Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kingshowman/Archive/1

07 September 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

SuperFriendlyEditor was indefinitely blocked by Diannaa on 5 September 2015 for abusing multiple accounts (the user's block log is visible here). Prior to being blocked, SuperFriendlyEditor expressed an interest in expanding the lead of the Sigmund Freud article, in a comment visible here. Parrhesiast, an account that was created and started editing only a day after SuperFriendlyEditor was indefinitely blocked, has expanded the lead of the Freud article, as visible in its revision history; his edits there seem to follow on directly from SuperFriendlyEditor's interests. Parrhesiast tends to use long, bombastic edit summaries that remind me of SuperFriendlyEditor. However, the strongest evidence that Parrhesiast is the same user as SuperFriendlyEditor comes from his comments about the lead of the Martin Heidegger article. SuperFriendlyEditor drastically increased the length of that article's lead, and edit warred to reinstate his changes after they were reverted. Parrhesiast left a lengthy comment about the lead of the Heidegger article at User:Rothorpe's talk page, visible here. See especially his observation, "I have tried to salvage some of the lead that was attempted to replace it, while cutting it down in length." Rothorpe did not seem to be in any doubt that Parrhesiast and SuperFriendlyEditor are the same user; he commented, "That's just the latest version of User:SuperFriendlyEditor's overlong and complex suggestion, just as "Parrhesiast" is his latest pseudonym." See also my conversation with Parrhesiast at his talk page, where he first claims not to be a sock and then de facto admits to sockpuppetry, treating the entire thing as a game. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 05:16, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

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

Parrhesia is an Ancient Greek word meaning free, fearless speech, or bold, courageous truth-telling. A Parrhesiast, then, is one who freely and courageously speaks the truth to those in power, bravely and openly at risk to themselves, freely and boldly telling the truth up to the point of death. A Parrhesiast is the fearlessly courageous, boldly free-speaking, risky truth-teller who openly welcomes every manner of danger, including death, in service of The Truth, his only real master. A Parrhesiast is the slave of no man, the flatterer of no Kings, a Partisan of no side but the side of Truth, Justice, and Knowledge, the dangerous truth-teller willing to pay the ultimate price and go to his grave so that the Truth may be told, that Knowledge may triumph, even at the cost of his own Death.

I am the Parrhesiast.

Greetings.

And how far down this rabbit-hole do you wish to go, my friend? What, pray tell, would you do if you were to find out that not only am I a mere servant of that great human being SuperFriendlyEditor, but SuperFriendlyEditor himself was but the mere servant of an even greater, more noble individual, the inimitable KingShowman? What, then, my friend? Fearlessly speaking the truth to Power up to the point of Death, the Parrhesiast signs out.

Verily, do you not call me Parrhesiastes now, now that I have taken the hemlock in service of Truth? To all my loyal readers and beloved friends at Wikipedia, I bid you a final farewell and adieu. We owe a cock to Ascelipus, CrIto. Do not forget.

Do not forget the cock, my dear Crito! What kind of a citizen would I be if I grew up under the protection of the Laws of Noble Athens, and then when she condemns me for corruption of the youth, I tried to evade my punishment? Do not try to convince me any longer to escape. I shall hear none of it. I shall drink the hemlock as you fine noble Athenians insist. But do not forget the cock, my dear Crito!

And so it came to pass that the feckless Athenians killed off their wisest, noblest, bravest citizen, the much-loved Parrhesiast, led by the bloodthirsty and poorly-named plebeian FreeKnowledgeCreator. This fearless death in service of the Truth borne by the wisest citizen of Athens, the Parrhesiast, shall be a tale that will be re-told for all time.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Parrhesiast (talk • contribs) 15:00, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

