Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Aurora Prince/Archive

25 March 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

User:Aurora Prince repeatedly blanked all mention of Jason Isaacs having a wife and children several times last year, with unsupported claims that this was at the personal behest of Isaacs and/or his "family". They racked up a final warning for doing so.

User:86.147.157.208 appeared last week and has been making the same kind of edits, blanking all mention of Isaacs' partner and children, now claiming to be a "relative" of Isaacs who knows "for a fact" that the actor has no children.

(There is some mild press confusion over the fact that Isaacs refers to his partner Emma as his "wife" for the sake of making interviews easier, but User:86.147.157.208 finds even this claim "false and potentially harmful". The Wikipedia article has an odd history of 86.* IP addresses claiming that Isaacs is unmarried, married to someone else, and/or claiming to be his wife themselves.)

Both accounts have also taken an interest in changing singer Paul Banks' birthplace from Clacton to Colchester based on a geneaology website and ignoring the existing secondary source for his birthplace (changing 1, 2), and have edited no other articles. McGeddon (talk) 09:26, 25 March 2015 (UTC)


 * Have also added User:Sera Nowitzki, who made a few similar unsourced wife edits around the same time as Aurora Prince last June. Aurora Prince claimed in one edit summary that Isaacs wasn't married and had "a girlfriend named Sera Nowitzki". --McGeddon (talk) 20:18, 27 March 2015 (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

 * The IP editor is clearly Aurora Prince, evading the block he was warned would come, so I have blocked the account indefinitely and increased the length of the IP block that was already in place. Sera Nowitzki could be the same person, but there really isn't enough evidence to tell, and since the account hasn't edited for nine months, it is of no importance unless and until it comes back into action. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 21:08, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

15 June 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Another WP:SPA account only interested in editing two articles - Jason Isaacs and Paul Banks (singer). This new account is editing the former to remove all mention of Isaacs' partner and children (as Aurora Prince did), and the latter to change Banks' birthplace from Clacton to Colchester (as Prince did). Aurora Prince was indefinitely blocked in March for block evasion on these exact two issues, in this previous SPI. McGeddon (talk) 13:29, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

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

Hi there, this is user Basic Bicycle, responding to the investigation into me for potential Sockpuppetry. I assure you with all good faith that I am not practicing sock puppetry. This is the one and only account I use. The account that I am suspected of using was, to the best of my knowledge, suspended and no longer used for editing or any other purpose as of, I believe, June or July last year. The account was made by someone known to me, which is presumably why this issue arose as the account was likely created and/or accessed through the same or similar IP address as mine. I have briefly consulted with those behind "Aurora Prince" and they all remain confident that have not used it or accessed it at all since 2014. As you will see, this account, Basic Bicycle, was created very recently. The reasons for potential similarities in editing areas is likely due to shared likely between the parties. I am very happy to provide further details if necessary and hope this gets cleared up soon. Many thanks, Basic Bicycle (talk) 14:08, 15 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Just to add to my statement above, and please forgive me if this sounds daft, or I am missing the most up to date definition of sockpuppeting, but how is it possible that I could be accused of utilising a second account when, as far as I can tell from looking over the pages associated, it appears the 'Aurora Prince' account has been indefinitely blocked since June 2014? Once again, I reiterate, that account has nothing to do with me and in fact has never been accessed by me myself. As for McGeddon's allegation that I have interest in "only two pages", this is not only not true, as you will hopefully see that I have edited several other and unrelated articles so far, but a very unfair accusation to make of a very new account, especially when one of the articles I am working on is so immensely in need of repair. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Basic Bicycle (talk • contribs) 15:44, 15 June 2015‎


