Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Frobozz1/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Here, the IP appears in a discussion to back Frobozz1 in a dispute with another editor: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AOfficer_of_the_United_States&type=revision&diff=1009285717&oldid=1009123781

After another user commented on posts made under that IP, "Your edits are replete with original research...", editor Frobozz1 replied, "No sir, my edits exactly cite the debate arguments...", effectively confirming that he had posted using the IP,

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AOfficer_of_the_United_States&type=revision&diff=1009320357&oldid=1009301697

The IP was used here to revert the article to a form favored by Frobozz1, in defiance of efforts to reach consensus on the article talk page, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Parental_alienation&diff=prev&oldid=1012982639

Promptly followed by Frobozz1's appearance to make additional changes to the same article. Arllaw (talk) 16:16, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

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

Frobozz1 has stated that this is his IP, and that it appears because he sometimes forgets to log in before editing. Arllaw (talk) 22:33, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Closing without action - self-admitted accidental logged-out editing. GeneralNotability (talk) 00:58, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Here the IP is used to edit Frobozz1's sandbox, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Frobozz1/sandbox&diff=prev&oldid=1012711952

Right before appearing to post a comment on a talk page as a "neutral" voice, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Parental_alienation&diff=prev&oldid=1012713776

The same IP has been used to back up Frobozz1 in another talk page exchange, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:President_of_the_United_States&diff=prev&oldid=1008807253

Here, the IP is used to insert content favored by Frobozz1 immediately before Frobozz1 returns to edit the same article: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Impeachment_in_the_United_States&type=revision&diff=1009175096&oldid=1009099292 Arllaw (talk) 15:59, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

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

Frobozz1 denies ownership of this IP, and suggests that it's a friend whom he enlists to edit on his behalf. Arllaw (talk) 22:36, 19 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Frobozz1 has now offered an explanation as to why editors are appearing to support him in talk page discussions,
 * "Several editors are indeed collaborating on some projects, I have a couple sandboxes set up for testing, as do they."


 * Under this construction the "collaboration" is undisclosed, such that to other editors the actions of these editors would appear to be independent. This "collaboration" has involved Frobozz1's soliciting at least one other editor (Hotornotquestionmarknot / 199.46.249.141) to post content that he has written to a talk page as if it were the position of an independent editor. Other than Hotornotquestionmarknot, he has not identified these collaborators. Arllaw (talk) 04:44, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * , where does the IP editor (and/or Hotornot...) post content that Frobozz drafted in their sandbox? I see the IP editing the sandbox, but I don't see them posting something from said sandbox. GeneralNotability (talk) 01:12, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the question. In looking at the edit, I have to revisit what I said. 199.46.249.141 (identified by Frobozz1 as hotornot...) added sandbox content at that edit, which Frobozz1 later transferred to my talk page. Arllaw (talk) 01:19, 23 March 2021 (UTC)


 * IP has not edited since mid-March. Closing without action due to likelihood of being stale. The SandDoctor  Talk 07:41, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

An editor reappears after 3 1/2 years to dive straight into a topic (Parental Alienation) that interested them before and that is now in conflict, with Frobozz1 being one of the disputants. Their first edit in 3+ years is to write "hi" on Frobozz1's page  before then editing in support of them on various other pages.  It is possible that this is meatpuppetry, but that would be interesting to know too.

Another editor has, above, started this report with IPs to be checked for sockpuppetry for this same user. I know that checkusers cannot comment on IPs, but it is an important part of this puzzle, including the disingenuousness comments and explanations of various IP edits here. But I apologize if adding this extra report is not the right way or in the right place. Slp1 (talk) 02:50, 20 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much for your swift work on this, Oshwah. Much appreciated and helpful in clarifying in what is going one. --Slp1 (talk) 13:39, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

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

The editor, Hotornotquestionmarknot, last edited Wikipedia in 2017. Since he returned he has made five edits. The first was to user Frobozz1's talk page. The second was to his sandbox, where he edited a draft of a post for the Parental Alienation talk page. The third and fourth were to post in support of Frobozz1's position on Reliable sources/Noticeboard. The fifth was to post in support of Frobozz1 on the Parental alienation talk page -- to something buried in the overwhelming walls of text that one would think would make the discussions all but inscrutable to a newcomer. All of that within an hour of his return.

The community of advocates for the concept of parental alienation as advanced by Frobozz1 is quite small, so this could be a situation of their knowing each other from their outside activities. Frobozz1 has effectively admitted that he solicits other editors to intervene in discussions on his behalf, without disclosure. That would help explain the initial "Hi" post on Frobozz's profile page.

However, of the two editors who have supposedly independently intervened on Frobozz1's behalf, they and Frobozz1 all have a consistent, somewhat esoteric manner of signing their talk page posts on a new line following their comment. Examples,

Frobozz1, "--Frobozz1 (talk) 03:14, 20 March 2021 (UTC)"

Hotornotquestionmarknot, "--Hotornotquestionmarknot (talk) 02:02, 20 March 2021 (UTC)"

199.46.249.141: "--199.46.249.141 (talk) 22:14, 17 March 2021 (UTC)"

They also share a similar writing style and tone of voice, also suggesting common authorship.