I know not, O Athenians! how far you have been influenced by my accusers for my part, in listening to them I almost forgot myself, so plausible were their arguments however, so to speak, they have said nothing true. But of the many falsehoods which they uttered I wondered at one of them especially, that in which they said that you ought to be on your guard lest you should be deceived by me, as being eloquent in speech. For that they are not ashamed of being forthwith convicted by me in fact, when I shall show that I am not by any means eloquent, this seemed to me the most shameless thing in them, unless indeed they call him eloquent who speaks the truth. For, if they mean this, then I would allow that I am an orator, but not after their fashion for they, as I affirm, have said nothing true, but from me you shall hear the whole truth. Not indeed, Athenians, arguments highly wrought, as theirs were, with choice phrases and expressions, nor adorned, but you shall hear a speech uttered without premeditation in such words as first present themselves. For I am confident that what I say will be just, and let none of you expect otherwise, for surely it would not become my time of life to come before you like a youth with a got up speech. Above all things, therefore, I beg and implore this of you, O Athenians! if you hear me defending myself in the same language as that in which I am accustomed to speak both in the forum at the counters, where many of you have heard me, and elsewhere, not to be surprised or disturbed on this account. For the case is this: I now for the first time come before a court of justice, though more than seventy years old; I am therefore utterly a stranger to the language here. As, then, if I were really a stranger, you would have pardoned me if I spoke in the language and the manner in which I had been educated, so now I ask this of you as an act of justice, as it appears to me, to disregard the manner of my speech, for perhaps it may be somewhat worse, and perhaps better, and to consider this only, and to give your attention to this, whether I speak what is just or not; for this is the virtue of a judge, but of an orator to speak the truth. 2. First, then, O Athenians! I am right in defending myself against the first false accusations alleged against me, and my first accusers, and then against the latest accusations, and the latest accusers. For many have been accusers of me to you, and for many years, who have asserted nothing true, of whom I am more afraid than of Anytus and his party, although they too are formidable; but those are still more formidable, Athenians, who, laying hold of many of you from childhood, have persuaded you, and accused me of what is not true: "that there is one Socrates, a wise man, who occupies himself about celestial matters, and has explored every thing under the earth, and makes the worse appear the better reason." Those, O Athenians! who have spread abroad this report are my formidable accusers; for they who hear them think that such as search into these things do not believe that there are gods. In the next place, these accusers are numerous, and have accused me now for a long time; moreover, they said these things to you at that time of life in which you were most credulous, when you were boys and some of you youths, and they accused me altogether in my absence, when there was no one to defend me. But the most unreasonable thing of all is, that it is not possible to learn and mention their names, except that one of them happens to be a comic poet.1 Such, however, as, influenced by envy and calumny, have persuaded you, and those who, being themselves persuaded, have persuaded others, all these are most difficult to deal with; for it is not possible to bring any of them forward here, nor to confute any; but it is altogether necessary to fight, as it were with a shadow, in making my defense, and to convict when there is no one to answer. Consider, therefore, as I have said, that my accusers are twofold, some who have lately accused me, and others long since, whom I have made mention of; and believe that I ought to defend myself against these first; for you heard them accusing me first, and much more than these last. Well. I must make my defense, then, O Athenians! and endeavor in this so short a space of time to remove from your minds the calumny which you have long entertained. I wish, indeed, it might be so, if it were at all better both for you and me, and that in making my defense I could effect something more advantageous still: I think, however, that it will be difficult, and I am not entirely ignorant what the difficulty is. Nevertheless, let this turn out as may be pleasing to God, I must obey the law and make my defense. 3. Let us, then, repeat from the beginning what the accusation is from which the calumny against me has arisen, and relying on which Melitus has preferred this indictment against me. Well. What, then, do they who charge me say in their charge? For it is necessary to read their deposition as of public accusers. "Socrates acts wickedly, and is criminally curious in searching into things under the earth, and in the heavens, and in making the worse appear the better cause, and in teaching these same things to others." Such is the accusation: for such things you have yourselves seen in the comedy of Aristophanes, one Socrates there carried about, saying that he walks in the air, and acting many other buffooneries, of which I understand nothing whatever. Nor do I say this as disparaging such a science, if there be any one skilled in such things, only let me not be prosecuted by Melitus on a charge of this kind; but I say it, O Athenians! because I have nothing to do with such matters. And I call upon most of you as witnesses of this, and require you to inform and tell each other, as many of you as have ever heard me conversing; and there are many such among you. Therefore tell each other, if any one of you has ever heard me conversing little or much on such subjects. And from this you will know that other things also, which the multitude assert of me, are of a similar nature. 4. However not one of these things is true; nor, if you have heard from any one that I attempt to teach men, and require payment, is this true. Though this, indeed, appears to me to be an honorable thing, if one should be able to instruct men, like Gorgias the Leontine, Prodicus the Cean, and Hippias the Elean. For each of these, O Athenians! is able, by going through the several cities, to persuade the young men, who can attach themselves gratuitously to such of their own fellow-citizens as they please, to abandon their fellow-citizens and associate with them, giving them money and thanks besides. There is also another wise man here, a Parian, who, I hear, is staying in the city. For I happened to visit a person who spends more money on the sophists than all others together: I mean Callias, son of Hipponicus. I therefore asked him, for he has two sons, "Callias," I said, "if your two sons were colts or calves, we should have had to choose a master for them, and hire a person who would make them excel in such qualities as belong to their nature; and he would have been a groom or an agricultural laborer. But now, since your sons are men, what master do you intend to choose for them? Who is there skilled in the qualities that become a man and a citizen? For I suppose you must have considered this, since you have sons. Is there any one," I said, "or not?" "Certainly," he answered. "Who is he?" said I, "and whence does he come? and on what terms does he teach?" He replied, "Evenus the Parian, Socrates, for five minæ." And I deemed Evenus happy, if he really possesses this art, and teaches admirably. And I too should think highly of myself, and be very proud, if I possessed this knowledge, but I possess it not, O Athenians. 5. Perhaps, one of you may now object: "But, Socrates, what have you done, then? Whence have these calumnies against you arisen? For surely if you had not busied yourself more than others, such a report and story would never have got abroad, unless you had done something different from what most men do. Tell us, therefore, what it is, that we may not pass a hasty judgment on you." He who speaks thus appears to me to speak justly, and I will endeavor to show you what it is that has occasioned me this character and imputation. Listen, then: to some of you perhaps I shall appear to jest, yet be assured that I shall tell you the whole truth. For I, O Athenians! have acquired this character through nothing else than a certain wisdom. Of what kind, then, is this wisdom? Perhaps it is merely human wisdom. For in this, in truth, I appear to be wise. They probably, whom I have just now mentioned, possessed a wisdom more than human, otherwise I know not what to say about it; for I am not acquainted with it, and whosoever says I am, speaks falsely, and for the purpose of calumniating me. But, O Athenians! do not cry out against me, even though I should seem to you to speak somewhat arrogantly. For the account which I am going to give you is not my own; but I shall refer to an authority whom you will deem worthy of credit. For I shall adduce to you the god at Delphi as a witness of my wisdom, if I have any, and of what it is. You doubtless know Chærepho: he was my associate from youth, and the associate of most of you; he accompanied you in your late exile, and returned with you. You know, then, what kind of a man Chærepho was, how earnest in whatever he undertook. Having once gone to Delphi, he ventured to make the following inquiry of the oracle (and, as I said, O Athenians! do not cry out), for he asked if there was any one wiser than I. The Pythian thereupon answered that there was not one wiser; and of this, his brother here will give you proofs, since he himself is dead. 6. Consider, then, why I mention these things: it is because I am going to show you whence the calumny against me arose. For when I heard this, I reasoned thus with myself, What does the god mean? What enigma is this? For I am not conscious to myself that I am wise, either much or little. What, then, does he mean by saying that I am the wisest? For assuredly he does not speak falsely: that he could not do. And for a long time I was in doubt what he meant; afterward, with considerable difficulty, I had recourse to the following method of searching out his meaning. I went to one of those who have the character of being wise, thinking that there, if anywhere, I should confute the oracle, and show in answer to the response that This man is wiser than I, though you affirmed that I was the wisest. Having, then, examined this man (for there is no occasion to mention his name; he was, however, one of our great politicians, in examining whom I felt as I proceed to describe, O Athenians!), having fallen into conversation with him, this man appeared to be wise in the opinion of most other men, and especially in his own opinion, though in fact he was not so. I thereupon endeavored to show him that he fancied himself to be wise, but really was not. Hence I became odious, both to him and to many others who were present. When I left him, I reasoned thus with myself: I am wiser than this man, for neither of us appears to know anything great and good; but he fancies he knows something, although he knows nothing; whereas I, as I do not know anything, so I do not fancy I do. In this trifling particular, then, I appear to be wiser than he, because I do not fancy I know what I do not know. After that I went to another who was thought to be wiser than the former, and formed the very same opinion. Hence I became odious to him and to many others. 7. After this I went to others in turn, perceiving indeed, and grieving and alarmed, that I was making myself odious; however, it appeared necessary to regard the oracle of the god as of the greatest moment, and that, in order to discover its meaning, I must go to all who had the reputation of possessing any knowledge. And by the dog, O Athenians! for I must tell you the truth, I came to some such conclusion as this: those who bore the highest reputation appeared to me to be most deficient, in my researches in obedience to the god, and others who were considered inferior more nearly approaching to the possession of understanding. But I must relate to you my wandering, and the labors which I underwent, in order that the oracle might prove incontrovertible. For after the politicians I went to the poets, as well the tragic as the dithyrambic and others, expecting that here I should in very fact find myself more ignorant than they. Taking up, therefore, some of their poems, which appeared to me most elaborately finished, I questioned them as to their meaning, that at the same time I might learn something from them. I am ashamed, O Athenians! to tell you the truth; however, it must be told. For, in a word, almost all who were present could have given a better account of them than those by whom they had been composed. I soon discovered this, therefore, with regard to the poets, that they do not effect their object by wisdom, but by a certain natural inspiration, and under the influence of enthusiasm, like prophets and seers; for these also say many fine things, but they understand nothing that they say. The poets appeared to me to be affected in a similar manner; and at the same time I perceived that they considered themselves, on account of their poetry, to be the wisest of men in other things, in which they were not. I left them, therefore, under the persuasion that I was superior to them, in the same way that I was to the politicians. 