 * Creating a second account to evade a block on the first is WP:SOCKPUPPETRY. Making some edits on behalf of your blocked friend in the next room is also likely to result in a block as users who share a connection "may be considered a single user for Wikipedia's purposes if they edit with the same objectives". (I see you've also edited a handful of other indie band articles since joining, but a full two thirds of your edits have related to Jason Isaacs and Paul Banks, the same two articles that past sockpuppets have concentrated on.) --McGeddon (talk) 17:42, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Possibly related to ? -- ‖ Ebyabe  talk -   Border Town   ‖ 14:10, 15 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Ebaybe, that is an IP user account, using an IP address very different to mine. Hope that clears that one up for you. All the best, Basic Bicycle (talk) 14:44, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
— Berean Hunter   (talk)  15:54, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I've just reverted more disruptive editing from this user on the Jason Isaacs article, where they claim that three mainstream British newspapers are unreliable sources. They'd previously placed a BLP violation about the subject on the talk page. I was led here, and looking at the editing of this account and User:Aurora Prince, they are pretty obviously the same person.  They have even pre-empted checkuser by admitting above that they may edit from the same IP address per WP:BROTHER.  As such, this is a duck quacking so loudly it is almost impossible that there is any other scenario.  Blocked. Black Kite (talk) 18:53, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Changing tag to suspected rather than confirmed and closing.

22 June 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Basic Bicycle was blocked as a sockpuppet last week. Their editing pattern was ostensibly the removal of poorly sourced BLP statements (with some odd ideas about what counted as a valid source), while repeatedly deleting two particular and well-sourced BLP statements that bothered them: the fact that actor Jason Isaacs has a long-term partner and children (Aurora/Bicycle says it's an elaborate press hoax and he has neither), and that singer Paul Banks was born in Clacton-on-Sea (Aurora/Bicycle says Colchester).

-- McGeddon (talk) 08:03, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Basic Bicycle changed Banks' birthplace from Clacton to Colchester and removed Banks's "Julian Plenti" pseudonym from the lede as "un-cited"
 * The Probability Wizard's very first edit is to change Banks' birthplace (edit summary: "copyedit (minor)") and their fourth is to remove the Julian Plenti pseudonym from the infobox (edit summary "Fixing style/layout errors")
 * Aurora Prince was changing Banks' birthplace in June 2014


 * Probability Wizard has now started an aggressive BLP/N thread over the single recurring Banks edit, in the same way that Basic Bicycle raised an accusatory, boomerang-shaped BLP/N thread over the recurring Jason Isaacs edit last week. --McGeddon (talk) 18:32, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

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

The creation of additional accounts was not deliberate and will not happen again. The article I am focusing on, Paul Banks, is of particular concern, and as you will see, is now being edited with greater care to details and more references to Wikipedia Templates for articles for musicians. These are not vandalistic but rather made in excellent faith given a very close personal connection to the living person that the article is about. Please also see my request in response to your comment about the insertion of unsourced information. Thank you, The Probability Wizard 16:46, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
I have indefinitely blocked The Probability Wizard. --Neil N  talk to me 19:43, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Nothing more to do here. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 13:30, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

24 June 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Brand new SPA headed straight to Paul Banks (singer) but found that the article now has PP. Is requesting at Talk:Paul Banks (singer) for essentially the same edits he made to the article as previous socks User:The Probability Wizard and User:Basic Bicycle to be made. WP:QUACK Keri (talk) 00:58, 24 June 2015 (UTC) More: Keri (talk) 01:48, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Basic Bicycle ArielNow
 * 2) Basic Bicycle ArielNow

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

 * ArielNow is ✅ to The Probability Wizard. I've blocked the account. Mike V • Talk 02:26, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

24 June 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

WP:QUACK. Like a flight of ducks passing overhead. Keri (talk) 16:44, 24 June 2015 (UTC) Checkuser might not be useful here as 4TheSol is using a mobile device. But the behavioural evidence is more than damning. Keri (talk) 18:04, 24 June 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) ArielNow 4Thesol  (both making same error: the title is "Julian Plenti Lives..." with the ellipsis after "Lives" not before)
 * 2) Obsession with Paul Banks and erroneous claims of incorrect/uncited content
 * 3) Mistaken belief that Paul Banks was not born in Clacton (he was, its verified by RS); this user is convinced Banks was born in Colchester because a genealogy site shows Banks's birth registration district ie Colchester.

