Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Barbarossa139/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

On the talk page for the alt-right organization Identity Evropa, the question of whether the group should be described as "identitarian" rather than "neo-Nazi" was brought up on 7 June 2018 by Barbarossa139, who has since been adamantly fighting for eliminating "neo-Nazi", against a consensus of editors who disagree.On 23 June, a brand new editor, Axumtoted, whose account was created that day, posted a semi-protected edit request to remove "neo-Nazi" and identify the group as "white nationalist organization, and a hate group". This request was turned down by several editors, including myself. This new editor only made edits to Talk:Identity Evropa, until they did a WP:DIVA exit on my talk page.During the time that Axumtoted edited the article talk page, from 14:33 23 June to 14:07 25 June, Barbarossa139 did not make a single edit to en.Wiki. As soon as Axuntoted posted their last edit to the talk page, Barbarossa immediately began editing again, with their first edit -- to the article talk page, in fact -- at 14:21, 14 minutes after Axumtoted's last edit.It seems highly probable that Axumtoted was a sock of Barbarossa139, that having gotten no traction editing under their own ID, they created a new one to make the edit request, and once that, too, failed, they closed down the sock, and began again under their own account. Creating a sock to avoid scrutiny and undermine talk-page consensus is a black-letter violation of the alternative account policy. (In addition, despite the clear consensus on the talk page, Barbarossa139 has opened a dispute resolution case to further undermine that consensus.) If this is indeed the case, Barbarossa needs to be blocked for that violation, so establishing that Axumtoted is their sock is essential. Beyond My Ken (talk) 03:02, 27 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Additional evidence to consider:
 * Barbarossa139 started editing on 4 June 2018, even though the account was created on 25 January 2018, opening the possibility that Barbarossa139 is itself a sock, since registering an account and not using it until months afterwards is frequently a sign of being a sock held in reserve.
 * I deliberately did not notify Barbarrossa139 of this SPI, nor did I use any format of mentioning them that would send them a notification. The only such use of a pinging format was the use of "User:Axumtoted" in the list of sockpuppets.  Therefore, there are only two ways I can see that Barbarossa139 found out about this SPI: either they are monitoring my contributions list, or they have access to the notifications sent to  Axumtoted.
 * It seems to me to be fairly rare for a user who has been editing for only 24 days to be aware of WP:DR. Beyond My Ken (talk) 07:16, 27 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Barbarossa139 is right about one thing: it was their move to undermine the clear consensus on Talk:Identity Evropa by opening an unnecessary DR request that provoked this report. That Axumtoted was somebody's sock was perfectly obvious almost from the outset, it only remained for B139 to show how extremely important and personal this issue was to them.  Their taking the BATTLEGROUND action of opening the DR made it clear to me whose sock Axumtoted probably was -- thus this report.  Before then, I had no master to connect it to, now, I do. Beyond My Ken (talk) 11:57, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I did not have any knowledge of this account in question prior to seeing their comment in the talk section. This account's use of syntax and grammar isn't even of a similar nature as mine to assume this is somehow another account I am operating from. Your hostile behavior and the accusatory nature of your discussions is why I opened a dispute for that particular topic, among other issues and policy violations present on that article. The timing of my posting compared to this account in question may seem planned or intentional within your narrative, but I simply don't believe this is stable ground for such accusations - I live a busy life and cannot make 50+ edits a day. I would hope you understand that not everyone who has an opposite opinion than yourself is doing so in bad faith. Thank you.


 * I checked your contribution history after your recent behavior on the dispute resolution board because I had a feeling you were going to attempt to further try to discredit me or bully users into complying with your demands. Lo and behold, I see you're trying the SPA avenue now. I see nothing wrong with this dispute and I believe I've laid out a fair and nuanced argument in accordance to wikipedia policy. If I've done anything wrong here, then I'll leave it up to more neutral users to determine whether my actions were appropriate or not. Barbarossa139 (talk) 06:08, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
❌. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:18, 27 June 2018 (UTC)