Even if these are separate editors, it is not unreasonable to infer that they were invited to participate in a coordinated effort by Frobozz1 to try to make it appear that he was not alone in his positions as asserted on the talk page, and to try to build an illusion of consensus in support of his positions. It also seems curious that Hotornotquestionmarknot reappeared shortly after Frobozz1 realized that he was suspected of sockpuppetry for posts made under the IP addresses. Arllaw (talk) 03:45, 20 March 2021 (UTC)


 * In this comment, Frobozz1 effectively confirms that he solicited Hotornotquestionmarknot to edit, and suggests that 199.46.249.141 is Hotornotquestionmarknot's IP address:

"No that is likely another address of an editor I asked for help for my first time using noticeboards and 3O. Maybe a work policy against logging on? Hotornotquestionmarknot"


 * That would appear to be confirmation that he's feeding material to Hotornotquestionmarknot to post on his behalf under the guise of its being an independent opinion, given that 199.46.249.141 posted material that Frobozz! drafted in his sandbox. Arllaw (talk) 04:16, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * ❌.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   04:02, 20 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Closing without action per the above. The SandDoctor  Talk 07:40, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Frobozz1 was heavily involved in this ANI thread, and specifically two subthreads, involving a complaint about an edit summary I made, and my apology for making it. After I apologized, Frobozz1 continued to try to have me sanctioned for it. The only editor to support thei position was a brand-new editor, Bradley Cumming, in their very first edit to Wikipedia. Bradley Commings' writing style is similar to Frobozz1's in the use of invective and hyperbole "I've no doubt at all that you buggers will find a way to silence him..."  In the discussion Frobozz1 constantly claimed that he was upholding the rights of the "wiki community" and that a "team", "tag-team", "clan" or "cabal" of editors which included myself were trying to intimidate him, for example here.Since Frobozz1 admits in the discussion that they have brought in other editors to the dispute underlying the ANI issue (} and CANVASSING them  this may well be MEATPUPPETRY rather than SOCKPUPPETRY. Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:41, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Polandersondonegal is another editor who came out of nowhere to support Frobozz1's positions on Talk:Parental alienation. Probably MEATPUPPETRY. Beyond My Ken (talk) 14:22, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Skythrops is another frequent editor of Parental alienation who stopped editing in November 2019, so probably is too old to check. If they are related to Frobozz1, they would be the master, as their editing began ini 2015.


 * Oshwah: Thank you for running the CU check. Could another admin please evaluate the behavior of the editors above for possible MEaTPUPPETRY? Beyond My Ken (talk) 02:21, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I did wonder about Skythrops but the tone is different and the editor seems to be Australian, so I don't think they are the same. But irrelevant anyway, s you say.
 * I am pretty much 100% certain that Polandersonlegal is an independent editor who just happened to come by at the same time. They have not engaged in any of the recent drama, and seem only interested in portraying the situation in Ireland.  Slp1 (talk) 14:50, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Also for that matter, DrPax, who started editing Parental alienation within days of the start of a March 2019 discussion about cleaning up the article, immediately became an enormous contributor to the talk page in support of Skythrops, never touched another subject, and disappeared in September, 2019, shortly before Skythrops. At this point I think that Polandersondonegal's arrival was coincidental, but I understand the suspicion given the history of the article and talk page. Arllaw (talk) 15:09, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Slp1, I agree that Skythrops and Frobozz1 have enough differences in their writing patterns that they are unlikely to be the same person. However, given that Frobozz1 is able to identify and get in touch offline with an editor such as Hotornotquestionmarknot, who had not edited here for many years, and coordinate the addition of content, suggests that a subset of the editors who have been pushing an agenda through this article know each other. I just took a look at Hotornotquestionmarknot's editing history, and here in 2017 that editor is drafting content that makes claims that Frobozz1 was trying to push into the article directly and through multiple talk page topics (Are PA symptoms described within the DSM-5?; American Psychiatric Association director Narrow published that PA is caused by DSM-5 Z62.898; Underuse of Bernet / Wamboldt / Narrow white paper). Whatever else is going on, there appears to be significant offline coordination of these efforts, and I suspect that they believe that blitzing the talk page is an effective tactic to drive off other editors. Arllaw (talk) 15:27, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
 * In terms of meatpuppetry, I suspect that it will be difficult to tie things together beyond the obvious (the admission by Frobozz1 about his coordination with Hotornotquestionmarknot, backed up by the editing logs). Frobozz1 admitted to collaborating (his word) with other interested editors. Near the end of this edit, Frobozz1 implied and then denied that he was a service provider, but I think at a minimum the posting of that link demonstrates how close he is to the P.A. advocacy community, including some who butter their bread with the theory.


 * We've also had "new" editors drop in to make edits that suggest a probability that they are monitoring the page (e.g., James Jones1978, who responded to bias in the opposite direction, but with an account created and an edit made within six hours of the problematic edit) or that display a level of knowledge that one would not expect from a newbie (e.g., these changes and invisible tagging by MSW4kidsfamilies.


 * While I take Frobozz1 at his word about his collaboration with multiple editors, and I think that in the past there has been undisclosed coordination and self-promotion through the article, squint hard enough at the editing history and perhaps we risk making his mistake in relation to the other editors on the P.A. page, seeing conspiracies and collusion in what are actually independent edits. Arllaw (talk) 03:54, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * All of these users appear to be ❌.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   00:43, 24 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Closing without action per the above. The SandDoctor  Talk 07:40, 18 April 2021 (UTC)