8. At last, therefore, I went to the artisans. For I was conscious to myself that I knew scarcely anything, but I was sure that I should find them possessed of much beautiful knowledge. And in this I was not deceived; for they knew things which I did not, and in this respect they were wiser than I. But, O Athenians! even the best workmen appeared to me to have fallen into the same error as the poets; for each, because he excelled in the practice of his art, thought that he was very wise in other most important matters, and this mistake of theirs obscured the wisdom that they really possessed. I therefore asked myself, in behalf of the oracle, whether I should prefer to continue as I am, possessing none, either of their wisdom or their ignorance, or to have both as they have. I answered, therefore, to myself and to the oracle, that it was better for me to continue as I am. 9. From this investigation, then, O Athenians! many enmities have arisen against me, and those the most grievous and severe, so that many calumnies have sprung from them, and among them this appellation of being wise; for those who are from time to time present think that I am wise in those things, with respect to which I expose the ignorance of others. The god, however, O Athenians! appears to be really wise, and to mean this by his oracle: that human wisdom is worth little or nothing; and it is clear that he did not say this to Socrates, but made use of my name, putting me forward as an example, as if he had said, that man is the wisest among you, who, like Socrates, knows that he is in reality worth nothing with respect to wisdom. Still, therefore, I go about and search and inquire into these things, in obedience to the god, both among citizens and strangers, if I think any one of them is wise; and when he appears to me not to be so, I take the part of the god, and show that he is not wise. And, in consequence of this occupation, I have no leisure to attend in any considerable degree to the affairs of the state or my own; but I am in the greatest poverty through my devotion to the service of the god. 10. In addition to this, young men, who have much leisure and belong to the wealthiest families, following me of their own accord, take great delight in hearing men put to the test, and often imitate me, and themselves attempt to put others to the test; and then, I think, they find a great abundance of men who fancy they know something, although they know little or nothing. Hence those who are put to the test by them are angry with me, and not with them, and say that "there is one Socrates, a most pestilent fellow, who corrupts the youth." And when any one asks them by doing or teaching what, they have nothing to say, for they do not know; but, that they may not seem to be at a loss, they say such things as are ready at hand against all philosophers; "that he searches into things in heaven and things under the earth, that he does not believe there are gods, and that he makes the worse appear the better reason." For they would not, I think, be willing to tell the truth that they have been detected in pretending to possess knowledge, whereas they know nothing. Therefore, I think, being ambitions and vehement and numerous, and speaking systematically and persuasively about me, they have filled your ears, for a long time and diligently calumniating me. From among these, Melitus, Anytus and Lycon have attacked me; Melitus being angry on account of the poets, Anytus on account of the artisans and politicians, and Lycon on account of the rhetoricians. So that, as I said in the beginning, I should wonder if I were able in so short a time to remove from your minds a calumny that has prevailed so long. This, O Athenians! is the truth; and I speak it without concealing or disguising anything from you, much or little; though I very well know that by so doing I shall expose myself to odium. This, however, is a proof that I speak the truth, and that this is the nature of the calumny against me, and that these are its causes. And if you will investigate the matter, either now or hereafter, you will find it to be so. 11. With respect, then, to the charges which my first accusers have alleged against me, let this be a sufficient apology to you. To Melitus, that good and patriotic man, as he says, and to my later accusers, I will next endeavor to give an answer; and here, again, as there are different accusers, let us take up their deposition. It is pretty much as follows: "Socrates," it says, "acts unjustly in corrupting the youth, and in not believing in those gods in whom the city believes, but in other strange divinities." Such is the accusation; let us examine each particular of it. It says that I act unjustly in corrupting the youth. But I, O Athenians! say that Melitus acts unjustly, because he jests on serious subjects, rashly putting men upon trial, under pretense of being zealous and solicitous about things in which he never at any time took any concern. But that this is the case I will endeavor to prove to you. 12. Come, then, Melitus, tell me, do you not consider it of the greatest importance that the youth should be made as virtuous as possible? Mel. I do. Socr. Well, now, tell the judges who it is that makes them better, for it is evident that you know, since it concerns you so much; for, having detected me in corrupting them, as you say, you have cited me here, and accused me: come, then, say, and inform the judges who it is that makes them better. Do you see, Melitus, that you are silent, and have nothing to say? But does it not appear to you to be disgraceful, and a sufficient proof of what I say, that you never took any concern about the matter? But tell me, friend, who makes them better? Mel. The laws. Socr. I do not ask this, most excellent sir, but what man, who surely must first know this very thing, the laws? Mel. These, Socrates, the judges. Socr. How say you, Melitus? Are these able to instruct the youth, and make them better? Mel. Certainly. Socr. Whether all, or some of them, and others not? Mel. All. Socr. You say well, by Juno! and have found a great abundance of those that confer benefit. But what further? Can these hearers make them better, or not? Mel. They, too, can. Socr. And what of the senators? Mel. The senators, also. Socr. But, Melitus, do those who attend the public assemblies corrupt the younger men? or do they all make them better? Mel. They too. Socr. All the Athenians, therefore, as it seems, make them honorable and good, except me; but I alone corrupt them. Do you say so? Mel. I do assert this very thing. Socr. You charge me with great ill-fortune. But answer me: does it appear to you to be the same, with respect to horses? Do all men make them better, and is there only some one that spoils them? or does quite the contrary of this take place? Is there some one person who can make them better, or very few; that is, the trainers? But if the generality of men should meddle with and make use of horses, do they spoil them? Is not this the case, Melitus, both with respect to horses and all other animals? It certainly is so, whether you and Anytus deny it or not. For it would be a great good-fortune for the youth if only one person corrupted, and the rest benefited them. However, Melitus, you have sufficiently shown that you never bestowed any care upon youth; and you clearly evince your own negligence, in that you have never paid any attention to the things with respect to which you accuse me. 13. Tell us further, Melitus, in the name of Jupiter, whether is it better to dwell with good or bad citizens? Answer, my friend; for I ask you nothing difficult. Do not the bad work some evil to those that are continually near them, but the good some good? Mel. Certainly. Socr. Is there any one that wishes to be injured rather than benefited by his associates? Answer, good man; for the law requires you to answer. Is there any one who wishes to be injured? Mel. No, surely. Socr. Come, then, whether do you accuse me here, as one that corrupts the youth, and makes them more depraved, designedly or undesignedly? Mel. Designedly, I say. Socr. What, then, Melitus, are you at your time of life so much wiser than I at my time of life, as to know that the evil are always working some evil to those that are most near to them, and the good some good; but I have arrived at such a pitch of ignorance as not to know that if I make any one of my associates depraved, I shall be in danger of receiving some evil from him; and yet I designedly bring about this so great evil, as you say? In this I can not believe you, Melitus, nor do I think would any other man in the world. But either I do not corrupt the youth, or, if I do corrupt them, I do it undesignedly: so that in both cases you speak falsely. But if I corrupt them undesignedly, for such involuntary offenses it is not usual to accuse one here, but to take one apart, and teach and admonish one. For it is evident that if I am taught, I shall cease doing what I do undesignedly. But you shunned me, and were not willing to associate with and instruct me; but you accuse me here, where it is usual to accuse those who need punishment, and not instruction. 14. Thus, then, O Athenians! this now is clear that I have said; that Melitus never paid any attention to these matters, much or little. However, tell us, Melitus, how you say I corrupt the youth? Is it not evidently, according to the indictment which you have preferred, by teaching them not to believe in the gods in whom the city believes, but in other strange deities? Do you not say that, by teaching these things, I corrupt the youth? Mel. Certainly I do say so. Socr. By those very gods, therefore, Melitus, of whom the discussion now is, speak still more clearly both to me and to these men. For I can not understand whether you say that I teach them to believe that there are certain gods (and in that case I do believe that there are gods, and am not altogether an atheist, nor in this respect to blame), not, however, those which the city believes in, but others; and this it is that you accuse me of, that I introduce others. Or do you say outright that I do not myself believe that there are gods, and that I teach others the same? Mel. I say this: that you do not believe in any gods at all. Socr. O wonderful Melitus, how come you to say this? Do I not, then, like the rest of mankind, believe that the sun and moon are gods? Mel. No, by Jupiter, O judges! for he says that the sun is a stone, and the moon an earth. Socr. You fancy that you are accusing Anaxagoras, my dear Melitus, and thus you put a slight on these men, and suppose them to be so illiterate as not to know that the books of Anaxagoras of Clazomene are full of such assertions. And the young, moreover, learn these things from me, which they might purchase for a drachma, at most, in the orchestra, and so ridicule Socrates, if he pretended they were his own, especially since they are so absurd? I ask then, by Jupiter, do I appear to you to believe that there is no god? Mel. No, by Jupiter, none whatever. Socr. You say what is incredible, Melitus, and that, as appears to me, even to yourself. For this man, O Athenians! appears to me to be very insolent and intemperate and to have preferred this indictment through downright insolence, intemperance, and wantonness. For he seems, as it were, to have composed an enigma for the purpose of making an experiment. Whether will Socrates the wise know that I am jesting, and contradict myself, or shall I deceive him and all who hear me? For, in my opinion, he clearly contradicts himself in the indictment, as if he should say, Socrates is guilty of wrong in not believing that there are gods, and in believing that there are gods. And this, surely, is the act of one who is trifling. 15. Consider with me now, Athenians, in what respect he appears to me to say so. And do you, Melitus, answer me; and do ye, as I besought you at the outset, remember not to make an uproar if I speak after my usual manner. Is there any man, Melitus, who believes that there are human affairs, but does not believe that there are men? Let him answer, judges, and not make so much noise. Is there any one who does not believe that there are horses, but that there are things pertaining to horses? or who does not believe that there are pipers, but that there are things pertaining to pipes? There is not, O best of men! for since you are not willing to answer, I say it to you and to all here present. But answer to this at least: is there any one who believes that there are things relating to demons, but does not believe that there are demons? Mel. There is not. Socr. How obliging you are in having hardly answered; though compelled by these judges! You assert, then, that I do believe and teach things relating to demons, whether they be new or old; therefore, according to your admission, I do believe in things relating to demons, and this you have sworn in the bill of indictment. If, then, I believe in things relating to demons, there is surely an absolute necessity that I should believe that there are demons. Is it not so? It is. For I suppose you to assent, since you do not answer. But with respect to demons, do we not allow that they are gods, or the children of gods? Do you admit this or not? Mel. Certainly. Socr. Since, then, I allow that there are demons, as you admit, if demons are a kind of gods, this is the point in which I say you speak enigmatically and divert yourself in saying that I do not allow there are gods, and again that I do allow there are, since I allow that there are demons? But if demons are the children of gods, spurious ones, either from nymphs or any others, of whom they are reported to be, what man can think that there are sons of gods, and yet that there are not gods? For it would be just as absurd as if any one should think that there are mules, the offspring of horses and asses, but should not think there are horses and asses. However, Melitus, it can not be otherwise than that you have preferred this indictment for the purpose of trying me, or because you were at a loss what real crime to allege against me; for that you should persuade any man who has the smallest degree of sense that the same person can think that there are things relating to demons and to gods, and yet that there are neither demons, nor gods, not heroes, is utterly impossible. 16. That I am not guilty, then, O Athenians! according to the indictment of Melitus, appears to me not to require a lengthened defense; but what I have said is sufficient. And as to what I said at the beginning, that there is a great enmity toward me among the multitude, be assured it is true. And this it is which will condemn me, if I am condemned, not Melitus, nor Anytus, but the calumny and envy of the multitude, which have already condemned many others, and those good men, and will, I think, condemn others also; for there is no danger that it will stop with me. Perhaps, however, some one may say, "Are you not ashamed, Socrates, to have pursued a study from which you are now in danger of dying?" To such a person I should answer with good reason, You do not say well, friend, if you think that a man, who is even of the least value, ought to take into the account the risk of life or death, and ought not to consider that alone when be performs any action, whether he is acting justly or unjustly, and the part of a good man or bad man. For, according to your reasoning, all those demi-gods that died at Troy would be vile characters, as well all the rest as the son of Thetis, who so far despised danger in comparison of submitting to disgrace, that when his mother, who was a goddess, spoke to him, in his impatience to kill Hector, something to this effect, as I think,2 "My son, if you revenge the death of your friend Patroclus, and slay Hector, you will yourself die, for," she said, "death awaits you immediately after Hector;" but he, on hearing this, despised death and danger, and dreading much more to live as a coward, and not avenge his friend, said, "May I die immediately when I have inflicted punishment on the guilty, that I may not stay here an object of ridicule, by the curved ships, a burden to the ground?"—do you think that he cared for death and danger? For thus it is, O Athenians! in truth: wherever any one has posted himself, either thinking it to be better, or has been posted by his chief, there, as it appears to me, he ought to remain and meet danger, taking no account either of death or anything else in comparison with disgrace. 