Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jooner29/Archive

05 December 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

See recent edits around Joshua Bonehill

It is obvious from the contributions that "AntiRacistwiki" is in fact pushing an agenda to highlight Bonehill, hardly an "anti racist" standpoint.

It has also been the case that, active there, has both asserted and denied that he is Joshua Bonehill. See Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive863

There are also a few IPs kicking about that locate to Bonehill's home town of Yeovil.

Time, I think, to do some laundry. Andy Dingley (talk) 03:19, 5 December 2014 (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

 * While some links would have been nice, I went through and found the diffs needed. The two are to each other. Furthermore,  is also inconclusive. --  DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  05:12, 5 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I think it's reasonable to connect Antiracistwiki to Myth-Buster-Yeovil. Anti was prone to adding Joshua Bonehill to an article and templates. 1, 2, 3 Myth's vandalism was focused on Bonehill's article. Sooner29 was set on labelling Bonehill as a UK nationalist/neo-nationalist. 4, 5, 6 It just so happens that one of the templates that Anti edited was the UK far right template to add Bonehill's name. (2) In addition, the edit made by Anti 7 uses the same source and focuses on the same content as Jooner29 did. 8 Therefore, I think it's fair to connect the accounts together. Mike V  •  Talk  22:56, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

06 December 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

More editing on Joshua Bonehill (the admitted identity of Jooner29). For an IP address that just happens to locate to Bonehill's hometown of Yeovil, this anonymous IP seems to take an awfully personal interest in the form of Bonehill-Paine's name. Andy Dingley (talk) 18:51, 6 December 2014 (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

 * I've semi-protected the page for 2 weeks. This should help the root of the issue. Mike V  •  Talk  05:21, 7 December 2014 (UTC)

16 December 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Claims to be Bonehill, as did Jooner29. CU for sleepers. Really need to swap Jooner29 for a Bonehill SPI page (since Bonehill is the older account), but I don't know how to do that without screwing things up. Ian.thomson (talk) 20:59, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

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


 * Since the editor has held himself out as the subject of an article, I've offered an olive branch to let him participate in civil discussion about the article and issues with it. —C.Fred (talk) 21:26, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Bonehill has other sock IP's on the page, 79.65.185.133, 79.65.59.146 which he more or less confessed as well. The latter links to his site where he wrote a blog post against being a troll the same day. He's obviously been watching his Wikipedia page like a hawk, as well as editing his own entry. FossilMad (talk) 21:58, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
✔️ No sleepers at this time. -- Versa geek  15:48, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Closing. Mike V  •  Talk  19:24, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

28 December 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Block evasion; voicing similar concerns to User:Bonehill over the article mentioning Bonehill being described as a "troll" in court, and making similar bad-faith AfD comments as User:Jooner29 (1, 2). Two 79.65.*.* IPs have been raised at Jooner's SPIs in the past. McGeddon (talk) 17:37, 28 December 2014 (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
. Checkuser is not going to connect an IP and an account in normal circumstances. Courcelles 19:03, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I've semi-protected the page for a month and it appears someone has already left a comment at the AfD. Mike V  •  Talk  16:06, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

04 February 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Obvious sock is obvious. Joshua Bonehill-Paine editing his own article to remove anything he dislikes. Andy Dingley (talk) 02:04, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Any chance of the revdel as requested? Andy Dingley (talk) 03:49, 4 February 2015 (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

 * I've semi-protected the article for 6 months, as it's the only focus of the individual. As I mentioned in the other case, checkuser can't be used to link an account to an IP. Mike V • Talk 03:40, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Requested revdel? Where was that? Mike V • Talk 04:49, 4 February 2015 (UTC)


 * The RevDel request was here, and it's already been handled (OS'ed, even). ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  17:08, 5 February 2015 (UTC)