Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ishola0/Archive

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.


Ishola0

Ishola0 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

07 February 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

The master removed maintenance templates from the sock's creation: [1] which is suspected UPE/COI (I agree). Over at simple, the master created the article and they've both !voted to keep it at AFD: [2] [3]. Draft:Musa Muhammed Olayinka created by the master also fits the COI/UPE pattern and was earlier created by Muhammedpro (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) (globally locked). SmartSE (talk) 15:09, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

I wanted to add my 'two cents' into this discussion. I joined Wikipedia as a simple passion project, and I'm not sure how my account got drawn into accusations of sockpuppetry or having ulterior motives when editing on the platform. I appreciate the passion these users have for protecting the integrity of Wikipedia, but at a point, the constant pursuit begins to feels like an attack on any edits I make. I have made over 500 contributions to the platform (both Wikipedia and Simple Wikipedia), and can confirm I have no association with the user mentioned in this Sockpuppet investigation. I look forward to receiving the results of this investigation and am hopeful these users will cease their pursuit of my edits after the investigation is complete. DestinyinDestiny (talk) 09:17, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • "Ishola0" and "DestinyinDestiny" are Red X Unrelated.
  • However - "DestinyinDestiny" is  Technically indistinguishable from the zero-edit Joseph_Arujo (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) (interesting, given Joseph Arujo was created by DestinyinDestiny), and also Bmgfmg (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). However, the nature of the technical evidence here means I'm not comfortable with calling them Confirmed. I think something odd is going on here, but I can't say what at the moment. firefly ( t · c ) 17:40, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Setting status to "second opinion requested" as I think some more eyes on the technical data may be worthwhile. firefly ( t · c ) 17:49, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree with the technical assessment, and I note an interesting previous article creation by Ishola0. I also have two questions for @DestinyinDestiny:
    • Is this your first account on Wikipedia?
    • Do you have a
      Conflict of Interest
      regarding Joseph Arujo?
  • Thanks. --Blablubbs (talk) 19:00, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Happy to clarify! When I first joined wiki months ago, I was unfamiliar with how the writing process worked, but I have since taken time to familiarize myself with and learn the rules of the platform. Rather than creating the Joseph_Arujo wiki page, I created said account which has since been inactive, hence zero posts and edits (I quickly learned that a user page and Wikipedia page were completely different entities). I’ve also learned it’s impossible to delete user accounts, so that account will exist retired for the foreseeable future. As for @Bmgfmg or @Ishola0, I am unfamiliar with either of those accounts and can confirm I have no relation.
    As for conflict of interest, there is no financial or otherwise benefit for me in writing articles on the platform. I’m currently working on another passion project for the notable creator and activist, Olivia Julianna, who I also believe meets notability and deserves their own article for their work as a women’s rights activist and member of Genz For Change. I'm passionate for writing about online creators and want to uplift the voices of notable, young change-makers in the world. DestinyinDestiny (talk) 09:53, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@DestinyinDestiny: Can you please explain how you reconcile having taken the subject's photograph in November and yet not having a conflict of interest? SmartSE (talk) 13:24, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I never took the subjects photo. I uploaded two images of Arujo to Wikimedia, reached out to the subject to provide Wikimedia Commons with licensing, and in turn, the organization received Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 4.0 rights to the photos. To my knowledge, Arujo was in communications with Wikimedia Permissions Commons. DestinyinDestiny (talk) 16:58, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Firefly and Blablubbs: There are lots of weird and inconsistent things going on here, but given that the technical evidence is inconclusive and Onel5969 (talk · contribs) has draftified the article, I think that this can probably be closed with no action. SmartSE (talk) 13:09, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Closing per SmartSE. Thanks, Spicy (talk) 23:48, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

15 June 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Interest in posting their autobiography (Musa Muhammed Olayinka or Musa Muhammed (entrepreneur) in main space and Draft space. They are blocked for promotional editing but I thought to report them here after seeing this Commons category for sockpuppets of Muhammedola. It might be worth tagging some of these User pages so we can just block them when they reappear to continue to promote the Musa Muhammed, a 17 year old digital marketer "entreprenur". Given the number of sockpuppets identified on the Commons already (some of whom are already blocked on en-wiki), I think they will continue to be persistent about having an article appear on the project. Liz Read! Talk! 22:07, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure how useful CU would be, as an inexperienced sockmaster, they seem to create a new sockpuppet when they are blocked so I doubt there are any sleeper accounts unless they created one after being blocked earlier today. Liz Read! Talk! 22:10, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
There is at least one username on enwp that was blocked on Commons: Pakitimes. They attempted to create Draft:W88Mobi which has been deleted as pure advertising, twice. Maybe the admin goggles tell you more. ☆ Bri (talk) 22:17, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • The suspected sock is blocked. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 12:24, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

17 July 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Like sockpuppet User:Sammarkk, User:Lolafam, who was created the day after Sammarkk was blocked, has created an article about Musa Muhammed, this time Draft:Musa Muhammed (digital marketer) (see sockmaster archives for other efforts to create an article on this teenager). There is also a connection with User:Oraprade regarding article Chef Dammy Pas which Oraprade created and Lolafam moved to main space. But the main tell is the recreation of the article on Musa Muhammed which has been created under a number of different page titles in different namespaces. Thank you. Liz Read! Talk! 01:50, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think the original sockmaster in this parade is User:Muhammedpro, not User:Ishola0 although Ishola0 was blocked first. Tagging Smartse who created the first page in this SPI report. Although my previous report was just closed, I think this is worth a checkuser as there are several sockpuppets operating at the same time. Liz Read! Talk! 02:03, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, thank you for checking Girth Summit. Based on my previous experience at SPI, I know that typically cases are automatically closed if the suspected sockpuppets are already blocked and so I was hoping that admins would hold off on blocking until a CUer noticed this filing. Looks like blocking happened (can't blame anyone for that) so I appreciate you spending a few minutes considering my request. Liz Read! Talk! 03:16, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • These accounts have already been blocked by ScottishFinnishRadish, as socks of LevaSoul SA. For the record, I'll say that they are  Technically indistinguishable to Sammarkk in the above case. They are hopping around some exceedingly busy ranges however - not great territory for hunting for sleepers. CU logs for Ishola0 are consistent with the data I'm seeing here - I'm going to tag as suspected. Girth Summit (blether) 11:30, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Ishola0/Archive&oldid=1167096654"