Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BatteryIncluded/Archive

Report date February 27 2009, 08:40 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets

- José Gnudista (talk) 08:40, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Evidence submitted by José Gnudista (talk)
 * Perhaps inadvertently, but User:Jesusmariajalisco has helped User:BatteryIncluded circumvent the three-revert rule twice. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_space_agencies&action=history


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * WP:3RR forbids any single editor, which includes multiple accounts operated by a single editor, or editing under the direction of a single editor, reverting more than 3 times in a 24 hour period. It does not forbid the same revert being made more than 3 times in total by different editors, provided each editor refrains from more than 3 reverts. WP:SPI cannot sanction people for sharing a viewpoint in an editing dispute. Mayalld (talk) 12:07, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Both the alleged master and the alleged sock are editors in good standing, registered for a considerable time, who share a common interest in Mexican topics, but who do not regularly edit together on articles. The fact that they are taking a similar stance on a single article today doesn't amount to evidence of sockpuppetry. Mayalld (talk) 12:07, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Conclusions

Suspected sockpuppets



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

On Sept. 28, the IP edited Talk:Alicia Machado, writing:
 * - "Bullshit".
 * - "Complete and utter bullshit."

At Talk:Myron Ebell, both BatteryIncluded and the IP began editing on Nov. 10. Both took a strong stand against Ebell for his views on climate change. BatteryIncluded made 5 edits first, during which he was engaged in a dispute with User:Zigzig20s:
 * first edit - "Cut the BULLSHIT."
 * third edit - "Cut the bullshit!"
 * fourth edit - "cut the bullshit! I'm not a newbie you can intimidate with BS"
 * fifth edit - "Ebell is sometimes described as climate denier-in-chief"

The IP then made 5 edits, in which he joined the dispute against Zigzig20s, and supported the points made by BatteryIncluded:
 * second edit - "He's not an "analyst" of climate change, he's a political hack and lobbyist. He has zero background in science, let alone climate science. He has a fixed position derived from ideology, not study, understanding, or "analysis" of climate science, which he knows next to nothing about".

BatteryIncluded made one edit here - "I question Zigzig20s' apparent intentions to sanitize this article".

The IP then made 8 edits:
 * seventh edit - "I know what sort of person you are and what you're up to. Now that Trump has been elected, it doesn't much matter ... human civilization on this planet is soon over. I will still call out this sort of BS".

BatteryIncluded then made 15 edits, and then the IP then make 6 edits, including:
 * sixth edit - the IP states: "Zigzig20s is topic banned from all pages related to climate change - Notice just in case he returns".

At Myron Ebell, BatteryIncluded began editing Nov. 9, and the IP on Nov. 10. Some early edits involved BatteryIncluded edit waring with other editors about the use of "skeptic" and "denier". In chronological order:


 * - BatteryIncluded added "Global warming denial".
 * - BatteryIncluded added "Global warming denial".
 * - BatteryIncluded changed "climate change analysis" to "climate change denial".
 * - BatteryIncluded changed "analysis" to "denial".
 * - BatteryIncluded added "denier-in-chief".
 * - The IP changed "public policy analyst on climate change" to " global warming skeptic".
 * - The IP changed "public policy analyst on climate change" to " global warming skeptic".
 * - BatteryIncluded added "is a global warming denier".
 * - BatteryIncluded changed "skeptic" to "denier".

BatteryIncluded was blocked from editing on Nov. 11. Following that, the IP appeared to stalk Zigzig20s here and here. Magnolia677 (talk) 20:28, 13 November 2016 (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
We don't publicly disclose the IP(s) of named accounts. CU declined.--Bbb23 (talk) 21:04, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
 * IP is continuing BatteryIncluded's POV crusade in this topic and stalking the same users with very similar personal attacks. Please block:
 * indefinite for evading their block to continue the personal attacks they've already been blocked for twice this month;
 * for 2 weeks (adding a week to the master's original block). This IP does appear to be dynamic.
 * Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:13, 16 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Blocked BatteryIncluded for 6 months and the IP for 1 week. I think an indefinite block would be a tad harsh for a first socking offense, even with the personal attacks aggravating things. This is a final chance. As for the IP block length, four days of activity on the IP from the same editor justifies more than a brief block, but by the end of a week, it's likely a new user will be editing from that IP. ~ Rob 13 Talk 07:46, 19 November 2016 (UTC)