17. I then should be acting strangely, O Athenians! if, when the generals whom you chose to command me assigned me my post at Potidæa, at Amphipolis, and at Delium, I then remained where they posted me, like any other person, and encountered the danger of death; but when the deity, as I thought and believed, assigned it as my duty to pass my life in the study of philosophy, and examining myself and others, I should on that occasion, through fear of death or any thing else whatsoever, desert my post, strange indeed would it be; and then, in truth, any one might justly bring me to trial, and accuse me of not believing in the gods, from disobeying the oracle, fearing death, and thinking myself to be wise when I am not. For to fear death, O Athenians! is nothing else than to appear to be wise, without being so; for it is to appear to know what one does not know. For no one knows but that death is the greatest of all good to man; but men fear it, as if they well knew that it is the greatest of evils. And how is not this the most reprehensible ignorance, to think that one knows what one does not know? But I, O Athenians! in this, perhaps, differ from most men; and if I should say that I am in any thing wiser than another, it would be in this, that not having a competent knowledge of the things in Hades, I also think that I have not such knowledge. But to act unjustly, and to disobey my superior, whether God or man, I know is evil and base. I shall never, therefore, fear or shun things which, for aught I know, maybe good, before evils which I know to be evils. So that, even if you should now dismiss me, not yielding to the instances of Anytus, who said that either I should not3 appear here at all, or that, if I did appear, it was impossible not to put me to death, telling you that if I escaped, your sons, studying what Socrates teaches, would all be utterly corrupted; if you should address me thus, "Socrates, we shall not now yield to Anytus, but dismiss you, on this condition, however, that you no longer persevere in your researches nor study philosophy; and if hereafter you are detected in so doing, you shall die"—if, as I said, you should dismiss, me on these terms, I should say to you, "O Athenians! I honor and love you; but I shall obey God rather than you; and so long as I breathe and am able, I shall not cease studying philosophy, and exhorting you and warning any one of you I may happen to meet, saying, as I have been accustomed to do: 'O best of men! seeing you are an Athenian, of a city the most powerful and most renowned for wisdom and strength, are you not ashamed of being careful for riches, how you may acquire them in greatest abundance, and for glory, and honor, but care not nor take any thought for wisdom and truth, and for your soul, how it maybe made most perfect?'" And if any one of you should question my assertion, and affirm that he does care for these things, I shall not at once let him go, nor depart, but I shall question him, sift and prove him. And if he should appear to me not to possess virtue, but to pretend that he does, I shall reproach him for that he sets the least value on things of the greatest worth, but the highest on things that are worthless. Thus I shall act to all whom I meet, both young and old, stranger and citizen, but rather to you, my fellow-citizens, because ye are more nearly allied to me. For be well assured, this the deity commands. And I think that no greater good has ever befallen you in the city than my zeal for the service of the god. For I go about doing nothing else than persuading you, both young and old, to take no care either for the body, or for riches, prior to or so much as for the soul, how it may be made most perfect, telling you that virtue does not spring from riches, but riches and all other human blessings, both private and public, from virtue. If, then, by saying these things, I corrupt the youth, these things must be mischievous; but if any one says that I speak other things than these, he misleads you.4 Therefore I must say, O Athenians! either yield to Anytus, or do not, either dismiss me or not, since I shall not act otherwise, even though I must die many deaths. 18. Murmur not, O Athenians! but continue to attend to my request, not to murmur at what I say, but to listen, for, as I think, you will derive benefit from listening. For I am going to say other things to you, at which, perhaps, you will raise a clamor; but on no account do so. Be well assured, then, if you put me to death, being such a man as I say I am, you will not injure me more than yourselves. For neither will Melitus nor Anytus harm me; nor have they the power; for I do not think that it is possible for a better man to be injured by a worse. He may perhaps have me condemned to death, or banished, or deprived of civil rights; and he or others may perhaps consider these as mighty evils; I, how ever, do not consider them so, but that it is much more so to do what he is now doing, to endeavor to put a man to death unjustly. Now, therefore, O Athenians! I am far from making a defense on my behalf, as any one might think, but I do so on your own behalf, lest by condemning me you should offend at all with respect to the gift of the deity to you. For, if you should put me to death, you will not easily find such another, though it may be ridiculous to say so, altogether attached by the deity to this city as to a powerful and generous horse, somewhat sluggish from his size, and requiring to be roused by a gad-fly; so the deity appears to have united me, being such a person as I am, to the city, that I may rouse you, and persuade and reprove every one of you, nor ever cease besetting you throughout the whole day. Such another man, O Athenians! will not easily be found; therefore, if you will take my advice, you will spare me. But you, perhaps, being irritated like drowsy persons who are roused from sleep, will strike me, and, yielding to Anytus, will unthinkingly condemn me to death; and then you will pass the rest of your life in sleep, unless the deity, caring for you, should send some one else to you. But that I am a person who has been given by the deity to this city, you may discern from hence; for it is not like the ordinary conduct of men, that I should have neglected all my own affairs, and suffered my private interest to be neglected for so many years, and that I should constantly attend to your concerns, addressing myself to each of you separately, like a father, or elder brother, persuading you to the pursuit of virtue. And if I had derived any profit from this course, and had received pay for my exhortations, there would have been some reason for my conduct; but now you see yourselves that my accusers, who have so shamelessly calumniated me in everything else, have not had the impudence to charge me with this, and to bring witnesses to prove that I ever either exacted or demanded any reward. And I think I produce a sufficient proof that I speak the truth, namely, my poverty. 19. Perhaps, however, it may appear absurd that I, going about, thus advise you in private and make myself busy, but never venture to present myself in public before your assemblies and give advice to the city. The cause of this is that which you have often and in many places heard me mention; because I am moved by a certain divine and spiritual influence, which also Melitus, through mockery, has set out in the indictment. This began with me from childhood, being a kind of voice which, when present, always diverts me from what I am about to do, but never urges me on. This it is which opposed my meddling in public politics; and it appears to me to have opposed me very properly. For be well assured, O Athenians! if I had long since attempted to intermeddle with politics, I should have perished long ago, and should not have at all benefited you or myself. And be not angry with me for speaking the truth. For it is not possible that any man should be safe who sincerely opposes either you, or any other multitude, and who prevents many unjust and illegal actions from being committed in a city; but it is necessary that he who in earnest contends for justice, if he will be safe for but a short time, should live privately, and take no part in public affairs. 20. I will give you strong proofs of this, not words, but what you value, facts. Hear, then, what has happened to me, that you may know that I would not yield to any one contrary to what is just, through fear of death, at the same time by not yielding I must perish. I shall tell you what will be displeasing and wearisome,5 yet true. For I, O Athenians! never bore any other magisterial office in the city, but have been a senator: and our Antiochean tribe happened to supply the Prytanes when you chose to condemn in a body the ten generals who had not taken off those that perished in the sea-fight, in violation of the law, as you afterward all thought. At that time I alone of the Prytanes opposed your doing anything contrary to the laws, and I voted against you; and when the orators were ready to denounce me, and to carry me before a magistrate, and you urged and cheered them on, I thought I ought rather to meet the danger with law and justice on my side, than through fear of imprisonment or death, to take part with you in your unjust designs. And this happened while the city was governed by a democracy. But when it became an oligarchy, the Thirty, having sent for me with four others to the Tholus, ordered us to bring Leon the Salaminian from Salamis, that he might be put to death; and they gave many similar orders to many others, wishing to involve as many as they could in guilt. Then, however, I showed, not in word but in deed, that I did not care for death, if the expression be not too rude, in the smallest degree; but that all my care was to do nothing unjust or unholy. For that government, strong as it was, did not so overawe me as to make me commit an unjust action; but when we came out from the Tholus, the four went to Salamis, and brought back Leon; but I went away home. And perhaps for this I should have been put to death, if that government had not been speedily broken up. And of this you can have many witnesses. 21. Do you think, then, that I should have survived so many years if I had engaged in public affairs, and, acting as becomes a good man, had aided the cause of justice, and, as I ought, had deemed this of the highest importance? Far from it, O Athenians! nor would any other man have done so. But I, through the whole of my life, if I have done anything in public, shall be found to be a man, and the very same in private, who has never made a concession to any one contrary to justice, neither to any other, nor to any one of these whom my calumniators say are my disciples. I, however, was never the preceptor of any one; but if any one desired to hear me speaking, and to see me busied about my own mission, whether he were young or old, I never refused him. Nor do I discourse when I receive money, and not when I do not receive any, but I allow both rich and poor alike to question me, and, if any one wishes it, to answer me and hear what I have to say. And for these, whether any one proves to be a good man or not, I cannot justly be responsible, because I never either promised them any instruction or taught them at all. But if any one says that he has ever learned or heard anything from me in private which all others have not, be well assured that he does not speak the truth. 22. But why do some delight to spend so long a time with me? Ye have heard, O Athenians! I have told you the whole truth, that they delight to hear those closely questioned who think that they are wise but are not; for this is by no means disagreeable. But this duty, as I say, has been enjoined me by the deity, by oracles, by dreams, and by every mode by which any other divine decree has ever enjoined anything to man to do. These things, O Athenians! are both true, and easily confuted if not true. For if I am now corrupting some of the youths, and have already corrupted others, it were fitting, surely, that if any of them, having become advanced in life, had discovered that I gave them bad advice when they were young, they should now rise up against me, accuse me, and have me punished; or if they were themselves unwilling to do this, some of their kindred, their fathers, or brothers, or other relatives, if their kinsman have ever sustained any damage from me, should now call it to mind. Many of them, however, are here present, whom I see: first, Crito, my contemporary and fellow-burgher, father of this Critobulus; then Lysanias of Sphettus, father of this Æschines; again, Antiphon of Cephisus, father of Epigenes. There are those others, too, whose brothers maintained the same intimacy with me, namely, Nicostratus, son of Theodotus, brother of Theodotus—Theodotus indeed is dead, so that he could not deprecate his brother's proceedings—and Paralus here, son of Demodocus, whose brother was Theages; and Adimantus, son of Ariston, whose brother is this Plato; and Æantodorus, whose brother is this Apollodorus. I could also mention many others to you, some one of whom certainly Melitus ought to have adduced in his speech as a witness. If, however, he then forgot to do so, let him now adduce them; I give him leave to do so, and let him say it, if he has anything of the kind to allege. But, quite contrary to this, you will find, O Athenians! all ready to assist me, who have corrupted and injured their relatives, as Melitus and Anytus say. For those who have been themselves corrupted might perhaps have some reason for assisting me; but those who have not been corrupted, men now advanced in life, their relatives, what other reason can they have for assisting me, except that right and just one, that they know that Melitus speaks falsely, and that I speak the truth. 23. Well, then, Athenians, these are pretty much the things I have to say in my defense, and others perhaps of the same kind. Perhaps, however, some among you will be indignant on recollecting his own case, if he, when engaged in a cause far less than this, implored and besought the judges with many tears, bringing forward his children in order that he might excite their utmost compassion, and many others of his relatives and friends, whereas I do none of these things, although I may appear to be incurring the extremity of danger. Perhaps, therefore, some one, taking notice of this, may become more determined against me, and, being enraged at this very conduct of mine, may give his vote under the influence of anger. If, then, any one of you is thus affected—I do not, however, suppose that there is—but if there should be, I think I may reasonably say to him: "I, too, O best of men, have relatives; for, to make use of that saying of Homer, I am not sprung from an oak, nor from a rock, but from men, so that I, too, O Athenians! have relatives, and three sons, one now grown up, and two boys: I shall not, however, bring any one of them forward and implore you to acquit me." Why, then, shall I not do this? Not from contumacy, O Athenians! nor disrespect toward you. Whether or not I am undaunted at the prospect of death is another question; but, out of regard to my own character, and yours, and that of the whole city, it does not appear to me to be honorable that I should do any thing of this kind at my age, and with the reputation I have, whether true or false. For it is commonly agreed that Socrates in some respects excels the generality of men. If, then, those among you who appear to excel either in wisdom, or fortitude, or any other virtue whatsoever, should act in such a manner as I have often seen some when they have been brought to trial, it would be shameful, who appearing indeed to be something, have conducted themselves in a surprising manner, as thinking they should suffer something dreadful by dying, and as if they would be immortal if you did not put them to death. Such men appear to me to bring disgrace on the city, so that any stranger might suppose that such of the Athenians as excel in virtue, and whom they themselves choose in preference to themselves for magistracies and other honors, are in no respect superior to women. For these things, O Athenians! neither ought we to do who have attained to any height of reputation, nor, should we do them, ought you to suffer us; but you should make this manifest, that you will much rather condemn him who introduces these piteous dramas, and makes the city ridiculous, than him who quietly awaits your decision. 24. But, reputation apart, O Athenians! it does not appear to me to be right to entreat a judge, or to escape by entreaty; but one ought to inform and persuade him. For a judge does not sit for the purpose of administering justice out of favor, but that he may judge rightly, and he is sworn not to show favor to whom he pleases, but that he will decide according to the laws. It is, therefore, right that neither should we accustom you, nor should you accustom yourselves, to violate your oaths; for in so doing neither of us would act righteously. Think not then, O Athenians! that I ought to adopt such a course toward you as I neither consider honorable, nor just, nor holy, as well, by Jupiter! on any other occasion, and now especially when I am accused of impiety by this Melitus. For clearly, if I should persuade you, and by my entreaties should put a constraint on you who are bound by an oath, I should teach you to think that there are no gods, and in reality, while making my defense, should accuse myself of not believing in the gods. This, however, is far from being the case; for I believe, O Athenians! as none of my accusers do, and I leave it to you and to the deity to judge concerning me in such way as will be best both for me and for you. [Socrates here concludes his defense, and, the votes being taken, he is declared guilty by a majority of voices. He thereupon resumes his address.] 