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

To save a passing admin some clicks, this user's very first edit was to restore the same album title change that Aurora's previous banned sock changed earlier today. --McGeddon (talk) 16:57, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi this account of aroma prince is not mine promise! I am brand new here and think maybe mageddon and kerry thought I am the same user bcause I asked about a edit the other editor already did. Sorry if it was mistake but that profile isnt mine!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4TheSol (talk • contribs) 17:03, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Checkuser evidence is, but the behavioral evidence seems sufficient. I have blocked the account as a suspected sock. Mike V • Talk 19:20, 24 June 2015 (UTC)

25 June 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Five hours after Aurora's last sockpuppet User:4TheSol was blocked, new user User:Tampico1 arrives with a similar gosh-wow I'm-new-here exclamation marks and an immediate interest in the same subjects as recent socks User:ArielNow, User:Basic Bicycle and blocked-as-probably-sock IP User:86.147.159.31. Looking at the only three edits they've made so far:


 * Tampico1 frames a Don DeLillo allusion as "believed by some fans" on no particular authority.
 * ArielNow blanked that allusion entirely yesterday.
 * Basic Bicycle blanked it a couple of weeks ago.


 * Tampico1 updated the year that Banks joined Interpol from 1997 to 1998 as part of changing the band's entire founding year to 1998
 * Basic Bicycle doesn't think Banks joined Interpol in 1997 but rather 1998.


 * Tampico1 is curious about the American School Foundation
 * Basic Bicycle removed a line about Banks attending the American School Foundation.
 * 86.147.159.31 changed "American School Foundation" to "American Institute" against the given source.

That's it. McGeddon (talk) 22:51, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Based on behaviour and the extremely narrow and specific focus of their edits... WP:QUACK. Keri (talk) 23:08, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
 * It's a fallacy that the definition of madness is doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting different outcomes, but it's pretty close to being the definition of a persistent sockmaster. Blocked Aurora Prince sock writes: "Is anyone making the big noble page or I will start it. Made drafts on comp already thanks" on 24 June. New user  writes: "You apparently deleted draft of a page for  Big Noble. I was about to start drafting one myself but wanted to see the deleted one first to see if it has the same content" on 26 June. This narrow, specific focus repeated on sock after sock... Per the Moscow Rules "Once is an accident. Twice is coincidence. Three times is a pattern." Keri (talk) 10:52, 26 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Smoking gun: posted to my talk page here. Forgetting which sock is being worn today  drops by to ask why the section "I created here yesterday to chat with you has been deleted?". Keri (talk) 17:03, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - They are unrelated to some of the accounts and possibly related to others. The IPs associated with this case are all over the world. This case will likely need to continue to be decided based on behavioral evidence alone. Tiptoety  talk 22:59, 25 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Blocked Tampico1 based on Keri's evidence. --Neil N  talk to me 18:34, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

05 July 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

WP:DUCK Brand new account immediately resumes editing in Paul Banks-related areas, making same against-consensus edits
 * 1) As sock BasicBicycle
 * 2) As sock ArielNow
 * 3) This sock Keri (talk) 18:44, 5 July 2015 (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'm declining the CU request as no reason was provided for requesting it. Also, based on the last checkuser's comment in the archives, it would probably be useless.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:32, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I think the behavioral evidence is enough to block (making identical edit + interested in Paul Banks (singer)  like all other socks).  Vanjagenije   (talk)  10:04, 9 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Blocked and tagged per finding. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 10:52, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

08 August 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Yawn. WP:DUCK. SPA currently obsessed with Interpol / Paul Banks. Same changes on The Heinrich Maneuver ‎ eg this sock compared with previous sock. Also using same range as a previous sock (eg ) Keri (talk) 23:02, 8 August 2015 (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 the IP for a week based upon behavior. Please note that we won't perform a checkuser at an SPI with just an IP address. <b style="color:#151B54">Mike V</b> • <b style="color:#C16C16">Talk</b> 02:58, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

