Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Blackened0/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Re User account IP 104.232.202.112 and  User account  Blackened0. 1. On 10:46, 3 August 2019, IP 104.232.202.112 was blocked for 36 hours for making personal attacks against me, and harassment. (1, 2, 3, 4, 5.) 2. The first offensive post was made 15:06, 1 August 2019 in the article talk page -- notice how the person used my signature at the start of the comment. 3. On 19:37, 6 August 2019, 36 hours later, IP 104.232.202.112 returned and made the same kind of personal attack comment against me that had led to the account being blocked. 4. On 08:29, 10 August 2019 new User Blackened0 posted a comment directed at me -- notice how the person used my signature at the start, exactly the same as IP 104.232.202.112. 5. On 01:35, 11 August 2019 User Blackened0 posted a comment similar in nature to the comments by IP 104.232.202.112. 6. On 01:48, 11 August 2019 User Blackened0 made a false accusation in the BLP/N discussion about my conduct; which in so doing is a personal attack. The registered user and the IP editor are both engaging in the same pattern of behavior. Pyxis Solitary  yak  07:31, 11 August 2019 (UTC)

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

I'm not sure I see how their behavior here violates WP:SOCK; even assuming the presumption here is correct (and there's no reason to doubt it), they seem to have respected their block, and didn't use their IP + account in any way that would violate WP:SOCK's rules. This looks like an IP that later registered, which is an entirely legitimate thing to do. If anything, calling attention to their IP, in the absence of any indication that they used it abusively, risks running afoul of WP:OUTING. --Aquillion (talk) 01:09, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

malicious accusation (2), personal attack (2),
 * How my signature was used (1) and how my signature was used (2). How many times have you used an editor's signature in a comment -- and in exactly the same way?  Pyxis Solitary   yak  01:32, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * That's not the point. Per WP:SOCK, it's not sufficient to establish that they're the same person - you have to demonstrate that they were using their IP and account in some abusive manner (eg. to avoid scrutiny for their actions, or to create a false appearance of consensus.)  In the context of what you have to argue here, the fact that they don't seem to have made any effort to disguise their posting style is exculpatory, ie. the thing you pointed out means they probably weren't trying to avoid scrutiny because they weren't really making any effort to disguise their identity.  Simply using an IP, and later registering, is not a violation of WP:SOCK (if it were, few users would be able to register.) --Aquillion (talk) 01:39, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * So if being a sock is not enough, then what's left is to report personal attacks and other abusive conduct to ANI when it happens, yes? Pyxis Solitary   yak  02:02, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Just so you know how the personal attacks and harrassment is ramping up:
 * malicious accusation (1),
 * personal attack (1),
 * harassing message on my talk page.
 * All of these attacks under the Blackened0 account are in-step with the attacks made under IP 104.232.202.112. Pyxis Solitary   yak  03:55, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Has the IP done any of this since Blackened0 account started doing it? That's the key as far as socking is concerned. --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106; &#x1D110;&#x1d107; 04:41, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I doubt he'll resort to connecting as IP 104 again. It would lead to another block of the address, and that would be two blocks in the IP history. Pyxis Solitary   yak  05:33, 13 August 2019 (UTC)

The editor used an IP disruptively after establishing their account. The account was created on July 26th []. The editor then used an IP address for disruptive activities after creating an account. That is evading scrutiny. Other actions certainly seem like sock behavior. Their second edit was editing their talk page to clear the "red label" associated with a new account. Most "new" editors start with edits to a topic, not comments to a notice board discussion. Even if we can't identify the master the account should be blocked as wp:NOTHERE per this ANI [] Springee (talk) 13:06, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not suggesting this person is not behaving badly and deserving of blocking for that. But no, it's not socking if you create a named account, don't use it for a while, and then decide to start using it instead of editing anonymously. It's problematic if the edits are intermingled. Are they? --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106; &#x1D110;&#x1d107; 17:44, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * As the editor was just blocked I guess this is an academic discussion now. What the edit history shows is, in time order, Account created (26Jul), IP edits (1Aug), first edits under named account (10Aug).  What we haven't seen is identified IP edits after they started editing with the named account.  Springee (talk) 17:49, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * It's not academic; this was made as a checkuser block, and if I wanted to pick nits, I'd unblock the checkuser block and turn it into a disruption block. There's no evading scrutiny and no socking. There's awful behavior as an IP and then as a named editor. --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106; &#x1D110;&#x1d107; 17:58, 13 August 2019 (UTC)


 * I was heartened when I saw that Blackened0 had been blocked. Editors that indulge in personal attacks and aspersions against other editors do not belong in Wikipedia. And attempts to cement allegations as fact by repeating a lie is reprehensible. The malicious accusations that I had called someone "homophobic" in discussions is a lie. All anyone need do is look at my history in the ANI discussion and Meghan Murphy talk page (any discussion in in) to see that it never happened. In the case of Blackened0, "They that sow the wind, shall reap the whirlwind".  Pyxis Solitary   yak  04:36, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
I've blocked the editor following the discussion at ANI (permalinked). Having nothing to do with the IP address mentioned in this case (no comment about that), they used a proxy IP to make an inappropriate edit that they decided not to reveal. They avoided scrutiny in the ANI thread and I believe that they would continue to do so. Concerning WP:OUTING, IP information is *NOT* included in the personal information in that policy. Regular admins and editors may indeed list IP addresses. Only checkusers, stewards and other functionaries are bound by non-disclosure rules except under certain exceptions. — Berean Hunter   (talk)  18:01, 13 August 2019 (UTC) — Berean Hunter   (talk)  18:11, 13 August 2019 (UTC)
 * , I've emailed you.

— Berean Hunter   (talk)  02:36, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * If the IP weren't stale I'd block 'cause  are strong enough for me. Since the master is blocked and the IP is stale I don't think there's anything else to do here unless you've got anything else ? Best, Kevin ( aka L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) 02:33, 16 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't have anything else for now.
 * Thanks. Closing. Kevin ( aka L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) 04:45, 16 August 2019 (UTC)