25. That I should not be grieved, O Athenians! at what has happened—namely, that you have condemned me—as well many other circumstances concur in bringing to pass; and, moreover this, that what has happened has not happened contrary to my expectation; but I much rather wonder at the number of votes on either side. For I did not expect that I should be condemned by so small a number, but by a large majority; but now, as it seems, if only three more votes had changed sides, I should have been acquitted. So far as Melitus is concerned, as it appears to me, I have been already acquitted; and not only have I been acquitted, but it is clear to every one that had not Anytus and Lycon come forward to accuse me, he would have been fined a thousand drachmas, for not having obtained a fifth part of the votes. 26. The man, then, awards me the penalty of death. Well. But what shall I, on my part, O Athenians! award myself? Is it not clear that it will be such as I deserve? What, then, is that? Do I deserve to suffer, or to pay a fine? for that I have purposely during my life not remained quiet, but neglecting what most men seek after, money-making, domestic concerns, military command, popular oratory, and, moreover, all the magistracies, conspiracies, and cabals that are met with in the city, thinking that I was in reality too upright a man to be safe if I took part in such things, I therefore did not apply myself to those pursuits, by attending to which I should have been of no service either to you or to myself; but in order to confer the greatest benefit on each of you privately, as I affirm, I thereupon applied myself to that object, endeavoring to persuade every one of you not to take any care of his own affairs before he had taken care of himself in what way he may become the best and wisest, nor of the affairs of the city before he took care of the city itself; and that he should attend to other things in the same manner. What treatment, then, do I deserve, seeing I am such a man? Some reward, O Athenians! if, at least, I am to be estimated according to my real deserts; and, moreover, such a reward as would be suitable to me. What, then, is suitable to a poor man, a benefactor, and who has need of leisure in order to give you good advice? There is nothing so suitable, O Athenians! as that such a man should be maintained in the Prytaneum, and this much more than if one of you had been victorious at the Olympic games in a horserace, or in the two or four horsed chariot race: for such a one makes you appear to be happy, but I, to be so; and he does not need support, but I do. If, therefore, I must award a sentence according to my just deserts, I award this, maintenance in the Prytaneum. 27. Perhaps, however, in speaking to you thus, I appear to you to speak in the same presumptuous manner as I did respecting commiseration and entreaties; but such is not the case, O Athenians! it is rather this: I am persuaded that I never designedly injured any man, though I can not persuade you of this, for we have conversed with each other but for a short time. For if there were the same law with you as with other men, that in capital cases the trial should list not only one day, but many, I think you would be persuaded; but it is not easy in a short time to do away with, great calumnies. Being persuaded, then, that I have injured no one, I am far from intending to injure myself, and of pronouncing against myself that I am deserving of punishment, and from awarding myself any thing of the kind. Through fear of what? lest I should suffer that which Melitus awards me, of which I say I know not whether it he good or evil? Instead of this, shall I choose what I well know to be evil, and award that? Shall I choose imprisonment? And why should I live in prison, a slave to the established magistracy, the Eleven? Shall I choose a fine, and to be imprisoned until I have paid it? But this is the same as that which I just now mentioned, for I have not money to pay it. Shall I, then, award myself exile? For perhaps you would consent to this award. I should indeed be very fond of life, O Athenians! if I were so devoid of reason as not to be able to reflect that you, who are my fellow-citizens, have been unable to endure my manner of life and discourses, but they have become so burdensome and odious to you that you now seek to be rid of them: others, however, will easily bear them. Far from it, O Athenians! A fine life it would be for me at my age to go out wandering, and driven from city to city, and so to live. For I well know that, wherever I may go, the youth will listen to me when I speak, as they do here. And if I repulse them, they will themselves drive me out, persuading the elders; and if I do not repulse them, their fathers and kindred will banish me on their account. 28. Perhaps, however, some one will say, Can you not, Socrates, when you have gone from us, live a silent and quiet life? This is the most difficult thing of all to persuade some of you. For if I say that that would be to disobey the deity, and that, therefore, it is impossible for me to live quietly, you would not believe me, thinking I spoke ironically. If, on the other hand, I say that this is the greatest good to man, to discourse daily on virtue, and other things which you have heard me discussing, examining both myself and others, but that a life without investigation is not worth living for, still less would you believe me if I said this. Such, however, is the case, as I affirm, O Athenians! though it is not easy to persuade you. And at the same time I am not accustomed to think myself deserving of any ill. If, indeed, I were rich, I would amerce myself in such a sum as I should be able to pay; for then I should have suffered no harm, but now—for I can not, unless you are willing to amerce me in such a sum as I am able to pay. But perhaps I could pay you a mina of silver: in that sum, then, I amerce myself. But Plato here, O Athenians! and Crito Critobulus, and Apollodorus bid me amerce myself in thirty minæ, and they offer to be sureties. I amerce myself, then, to you in that sum; and they will be sufficient sureties for the money. [The judges now proceeded to pass the sentence, and condemned Socrates to death; whereupon he continued:] 29. For the sake of no long space of time, O Athenians! you will incur the character and reproach at the hands of those who wish to defame the city, of having put that wise man, Socrates, to death. For those who wish to defame you will assert that I am wise, though I am not. If, then, you had waited for a short time, this would have happened of its own accord; for observe my age, that it is far advanced in life, and near death. But I say this not to you all, but to those only who have condemned me to die. And I say this, too, to the same persons. Perhaps you think, O Athenians! that I have been convicted through the want of arguments, by which I might have persuaded you, had I thought it right to do and say any thing, so that I might escape punishment. Far otherwise: I have been convicted through want indeed, yet not of arguments, but of audacity and impudence, and of the inclination to say such things to you as would have been most agreeable for you to hear, had I lamented and bewailed and done and said many other things unworthy of me, as I affirm, but such as you are accustomed to hear from others. But neither did I then think that I ought, for the sake of avoiding danger, to do any thing unworthy of a freeman, nor do I now repent of having so defended myself; but I should much rather choose to die, having so defended myself, than to live in that way. For neither in a trial nor in battle is it right that I or any one else should employ every possible means whereby he may avoid death; for in battle it is frequently evident that a man might escape death by laying down his arms, and throwing himself on the mercy of his pursuers. And there are many other devices in every danger, by which to avoid death, if a man dares to do and say every thing. But this is not difficult, O Athenians! to escape death; but it is much more difficult to avoid depravity, for it runs swifter than death. And now I, being slow and aged, am overtaken by the slower of the two; but my accusers, being strong and active, have been overtaken by the swifter, wickedness. And now I depart, condemned by you to death; but they condemned by truth, as guilty of iniquity and injustice: and I abide my sentence, and so do they. These things, perhaps, ought so to be, and I think that they are for the best. 30. In the next place, I desire to predict to you who have condemned me, what will be your fate; for I am now in that condition in which men most frequently prophesy—namely, when they are about to die. I say, then, to you, O Athenians! who have condemned me to death, that immediately after my death a punishment will overtake you, far more severe, by Jupiter! than that which you have inflicted on me. For you have done this, thinking you should be freed from the necessity of giving an account of your lives. The very contrary, however, as I affirm, will happen to you. Your accusers will be more numerous, whom I have now restrained, though you did not perceive it; and they will be more severe, inasmuch as they are younger, and you will be more indignant. For if you think that by putting men to death you will restrain any one from upbraiding you because you do not live well, you are much mistaken; for this method of escape is neither possible nor honorable; but that other is most honorable and most easy, not to put a check upon others, but for a man to take heed to himself how he may be most perfect. Having predicted thus much to those of you who have condemned me, I take my leave of you. 31. But with you who have voted for my acquittal I would gladly hold converse on what has now taken place, while the magistrates are busy, and I am not yet carried to the place where I must die. Stay with me, then, so long, O Athenians! for nothing hinders our conversing with each other, while we are permitted to do so; for I wish to make known to you, as being my friends, the meaning of that which has just now befallen me. To me, then, O my judges! and in calling you judges I call you rightly—a strange thing has happened. For the wonted prophetic voice of my guardian deity on every former occasion, even in the most trifling affairs, opposed me if I was about to do any thing wrong; but now that has befallen me which ye yourselves behold, and which any one would think, and which is supposed to be the extremity of evil; yet neither when I departed from home in the morning did the warning of the god oppose me, nor when I came up here to the place of trial, nor in my address when I was about to say any thing; yet on other occasions it has frequently restrained me in the midst of speaking. But now it has never, throughout this proceeding, opposed me, either in what I did or said. What, then, do I suppose to be the cause of this? I will tell you: what has befallen me appears to be a blessing; and it is impossible that we think rightly who suppose that death is an evil. A great proof of this to me is the fact that it is impossible but that the accustomed signal should have opposed me, unless I had been about to meet with some good. 32. Moreover, we may hence conclude that there is great hope that death is a blessing. For to die is one of two things: for either the dead may be annihilated, and have no sensation of any thing whatever; or, as it is said, there are a certain change and passage of the soul from one place to another. And if it is a privation of all sensation, as it were a sleep in which the sleeper has no dream, death would be a wonderful gain. For I think that if any one, having selected a night in which he slept so soundly as not to have had a dream, and having compared this night with all the other nights and days of his life, should be required, on consideration, to say how many days and nights he had passed better and more pleasantly than this night throughout his life, I think that not only a private person, but even the great king himself, would find them easy to number, in comparison with other days and nights. If, therefore, death is a thing of this kind, I say it is a gain; for thus all futurity appears to be nothing more than one night. But if, on the other hand, death is a removal from hence to another place, and what is said be true, that all the dead are there, what greater blessing can there be than this, my judges? For if, on arriving at Hades, released from these who pretend to be judges, one shall find those who are true judges, and who are said to judge there, Minos and Rhadamanthus, Æacus and Triptolemus, and such others of the demi-gods as were just during their own life, would this be a sad removal? At what price would you not estimate a conference with Orpheus and Musæus, Hesiod and Homer? I indeed should be willing to die often, if this be true. For to me the sojourn there would be admirable, when I should meet with Palamedes, and Ajax, son of Telamon, and any other of the ancients who has died by an unjust sentence. The comparing my sufferings with theirs would, I think, be no unpleasing occupation. But the greatest pleasure would be to spend my time in questioning and examining the people there as I have done those here, and discovering who among them is wise, and who fancies himself to be so, but is not. At what price, my judges, would not any one estimate the opportunity of questioning him who led that mighty army against Troy, or Ulysses, or Sisyphus, or ten thousand others whom one might mention both men and women—with whom to converse and associate, and to question them, would be an inconceivable happiness? Surely for that the judges there do not condemn to death; for in other respects those who live there are more happy than those who are here, and are henceforth immortal, if, at least, what is said be true. 33. You, therefore, O my judges! ought to entertain good hopes with respect to death, and to meditate on this one truth, that to a good man nothing is evil, neither while living nor when dead, nor are his concerns neglected by the gods. And what has befallen me is not the effect of chance; but this is clear to me, that now to die, and be freed from my cares is better for me On this account the warning in no way turned me aside; and I bear no resentment toward those who condemned me, or against my accusers, although they did not condemn and accuse me with this intention, but thinking to injure me: in this they deserve to be blamed. Thus much, however, I beg of them. Punish my sons when they grow up, O judges! paining them as I have pained you, if they appear to you to care for riches or anything else before virtue; and if they think themselves to be something when they are nothing, reproach them as I have done you, for not attending to what they ought, and for conceiving themselves to be something when they are worth nothing. If ye do this, both I and my sons shall have met with just treatment at your hands. But it is now time to depart—for me to die, for you to live. But which of us is going to a better state is unknown to every one but God. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Parrhesiast (talk • contribs) 07:04, 7 September 2015 (UTC)


