Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Alexandre8/Archive

17 January 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Both IPs locate to Alexandre8's self-admitted current location, and have both participated in edit warring to make the same edits as Alexandre8.

First up is the repeated removal of the BNP's fascist idelogy by 195.135.239.5, something repeatedly done by Alexandre8 (see, and ). Similarly there's the same removal by 195.135.239.4.

Secondly there's the removal of important qualifiers by 195.135.239.4, something repeatedly done by Alexandre8 (see, , and the discussions at Talk:English Defence League and Talk:English Defence League), which Alexandre8 then removes again despite the overwhelming consensus (meaning everyone except him agrees) for the qualifiers.

The recent edits from both IPs are only to the English Defence League and British National Party articles, neatly mirroring Alexandre8's own far right SPA editing. A quick analysis of the time of the edits is quite revealing also. At 09:03, 10 January 2011 Alexandre8 edits, then beginning 21 minutes later this series of edits are made by 195.135.239.5. Similarly Alexandre8 edits at 09:32, 17 January 2011, 09:35, 17 January 2011 and 09:40, 17 January 2011 before seemingly stopping editing, until this edit by 195.135.239.4 14 minutes later. Note the IP edits occurred *after* logged in edits were made, which would tend to negate any "I forgot to log in" excuse.

Same articles, same edits, same location, very suspicious matching online times, I hope that's enough? 2 lines of K 303  13:09, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

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

 * I've blocked 195.135.239.4 for three days. The other IP hasn't edited in a week, so there may have been an IP change somewhere in there. I've also reminded the master about multiple accounts and editing while logged out. Please relist if there are new issues that arise. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 14:10, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

11 September 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

contributions, for the IP these edit summaries: and. See also WP:ANI which mentions other IPs with different geolocations. Dougweller (talk) 05:38, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

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

 * - Yeah, it's likely that they're the same. Endorsing for confirmation and sleepers. There won't be a comment on the IP. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 14:14, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Lonewulf44 is the same as Bobr48.
 * These are ❌ to Alexandre8, not least because they seem to be editing from different continents.
 * No sleepers and no comment on the IP. AGK  [&bull; ] 08:47, 12 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Per the results I've blocked and tagged Bobr48 as a sock of Lonewulf. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 23:38, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

02 October 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

This edit by the IP editor calling the BCE dating system "socialist" and calling me an idiot (while leaving the marxist.com reference alone) is pretty much the same as Alexandre8's edits in Jesus and Abraham, where he made the exact same arguments, called BCE/CE "socialist" (despite never being able to explain how it connects to economics), and attacked editors for supporting consensus over his disruptive edits (eventually leading to a block). Alexandre8 would also remove BCE from articles unrelated to Christianity like Achaemenid Empire, Muhammad, and Māori people. Ian.thomson (talk) 18:52, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Obvious WP:DUCK is obvious. N o f o rmation Talk  19:04, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

I've said it before: funny that he only comes back once the IP was blocked. Odd also that the IP editor has not asked for an unblock on the grounds of not being Alexandre8. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:59, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

I came back because I got a message saying that I was under investigation. I use Wikipedia for gathering information, but I never check the sockpuppet forum? Isn't that normal? I don't understand what you're trying to prove? Haven't they got the gadgets for just checking automatically whether it was me or not>? What am I supposed to say in my defence? I've been unlawfully called a duck, not much I can do about it? Alexandre8 (talk) 23:02, 2 October 2011 (UTC)


 * aaaaaaaaaaaah I'm losing my head here! What am I supposed to do! I've got people telling me to do different things left right and centre. I've got things to be doing but this needs sorting Alexandre8 (talk) 23:09, 2 October 2011 (UTC)


 * You don't have to log in to gather information. "Unlawfully?"  LOL!  WP:DUCK refers to "if it walks like a duck, talks a duck, and looks liks a duck, it just might be a duck."  "If an IP calls BCE/CE socialist like Alexandre8 did, removes BCE/CE from articles like Alexandre8 did, and tosses the red-herring 'why don't you just change the name of the days of the week' like Alexandre8 did, it just might be Alexandre8" is not an unreasonable assumption.  Ian.thomson (talk) 23:14, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

First. I log in automatically? What sort of comment is that for an argument, can we at least make sensible defences here? And I'll repeat what I wrote on noformation's wall. " Like I said, it is widely believed in Britain that politcal correctness is left wing, and we just had our mayor of London writing an article against the posibility of the BBC changing to BCE/CE which they've gone against. So it's a massively current topic. This guy just seems to be so flippant".

If a check would be run, this would cleared up so soon. Your conviction would we wiped clean with a simple ip check.

"Grounds for checking The tool is to be used to fight vandalism, to check for sockpuppet activity, to limit disruption or potential disruption of any Wikimedia project, and to investigate legitimate concerns of bad faith editing.

The tool should not be used for political control; to apply pressure on editors; or as a threat against another editor in a content dispute.

Note that there are legitimate uses of alternative accounts, so long as they are not used in violation of the policies (for example, to double-vote or to increase the apparent support for any given position).

Some wikis allow an editor's IPs to be checked upon his or her request if, for example, there is a need to provide evidence of innocence against a sockpuppet allegation; note, however, that requesting a checkuser in these circumstances is sometimes part of the attempt to disrupt. Such requests are typically declined on the English Wikipedia."

p.s I get comments like this "And then the unrelated person made the same edits on the same article and used the same specific (and nonsensical) insults. You must really think the rest of us are wankers or you're trolling, or both, either way I'm bored so I'm done. Take it to another talk page. Noformation " How am I supposed to defend my self against people who 1) already have their mind made up, 2) are rude as they come? Alexandre8 (talk) 23:30, 2 October 2011 (UTC) Alexandre8 (talk) 23:17, 2 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Regarding automatic logins: I assumed that people were as concerned about their own account security as I am about mine. Ian.thomson (talk) 23:55, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Why it's a personal laptop. No one else comes into my flat and uses it. Alexandre8 (talk) 23:58, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The IP is already blocked. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 19:45, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

We are not going to run a CheckUser to "prove one's innocence". –MuZemike 23:05, 2 October 2011 (UTC)