you are renovating. With how many users to edit wikipedia? Panenkazo (talk) 17:53, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

i did not know there was an investigation until I read Talk:Catalonia, and your accusation of accusing me to be a sockpuppet when I am not is just plain out stupid all because I am neutral in editing Wikipedia articles not editing it in the pro-independence which is a non-neutral opinion of a single page. SnowieLuna1212 (talk) 17:54, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are too suspicious. This account and your edits have betrayed you. Panenkazo (talk) 17:58, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My edits? most of my edits are of my sandbox which is on a nuclear incident, while your edits, the account in question and the other account suspected all share in common edits, talk styles, and more. I stand on a neutral point of view, and I am doing what I know is right when it comes to editing other pages to a neutral stand point such as what you kept doing to Catalonia. SnowieLuna1212 (talk) 18:02, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A catalan pro-independence user like you doing this. Very very very suspicious… You could participate in WikiProject Catalonia and discuss this topic. I would like to know what you think.. It will be interesting to hear a pro-independence opinion that Catalonia should be removed from the pages. Panenkazo (talk) 18:06, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just because I am pro-independence doesn’t make me suspicious, everyone has their own view points which I can respect other view points and keeping articles neutral is best for both sides. Your opinions remove neutrality, and according to Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, “All encyclopedic content on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view.” SnowieLuna1212 (talk) 18:09, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The first ever person in the world that is a neutral pro-independence. Very very supocious. You are a fake user. Nobody pro-independence is neutral. We caught you. Panenkazo (talk) 18:13, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I write neutral, does not mean I am neutral myself, do you not understand that? And also it’s suspicious, not “supocious” to correct you. I am not a fake user, and you saying this just appears as you firing back because I have stated a opinion which is against you Penfield/Panenkazo.

Sincerely, SnowieLuna1212 (talk) 18:16, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Caught you. Panenkazo (talk) 18:20, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I never wanted to fight, he just started accusing me of being a sockpuppet to fire back because I made a statement against him, but I will stop Bbb23 because this is just pointless to keep going as he won’t give up firing back. SnowieLuna1212 (talk) 18:22, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Panenkazo and SnowieLuna1212: This is not a place for you to fight, so stop it. No more comments.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:20, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

•   Confirmed, blocked and tagged. -- ferret (talk) 19:19, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @Ferret: What about JJibin?--Bbb23 (talk) 19:20, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• @Bbb23: Sorry, forgot about it was about to edit in a response. JJibin appears unrelated. -- ferret (talk) 19:21, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 19:23, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

• 213.143.48.165 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • SPI Tools

See e.g. the history of the article Bojan Krkić where the recently blocked user and today's IP editing matches exactly one another. The article about Bojan is one of many pages affected by the edit warring about the Catalonia issue. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 21:13, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

• I've issued a range block for 3 months. -- ferret (talk) 22:27, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

• 213.143.48.247 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • SPI Tools

As before: Catalonia-related edit warring Robby.is.on (talk) 20:57, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Yes, very obvious. The SPI I reported above has the IP address already blocked without it being closed first. This group of IP's can't do any more damage on reverting this sockpuppet but I think that is almost certain to be a different person. Iggy (Swan) (Contribs) 21:28, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I've issued a range block for 3 months. -- ferret (talk) 22:27, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]