11 August 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Same edits to Paul Banks (singer) and The Heinrich Maneuver as previously blocked IP User:86.147.156.136, same IP range as earlier socks. User is evading their block rather than requesting it be lifted. McGeddon (talk) 17:16, 11 August 2015 (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 semi-protected both articles. There's little point blocking the IP as they'll simply hop to another one.  The ISP, British Telecom in the UK, is the biggest in the country and impossible to range-block. Black Kite (talk) 17:41, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Noted. Thanks. --McGeddon (talk) 17:45, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Closing the case.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  16:18, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

14 September 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Previous socks have been blanking a particular sentence from the article The Heinrich Maneuver (eg. 1, 2), to the point where the article had to be protected for a month. Within six hours of that protection expiring, Heinrich Vancouver joined Wikipedia and blanked it as their second edit. McGeddon (talk) 15:38, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * It would help if someone sourced the sentence. Whilst this indeed probably an AP sock, what if an unsuspecting editor came along and removed it (as they are perfectly entitled to do) because there was no source for it? Black Kite (talk) 09:05, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
 * I sourced the sentence when adding it back yesterday. --McGeddon (talk) 09:10, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
 * So you did, my apologies - I was looking at the previous version. Black Kite (talk) 09:17, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
 * But, your source substantiates only that there is a link between this song and the book White Noise — it doesn't say anything about the claim that "Heinrich Maneuver" is a play on "Heimlich maneuver". The other editor (or editors) should really have brought the matter up on the article's talk page rather than wage an edit war, but I can't discount the possibility that an unsuspecting editor might have come along and removed this unsourced claim.  FWIW, I've kept the claim in the article for now, but it's marked as needing a source.  —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 04:00, 26 September 2015 (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

 * - per provided diffs.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:22, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Is there an account besides, a suspected puppet, that is not stale?--Bbb23 (talk) 01:19, 15 September 2015 (UTC)\
 * and were confirmed to each other. They are not stale.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  08:31, 15 September 2015 (UTC)


 * is ❌ to the following accounts:
 * This doesn't preclude a behavioral finding that Heinrich Vancouver is a sock. A lot of time has elapsed since these other accounts edited, and the CU history of this master is problematic.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:19, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
 * See my comment above about how a presumption that is a sock, as opposed to someone trying to do the right thing but being in the wrong place at the wrong time, is weak.  Too weak for me to be comfortable calling them a sock on behavioural evidence alone.  I'm going to close this one without taking any action against this account.  —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 04:00, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
 * This doesn't preclude a behavioral finding that Heinrich Vancouver is a sock. A lot of time has elapsed since these other accounts edited, and the CU history of this master is problematic.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:19, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
 * See my comment above about how a presumption that is a sock, as opposed to someone trying to do the right thing but being in the wrong place at the wrong time, is weak.  Too weak for me to be comfortable calling them a sock on behavioural evidence alone.  I'm going to close this one without taking any action against this account.  —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 04:00, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
 * This doesn't preclude a behavioral finding that Heinrich Vancouver is a sock. A lot of time has elapsed since these other accounts edited, and the CU history of this master is problematic.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:19, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
 * See my comment above about how a presumption that is a sock, as opposed to someone trying to do the right thing but being in the wrong place at the wrong time, is weak.  Too weak for me to be comfortable calling them a sock on behavioural evidence alone.  I'm going to close this one without taking any action against this account.  —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 04:00, 26 September 2015 (UTC)
 * See my comment above about how a presumption that is a sock, as opposed to someone trying to do the right thing but being in the wrong place at the wrong time, is weak.  Too weak for me to be comfortable calling them a sock on behavioural evidence alone.  I'm going to close this one without taking any action against this account.  —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 04:00, 26 September 2015 (UTC)