 * No matter what comes out of this SPI, it is clear that Parrhesiast is WP:NOTHERE. ~ RobTalk 15:20, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - to compare the two.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  14:34, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The following accounts are ✅:
 * Blocked the last one and tagged/retagged the others. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Blocked the last one and tagged/retagged the others. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Blocked the last one and tagged/retagged the others. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Blocked the last one and tagged/retagged the others. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Blocked the last one and tagged/retagged the others. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Blocked the last one and tagged/retagged the others. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Blocked the last one and tagged/retagged the others. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:08, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

12 September 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Freshly created account's first edit is to jump into WP:ANI and harass fairly established editors having a discussion. Freud as favorite topic and user-name pattern match. I blocked indef on its own before realizing there was a sock-drawer. DMacks (talk) 04:00, 12 September 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

 * The account is ✅. Tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 04:21, 12 September 2015 (UTC)

31 October 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Frankly, everything this IP address has done indicates that it is being used by someone who wants to disrupt Wikipedia, and pick fights with other users (primarily but not exclusively me). The user's interest in the lead of the Friedrich Nietzsche article is consistent with Kingshowman, the edit warring is consistent with Kingshowman, the ranting on talk pages (visible here) is consistent with Kingshowman, the game playing behavior (edit warring while simultaneously telling other people not to edit war, visible here) is consistent with Kingshowman, his lengthy and self-important edit summaries are consistent with Kingshowman, and his habit of insulting me and then denying that he has done so (visible here) is consistent with Kingshowman. I realize that this may seem like limited evidence, but after extensive and unpleasant past interaction with Kingshowman, I'm 90% sure or more this is him. At this stage, I cannot find a single edit that clinches the case, but I believe this IP shares Kingshowman's interest in denying or minimizing the fact that Nietzsche became associated with ideologies such as Nazism. That's apparent if you carefully compare this edit by a known sock of Kingshowman to IP edits like this. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 02:26, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

