Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dronebogus/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets
It is with a great deal of disappointment that I file this SPI request. I have made every effort to have this looked into discreetly, so that this user's name is not dragged through the mud, but upon the recommendation of multiple parties who have reviewed the evidence, I am filing this public SPI.

I have a strong suspicion that Dronebogus is a prolific sockmaster, who has targeted me with multiple sockpuppets over the course of nearly a year. Another user, Skyerise, also reached the same conclusion about Dronebogus, in a different topic area, after multiple years of interacting with different sockpuppets.

I recently discovered that the socks that Skyerise suspects of being run by Dronebogus and the socks that I suspect of being run by Dronebogus are being run by the same sock master. Here is the background:

In December 2022, Dronebogus started following me around on en.wiki. Hatting/closing active discussions, reverting edits, following me from page to page, and being generally hostile and obnoxious, [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1113#Is_this_a_violation_of_wp:soap_and_wp:PROFRINGE? which] seems to be a [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Roxy_the_dog#Pregnant_people_go_swimming? pattern].

In mid-January 2023, a "new" user and obvious sockpuppet called Vizorblaze was created, for one reason: to follow me from page to page being obnoxious. The attitude was strikingly similar to Dronebogus, but even more over the top. Nobody else has treated me this way - Dronebogus and Vizorblaze are extreme outliers.

Dronebogus [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Vizorblaze#Welcome! greeted] the new sockpuppet, and then something odd happened. Dronebogus went from interacting with me multiple times a day, on nearly every single page at which I was involved, to completely ceasing his pattern of interaction with me within a day or two. Vizorblaze, on the other hand, got more and more vitriolic towards me before eventually getting banned.

As the previously linked SPI indicates, Vizorblaze continued harassing me through various accounts and IPs, and continues to do so to this day. 3 ANI threads have been started by the sockpuppets just in the past week. Dronebogus is still very active, as am I, but he completely dropped off and has never, interacted with me again, ever since a day or two after Vizorblaze and his socks started targeting me.

That's my experience, which is related to the experience of a user named Skyerise, who's been around for over 15 years. For multiple years, they've experienced harassment from a sock puppet army at pages like "Chaos magic" and related titles. Skyerise has paid close attention to these pages for years and years, and is quite familiar with the attitude and behavior of these sockpuppets. The sock puppet army has been tied to the user Raxythecat.

Approximately 24 hours before the creation of Vizorblaze, Skyerise made a rather bold claim: Raxythecat is Dronebogus.

Skyerise said "...it's not your edits that identify you. It's your attitude. That's why I waited to see what you would say when you inevitably reverted me before filing the report." - This summarizes my view of Vizorblaze perfectly. The attitude is unmistakable. I've never had any other editor interact with me with this sort of attitude, and it is exactly the attitude that Dronebogus exhibits towards myself and others.

Now, Skyerise has felt uneasy about the Raxythecat-Dronebogus connection for months, as have I with the Vizorblaze-Dronebogus connection. However, I decided to move forward with this in a serious way when I learned the following:

Per NinjaRobotPirate's comment at the bottom of this thread, Raxythecat and Vizorblaze are likely run by the same sock master.

I think that the sock master is Dronebogus, and so does Skyerise - and we reached that conclusion independently, without previously communicating with one another about it, working in different topic areas, over a period of years, based on Dronebogus' unmistakable, distinctive bad attitude, which is well documented.

I sure wish that someone would be willing to do a CU and see if Dronebogus is indeed operating in a similar IP range as these sockpuppets. If the CU comes up positive, it will put an end to this. If it comes up negative, it will also put an end to this, as I will apologize to Dronebogus and move on.

I also have circumstantial evidence, such as edit interaction analyses and overlap between usernames, that suggest to me and others that Vizorblaze and Raxythecat are not Dronebogus' only sockpuppets. One account that I've analyzed is Dronebogus1. I will present this evidence upon request, but for the sake of brevity, I won't say more now. Philomathes2357 (talk) 22:21, 1 October 2023 (UTC)

