Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Blackvisionit/Archive

07 August 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets






 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Wikistalk shows that, of Powerlife's 31 edits, 17 overlap with Blackvisionit. Most obviously, Powerlife edited Blackvisionit's userpage (diff). Blackvisionit was recently warned (by me) that they have a COI with regards to Floppy disk hardware emulator and that they should not edit the page directly; afterward, Powerlife made an edit to the page with the summary "applying agreed comment and see also section", despite never once having edited the article or the talk page. Since Blackvisionit has already indicated that they intend to keep editing the article despite the warning, I'm actually concerned that not only are they using this sock as a problem, but that they may have other socks in waiting to be used for similar purposes. I'm unclear on exactly what circumstances warrant a general search for sleepers, but if they apply here, I'd like a checkuser to do so. Qwyrxian (talk) 02:36, 7 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Blackvisionit has stated that Powerlife was used during a transition between it.wiki and en.wiki, and was used in error in this case. In User Talk:Qwyrxian, user has stated that they don't wish to use that account any more, and thus want it indefinitely blocked. I will do so.  If CU still feels it appropriate to check for other socks, feel free to do so; otherwise, this can be closed and archived.  Qwyrxian (talk) 04:02, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, I'm going to have Blackvisionit log in to that account first to prove its his, then block it. Qwyrxian (talk) 04:03, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

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

The following IP addresses: ( 79.45.39.176 -- 93.48.130.200 -- 93.48.143.214 -- 93.48.129.148 ) reverted the same edit, used the same phrasing, made similar arguments and posted to the same pages as Blackvisionit/Powerlife, supporting him. The IP addresses are in Italy (telecomitalia.it and RCT-Rome.as6453.net) and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Powerlife indicates that Blackvisionit/Powerlife has a connection with it.wikipedia.org --Guy Macon (talk) 08:21, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - Hmm... the articles line up, but I'm not sure about their edits. Endorsing to clarify. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 04:21, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, I'm closing this for now. Powerlife has been indeffed as part of a transition for Blackvision from it -> en, whatever that means. I've listed the IPs above. They're clearly the same person - or working in collusion with each other - so I've blocked the one IP that edited after Powerlife was blocked. I'm trying to assume good faith on this one, but relist if there is new activity. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 13:34, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

28 November 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

It was suggested that I open a SPI by Admin Wifione here. He wrote "The SPI desk is the place you should re-open this investigation" and "[No one] can have a conjecture of a definite connection between Blackvisionit and the ip until the SPI administrator/clerk agrees."

All the evidence (including a previous SPI) is at the link above (near the bottom, starting with "Here are my reasons for believing that the IP is Blackvisionit.") Should I reproduce all the evidence here or is the link sufficient? Just let me know and I will do whatever is needed. Guy Macon (talk) 06:45, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Question: When the current SPI gets archived will there be a name conflict, or is the archiving software smart enough to pick a name like Archive2? --Guy Macon (talk) 02:09, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
 * They are archived to the same page, like any talk page archive with more than one discussions. T. Canens (talk) 12:40, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Although the IP address in question has not edited Wikipedia for the last few days, if I am correct about it being a Blackvisionit sock, it is likely that we will see a continuation of the pattern of waiting a few months and then doing more COI editing of the emulator article from another IP that geolocates to the same Italian city. If that happens, I would like to minimize the problem I had this time, where an admin told me that no action could be taken until the SPI administrator/clerk agrees that there is a connection between Blackvisionit and the IP. To that end, I would like to request a yes/no/unknown determination in this case.

I didn't get an answer about whether the link was enough, so I am reproducing the evidence here:

Blackvisionit owns a company in Italy that sells one particular type of floppy disk hardware emulator - the kind that is used on IBM-Compatible PCs. http://members.fortunecity.it/blackvisionit/emufdd_en.htm redirects to his web page, and Admin Qwyrxian said "Blackvisionit has stated that Powerlife was used during a transition between it.wiki and en.wiki"

137.204.148.73's recent edit warring is an attempt to focus the page on the low-level details (NEC Compatability, for example) which differentiate Blackvisionit's floppy disk hardware emulator from his competitor's products. All of these details are about areas where Blackvisionit's floppy disk hardware emulator is clearly superior to his competitor's products. The other editors of the page are trying to make it more encyclopedic, treating all floppy disk hardware emulators - PC, Mac, Commodore, Atari, etc. equally.

137.204.148.73 resolves to proxy-almanet.cib.unibo.it That's the Universita' degli Studi di Bologna, a University in Bologna, Italy.

On Blackvisionit's website, under "University material" are several papers labeled "Bologna" I don't know enough Italian to narrow it down to the university.

137.204.148.73 may have been assigned to different different users at different times, but is clearly the present user from at least 14 October 2011 where it was used to re-insert the pinout table that was originally put there by Blackvisionit when he created the page  (Note the same background:whitesmoke;color:black tags)

Previous to that (same day) the same table with same background:whitesmoke was added by IP address 130.136.4.212, which also resolves to cs.unibo.it - the same University in Bologna

Admin Qwyrxian concluded from 137.204.148.73's editing pattern that my suspicion was well-founded. 