The user is now using an additional IP, 37.47.20.61, as visible here. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 04:00, 31 October 2015 (UTC) I'm adding one more. See: and.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  22:00, 1 November 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

 * Admin action needed - Please, block those IPs for three days each.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  22:01, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
 * per Vanja. ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  19:37, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

05 November 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

In this edit, the IP admits to being Kingshowman. Needs immediate block. FreeKnowledgeCreator (talk) 06:29, 5 November 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

 * IP already blocked as is TheOnceAndFutureKingShowman, who sort of added himself. Closing up. Favonian (talk) 18:02, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

07 December 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Same MO as the latest sockpuppets that were identified at Sockpuppet investigations/TruthIsDivine. User's first edit was to Talk:Defensive gun use and making same kinds of arguements as User:TruthIsDivine. -- GB fan 18:16, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Their first unblock request says they are a Meat Puppet not a sock puppet. Their second unblock request sounds like TruthIsDivine's comments.  -- GB fan 18:44, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Added request for a CU to be run because of the claim that they are a Meat Puppet instead of a Sock Puppet. -- GB fan 18:50, 7 December 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

 * Already blocked. Closing the case.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:41, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

07 December 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

New account TheLastTruthfulHumanBeing has the same focus on Defensive gun use as blocked and topic-banned user TruthIsDivine, specifically an issue with the logic of more defensive gun use incidents than reported crimes. Note the use of the figure of 1584. Further focus on Kleck being debunked and the research being "over 20 years old". I'm sure the use of "truth" in the usernames isn't coincidence, either. clpo13(talk) 06:51, 7 December 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

 * ✅, , , and  all belong to Kingshowman. - Mailer Diablo 16:30, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
 * please archive all of these cases to Sockpuppet investigations/Kingshowman. - Mailer Diablo 16:30, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅ and closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:44, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

07 December 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

TruthIsDivine from last night hasn't given up. Gaijin42 (talk) 15:32, 7 December 2015 (UTC) (fix ping) Gaijin42 (talk) 15:40, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Oops, already reported, needs to be merged.Gaijin42 (talk) 15:38, 7 December 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

 * --Neil N  talk to me 15:56, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
 * I have extended 's block to indef based on these results. -- GB fan 16:36, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Thanks. - Mailer Diablo 16:40, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Closing the case.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:44, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

09 December 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

All of this new editors attempted edits have been blocked by edit filters. They all concern gun control which has been the target of Kingshowman's latest socks. The username is also similar to the latest sock's usernames in regards to using Truth in the username. -- GB fan 15:56, 9 December 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

 * Added BeautifulEncyclopedist to the mix. Picked up where other socks left off, so I've already blocked it, but I guess it should be mentioned somewhere. Favonian (talk) 21:26, 11 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Everything that needs to be done appears to have been done; no need to keep old pending CU request active, so closing now. —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 04:10, 12 December 2015 (UTC)
 * This editor uses a lot of accounts, both named and otherwise. I don't think a CU for sleepers is an unreasonable request. How long could it take? It's certainly warranted. Doc   talk  09:39, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

10 December 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

The other night I helped get blocked from the encyclopedia for POV-pushing, and it was determined that he was a sock of Kingshowman. Unsurprisingly, other single-purpose accounts have popped up to smear the BLP subject Donald Trump at the talk page. In, HeilTrump declares myself and another editor to be "to the right of Adolf Hitler" during a dispute. (CAMDEOTTL) has used the same terminology multiple times, particularly. HeilTrump used the term "friend" in a smarmy fashion (as in this edit summary) much like CAMDEOTTL uses the term multiple times,,. CAMDEOTTL refers to Trump as the "Fuhrer" (e.g. in this edit summary) much like HeilTrump does here. HeilTrump was very quickly determined to be a sock of Kingshowman after a UAA report, so a quick CU check is requested here. Doc  talk  08:24, 10 December 2015 (UTC)  Doc   talk  08:24, 10 December 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