Comments by other users

 * Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

The entire wall of text by Philomathes2357 here has no actual evidence and no diffs that relate. It looks like this is part of Philomathes2357's attempt to deflect and derail discussion of his problem behavior by accusing random other editors of sockpuppeting. To correctly state the content of the "report" by Skyerise that RoySmith and Philomathes link: after numerous uncivil comments and being caught WP:CANVASSING, Skyerise was warned for harassing Dronebogus. The "report" was closed for lack of evidence by and. A WP:BOOMERANG is in order here. Philomathes2357 seems to believe that anyone who does not agree with him is a sockpuppet of Vizorblade, now expanding to editors he has no recent contact with. It is part of the larger problem of his repeated WP:UNCIVIL commenting, WP:BLUDGEONING, WP:IDHT, refusals to WP:DROPTHESTICK, attempts to WP:CANVAS, and other WP:CIR issues. 76.143.193.135 (talk) 13:50, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
 * The RaxyTheCat sockpuppet investigation was already open and shut as total crap. If you’re going to accuse me of sock puppetry then don’t bring up a totally ludicrous accusation that’s been proven false. Dronebogus (talk) 22:00, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
 * As for Vizorblaze, I welcomed them because their edits as of 17 January were perfectly reasonable. I’ve never interacted with them since to my memory. Dronebogus (talk) 22:04, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Dronebogus1 is an impersonation account that existed to disagree with me by edit warring over their garbage edits to Obscenity. Using my own account name AND fighting with myself would be extremely odd behaviors from a sock puppet. Dronebogus (talk) 22:20, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Randy Peck (mentioned further down) was a short+lived sock who just happened to perform some similar maintenance work to me (see MOS:TRIVIA— there is nothing disruptive about removing trivia sections). The plausible resemblance ends there. Why I would apparently need a sock to perform uncontroversial maintenance is beyond me. Dronebogus (talk) 23:11, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
 * This is an interesting comment from a new IP editor. Same tone and verbiage as this. Most likely another sockpuppet of Vizorblaze: IP range is similar. Here's a rhetorical question: why would a brand new IP editor, and a likely sockpuppet of Vizorblaze, show up here to present a spirited defense of Dronebogus?
 * I have other circumstantial evidence beyond what's already been presented, but didn't want to make the text wall any larger if it wasn't necessary. Just one other piece of evidence: proven sockpuppet of Vizorblaze, Randy Peck, dedicated a number of his edits to removing "trivia". See here. This is also a focus of Dronebogus, who has removed what he described as "trivia" from articles in 3 of his last 500 edits. See here. Randy Peck used the abbreviation "rm" for remove, which Dronebogus has also done several times in his last 500 edits when removing content.
 * Again, I resent that this all has to take place in public. Especially if my suspicions are incorrect. I would have much preferred that a CU was done per my privately-expressed concerns, then, if Dronebogus has nothing to do with this, his name wouldn't be dragged through the mud on the record in this way. If a CU demonstrates that there is no relationship between Dronebogus, Vizorblaze, and Raxythecat, I will apologize to Dronebogus. @Dronebogus, would you support a CU here, just to get this done and over with? Philomathes2357 (talk) 22:58, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes because you’re wrong. Dronebogus (talk) 23:01, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Also, using a common abbreviation is “evidence”? Seriously? Dronebogus (talk) 23:07, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Also, did you consider that maybe the “tone and verbiage” of IP and UsernameUnderDuress is similar because you’re getting on multiple people’s nerves? Dronebogus (talk) 23:13, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
 * PS the IP geolocates to Huston, which would mean the supposed sockmaster is also in Huston. I’m not from Huston nor have even set foot in it as indicated by my userpage so that kind of damages your case. Dronebogus (talk) 23:22, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
 * You mean Houston? Of course, to be fair, proxies exist. And also, I've struck the "rm" bit. I think the best course of action here is to sit back and wait for third parties to weigh in. Philomathes2357 (talk) 00:47, 4 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Nice. I'll be out of town until Tuesday but I can speak to the Dronebogus/Vizorblaze connection when I get back. Kindly leave this SPI open until then. Philomathes2357 (talk) 16:50, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
 * You can stop wasting your time on this. I’m not a sock and I’ve done nothing as of late to bother you. Dronebogus (talk) 20:30, 5 October 2023 (UTC)

What's the current status here? It appears to me like harassment of Dronebogus by an editor who has had myriad negative interactions with many mainstream editors, a block, and many warnings that don't seem to have any effect. These interaction analyses may help to uncover some of those negative interactions:


 * Dronebogus and Philomathes2357
 * Valjean and Philomathes2357

They are usually on fringe topic areas where Philomathes2357 won't drop the stick and is a huge time sink. I'm really amazed that Philomathes2357 hasn't been permabanned or topic-banned yet for their tendentious editing and disruptions.

Philomathes2357's block log contains a great summary of the problems, for which they were blocked and which continue unabated:


 * "Edit warring, bludgeoning on talkpages, disrespect for consensus, and an egregious waste of constructive editors' time and patience, which is Wikipedia's most precious resource." - Bishonen


 * Here are the unblock conditions.