Clerk HelloAnnyong concluded that a previous batch of IP edits (not 137.204.148.73) from the same region of Italy that I documented above were "clearly the same person - or working in collusion with each other" This shows a history of using IP edits to evade an administrator's instructions. 

Admin Wifione, while not convinced that the IP is definitely Blackvisionit (he sent me here for a determination) did say that "I believe the IP passes the duck theory quite well." This refers to The duck test.

Three of those the IP addresses (93.48.130.200, 93.48.143.214 and 93.48.129.148) are from Fastnet Italy. They are in Bolzano, Rovereto, and Trento Italy, in the same region as Bologna and Verona.

The 79.45.39.176 IP resolves to host176-39-dynamic.45-79-r.retail.telecomitalia.it That's the Telecom Italia regional hub in Verona, Italy, headquartered 100 kilometers from Bologna (confirmed through http://www.ip-adress.com/)

It seems highly unlikely that 137.204.148.73 just happens to be from the same town in Italy as Blackvisionit, both just happen to primarily edit the same rather obscure page, both just happen to insert the same table with the same "whitesmoke" background color, both just happen to get into a fight with the same editor over the same issues (with 137.204.148.73 making a reference in an edit comment to the previous fight that Blackvisionit was in), both just happen to ignore repeated requests to discuss edits on the talk page, both just happen to wikikilawyer without any real understanding of policy (WP:BEANS? Really?) and both just happen to want to put information on the Emulator page that describe features of Blackvisionit's products that are superior to his competitors products. Nonetheless, I would like a determination by an SPI clerk in case I am mistaken.

Also Relevant --Guy Macon (talk) 03:11, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

I don't know if this will help, but the talk page for 137.204.148.73 on Italian Wikipedia is here: [ http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussioni_utente:137.204.148.73 ] (Blackvisionit has stated that he had the username Powerlife on Italian Wikipedia). Perhaps the SPI tools might show a connection or a lack of connection there. --Guy Macon (talk) 22:52, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Updated list of recent administrative actions regarding IP Address 137.204.148.73

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Blackvisionit

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RRArchive173#User:137.204.148.73 reported by User:Guy Macon (Result: No action right now.)

Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Floppy disk hardware emulator (Closed)

Wikipedia:Wikiquette assistance#Active "hunt & attack" by editor

--Guy Macon (talk) 10:41, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

''' HELP!!! '''

Please look at [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikiquette_assistance#Active_.22hunt_.26_attack.22_by_editor ]. We REALLY need a determination here, even if the determination is "cannot be determined" Can we please get a clerk to look at this? Pretty please with sugar on top? --Guy Macon (talk) 22:01, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I'm the admin who was previously involved in this case. Earlier in the year, I responded to a WP:COIN question about User:Blackvisionit, and, after looking at the article in question, as well as hearing discussion on the talk page and noticeboard, it became quite clear to me that Blackvisionit had an admitted COI, and that this COI was preventing him from realizing when his edits were POV.  I was and am now willing to AGF that Blackvisionit isn't actually trying to unbalance the article Floppy disk hardware emulator towards the types of products his own company supports, but that because of his intimate involvement with the topic in a professional and financial level, he is unable to realize when he was introduce POV to the article.  Previously this came primarily in the form of adding links to "sources" that were really just sales pages; more recently it has focused on skewing the article content to a single aspect of the emulator market. As such, I gave Blackvisionit a final warning that any editing of the article on his part that was anything higher than grammar correction or vandalism reversion would result in a block.  Eventually, he agreed to stop editing the article.
 * As for this SPI, at the beginning I was not certain that the IP in question is Blackvisionit, but after reviewing everything Guy Macon has presented, I'm fairly confident it is the same person (or, alternatively, a close working colleague). The geo-location of the IP, combined with prior information from Blackvisionit regarding his own location, certainly make the connection likely.  Most telling, for me, though, was the edit summary on this diff.  There, 137 says, "Guy Macon is back..."  However, if we look back to the time that the article was being editing by Guy Macon previously (around August 2011), we can see in the history that there was no other IP editing the article at that time (though there was one IP who popped onto the talk page from Torino), and certainly not one that was actively disputing.  Guy Macon's evidence, in terms of the fact that the info being added by the IP is substantially similar to that previously added/supported by Blackvisionit, is also compelling. Thus, to me, there is an awfully strong likelihood that 137 is Blackvisionit, trying to avoid scrutiny.
 * I haven't taken any admin action against the IP, as some might argue that my involvement with this case makes it difficult for me to judge the similarity carefully enough. I'd love for another admin to take a look and see if the connection is strong enough.  Of course, even if such a connection is established, that doesn't necessarily mean that 137 should be sanctioned; then the question would be whether the attempt to avoid scrutiny, combined with further attempts to bias the article, merit sanctions.  There hasn't been any problematic activity from the IP in the last 24 hours or so...but if someone else were watching, perhaps that alone might be enough. Qwyrxian (talk) 00:34, 29 November 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I've blocked the 137 IP for three days. If it's him, maybe Blackvision will log in. I'm going to leave the account and the other IP alone, as they haven't edited in months. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 04:26, 6 December 2011 (UTC)