I could not have said it better. This SPI may be vexatious revenge and deserve a trouting and full block. I hope it gets cleared up soon. Even if it turns out to be right, the problems with Philomathes2357 remain serious and actionable. -- Valjean (talk) ( PING me ) 22:18, 5 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Philo has requested the case remain open for almost a week longer because they apparently have some bombshell evidence to drop after they return from parts unknown. This is absurd— their primary evidence, which they had ample time to prepare, is just unremarkable  overlap, a single minor coincidence, and obvious non-evidence (like citing a hostile impersonation account as a potential sock puppet). Why should anyone believe whatever else they come up with is any better? I think that this should be a. Closed due to lack of evidence to justify even a checkuser; and b. Philo should be blocked for WP:CIR (even if nominally good faith you absolutely do not open baseless sockpuppet investigations based entirely on personal suspicion since sock puppetry is one of the worst things you can accuse another Wikimedian of) Dronebogus (talk) 04:12, 6 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Subsequently, two users have come to me with claims that there is off-site coordination, administrative corruption, and undisclosed COIs going on here. See links:
 * User talk:73.206.160.3
 * User talk:Dronebogus
 * Dronebogus (talk) 14:47, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Why is this still open? Either do the checkuser or close as no evidence. Dronebogus (talk) 18:54, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I agree. Either provide evidence or close/withdraw this. -- Valjean (talk) ( PING me ) 19:03, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I was asked to update the SPI with more evidence of behavioral similarities. This would take some time, but I was prepared to do so. But then I was also told off-Wiki that a CU has been done on Vizorblaze, and it showed that there is no connection to Dronebogus. That appears to contradict what I was told by Blablubbs. If that's true, I don't know what listing more diffs demonstrating Vizorblaze's coincidental appearance and behavioral similarity to Dronebogus would accomplish. What am I missing?
 * I've also been told by multiple editors, with some evidence to back it up, that Vizorblaze, along with all of the socks and IPs that have been causing chaos lately, are being controlled by an obsessive LTA troll, and that Dronebogus is just a pawn in the troll's game.
 * I can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that some, if not all of these socks are being run by Vizorblaze. It's also true that many of these socks have been explicitly coordinating with Dronebogus, and working overtime to defend him. Those facts, especially the explosion of activity from the sockpuppets in defense of DB, suggested to me that my SPI had merit.
 * I recognize that may be confirmation bias at work, especially since it's subsequently been brought to my attention that other socks have been defending me and levying false personal attacks against other editors in defense of me. That disturbs me.
 * If someone could kindly confirm or reject the rumor that the CU team has already looked into the Vizorblaze/Dronebogus allegation, that would be great, so that I don't waste time. If it's true, I will withdraw the SPI and apologize to DB. If it's not true, I'll go ahead and create a more focused report, with the caveat that the behavioral similarities and coincidental timings could be explained by an elaborate joe job orchestrated by a loser with way too much time on his hands.
 * I'd like this to be over as much as everyone else. This SPI was submitted in good faith based on my hunch, but if my hunch was wrong, I'll have no problem owning that. I'd just like the nearly year-long harassment of me by Vizorblaze to be put to an end. If someone can clarify what investigative action, if any, has been taken thus far, I can proceed accordingly and wrap this up in a timely manner. Philomathes2357 (talk) 19:27, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Just noting this isn't the first time Dronebogus has been suggested to Raxythecat. See Sockpuppet investigations/Raxythecat/Archive. RoySmith (talk) 23:38, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
 * A few thoughts:
 * A look at the CU log has me pretty convinced that Vizorblaze is indeed Raxy
 * I've checked Raxy quite a lot, and I don't recall Dronebogus ever showing up in any of these checks; that isn't proof of anything one way or another, but it does suggest to me that checking Dronebogus would be unlikely to produce any sort of clearly positive CU result, even if we assume they're the same person
 * The evidence, as presented, strikes me as thin. It boils down to:
 * Dronebogus and Raxy have edited similar topics
 * Dronebogus and Raxy have gotten into spats with similar people
 * Dronebogus has been under community scrutiny in the past
 * The timing is conspicuous
 * Someone else agrees with the filer
 * These are things that might be considered at least suggestive depending on the specifics, but most of the substantive assertions about a connection between Dronebogus and Raxy/Vizorblaze are not backed up by diffs that would allow us to evaluate them closely
 * The previous filing also contained insufficient evidence and was deemed to not be actionable
 * CU is not suited to proving negatives
 * It is irrelevant whether Dronebogus "support[s] a CU". Checking someone because they have asked for it in order to prove their innocence is explicitly prohibited by policy (WP:CHECKME)
 * I think this is likely to end up getting closed without action unless additional evidence (with diffs) is presented (see WP:GOODSPI for guidance)
 * --Blablubbs (talk) 21:46, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Original filer now has doubts partially due to the amount of trolling over this, possibly by Vizorblade/Raxythecat and believes the constraints on CU won't allow it, which is correct. So, closing this as there has been no convincing evidence. Doug Weller  talk 08:14, 13 October 2023 (UTC)