 * Based on the confession that was later removed, I have indeffed these two accounts. Still not sure about the one above.  -- GB fan 15:18, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Closing the case.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  23:10, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

16 December 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

A red flag is the same smarmy use of the term "friend" that the report just above ^ details concerning the socks and. We also have the same extensive Donald Trump smearing; and the editing of the Coal article, which was also edited by suspected Kingshowman socks and. It's worth a CU, in my opinion. Doc  talk  08:24, 16 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Note - There is a concurrent SPI at Sockpuppet investigations/MBUSHIstory. Doc   talk  08:49, 16 December 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

 * The sock is already blocked. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  10:11, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

26 December 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets

The newest sock attacking after its pending changes protection. Same flamboyant edit-summary and username styles as master. . Dr.   K.  23:20, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility
 * Introduction

Please compare sample below: Just a sample
 * Evidence
 * Loud edit-summaries
 * Kingshowman with edit-summary: Deleting my edits due to hostility. I have better things to do than contribute and donate my time to your shitty project vs. Destroyer's edit-summary: The jig is up, coal boys! We won in Paris! Your earth destroying days are numbered!.
 * References to "scholarship"
 * Kingshowman with edit-summary: /* Forget it. I quit this farce and will be informing all of my scholarly colleagues of my negative experience at Wikipedia, where a professional freely donating his time is chased away by resentful "Admins" with an open hatred of expertise of any kind... vs. Destroyer's edit-summary: No. This article is Pov pushing. You are all pushing 3 decade old studies above recent verified scholarship. Undid revision 696914552 by Faceless Enemy (talk).
 * Flamboyant sock usernames
 * Destroyer of Sophistry and Falsehood
 * ConspiracyToTellTheTruth
 * Convictions Are More Dangerous Enemies Of Truth Than Lies
 * DefenderOfFreedom
 * Recent socks for CU purposes

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


 * Very obviously similar behavior to on Defensive gun use, especially the attitude that anyone opposed to his edits is a gun nut. clpo13(talk) 02:15, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
The edit-warring is enough to warrant at least a temporary block. The behavioural similarities, though...I guess you'd say I applied the duck tape. :) —C.Fred (talk) 02:21, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * ✅, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:23, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

27 December 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Keeps up the crappy work, stating his considered opinions on Donald Trump and coal. Naming conventions are also adhered to. Requesting CU as a rich harvest of socks is commonly gathered once this person is on the roll. Favonian (talk) 19:05, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

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

Adding for obvious reasons (name, this edit). clpo13(talk) 19:14, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Blocked that one, as they are obviously either a sock, or pretending to be a sock. Monty  845  19:18, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The three accounts are ✅. . Tagged and closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:48, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

28 December 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

diff 1 diff 2 Faceless Enemy (talk) 14:19, 28 December 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

 * Blocked by another administrator and ✅ and tagged by me. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:41, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

29 December 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

There have been a constant stream of obvious socks    pushing very similar edits to Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016 as the current account. This most recent account is operating slightly differently, but given there have been so many recent socks there, I think it justifies a checkuser. Monty 845  20:32, 29 December 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 added "DisruptiveEditor23" and "Kingshowman Rises", both rather obvious. I'd already blocked all three of them before this case was reopened. Guess we are moving into WP:RBI territory. Favonian (talk) 20:38, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
 * No need to run a CU. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 21:36, 29 December 2015 (UTC)

06 January 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

As suggested by 103.47.145.160:

"Lord and Sovereign of Truth" is a new account that was created less than an hour ago to support World Champion Editor on the Nations and Intelligence article. He also seems to be logging out in order to edit war.

diffs:   The Master (talk) 05:53, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Adding 103.47.145.160 - Edits made to similar articles, and similar interactions along with the others listed. It appears to exhibit the same behaviors/concerns and should also be looked into.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   07:36, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

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

The new account is making the same revert that the first account did,   and also is trying to get the article deleted. Between the two accounts and the 104 IP, he's made four reverts in four hours, so this looks like an attempt to evade the three-revert rule. Note that the new account was created only one minute after his previous revert. 103.47.145.160 (talk) 06:33, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Per, this user seems like he may be a case of WP:NOTHERE. 103.47.145.160 (talk) 06:43, 6 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment: Looking at the history of the Nations and intelligence article, as well as the fact that World Champion Editor was created on 4 January 2016 and Lord and Sovereign of Truth was created on 5 January 2016 and editing the same articles between one another sets off some red flags. Both accounts also reference 'racism' in their edit summaries using the same grammar (See:, , , and as examples). With these circumstantial similarities in mind, I endorse a CU taking a look at this and confirming any socks / possible sleeper accounts that may exist.  ~Oshwah~  (talk)  (contribs)   06:55, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Oshwash, why exactly am I being attacked for pointing out that these two are obvious racists with no business editing anything other than their local Klan newsletter? I should think you would want them banned, rather than the person who has been fixing their dreadful Racialist propagandist article, and their obvious POV-pushing. Before I showed up, that article read like Mein KampfII: Hitler returns. This content has no business in any serious encylopedia and I guarantee you are in violation of policy if you restore the ridiculously unreferenced claims that were there claiming major differences in intelligence on the basis of genes between nations have been demonstrated. Do White people all get a prize if able to demonstrate their superiority to other races, or did I miss the newsletter?Lord and Sovereign of Truth (talk) 07:09, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

This is pure retaliation for the fact that I nominated their thinly veiled efforts at Scientific Racism for deletion. The minute I had nominated their obvious nonsense page for deletion, they come after me. Please help the Sovereign banish these two racists back from under the hole they crawled in from. They are destroying the Encyclopedia and filling it with nothing but article after article of the same poorly sourced, racist hoax with a thin veneer of laughable "science" that Whites and Asians are deeply intellectually superior to people with browner colored skin. There is no reason to provide a platform to these two. Indeed, it is little better to allow them to continue here than publishing ignorant rants overheard at the local Klan meeting.Lord and Sovereign of Truth (talk) 07:00, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Lord and Sovereign of Truth - This is not the proper place to discuss article disputes and make grievances regarding them. You need to do what I have asked you to do in my response to you on my talk page. If you have any relevant statements regarding the SPI process (read this guide for help), you're welcome to state them here. Otherwise, we ask you to take other disputes and questions not involving SPI to their proper places.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   07:21, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

All I know is that the second I nominated their ridiculous obvious hoax nonsense article for deletion, these two goose-stepping frauds try to have me banned from the encyclopedia. THEY should be banned. They are using the encylopedia as a place to disseminate their neo-nazi ideology. That entire article is based on the views of one pseudoscientist named Richard Lynn. Here's Lynn in 1995, which I added to the article from elsewhere in the encylopedia: "Amid racialist controversies during the 90s, Lynn was quoted in the Jan 1,1995 news article Racism Resurgent saying “What is called for here is not genocide, the killing off of the population of incompetent cultures. But we do need to think realistically in terms of the ‘phasing out’ of such peoples…. Evolutionary progress means the extinction of the less competent. To think otherwise is mere sentimentality" Yes, I obviously deserve to be banned for exposing the nefarious plot of these two to use as the soapbox for their local Klan meeting.Lord and Sovereign of Truth (talk) 07:28, 6 January 2016 (UTC).

Here is a link showing their outrageous insertion of hoaxes into wiki articles, without any referencing, simply removing my addition of sourced material, straight from other wikipedia pages, demonstrating the fraudulence of their neo-nazi claims: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nations_and_intelligence&diff=698456772&oldid=698456229

With ZERO references, they claim that it has been demonstrated that there is a "validated" connection between Race and IQ. Please do not restore any edits from either Klansman 1 or Klansman 2, for the good of the encylopedia.My version was referenced and systematically demonstrated the falsity of their claims. They couldn't win on the merits, so they try to have me banned. The Truth will never be destroyed. (By the way, I hate to break it to you, but none of you will be getting any "White People's Trophy" for showing that Whites and Asians are intellectually superior anyway, so it's unclear why you are so interested in this.)Lord and Sovereign of Truth (talk) 07:39, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Anyway, that IP is mine, if that is the problem here. I registered an account after making the first edit. Why is that a problem?Lord and Sovereign of Truth (talk) 07:55, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

I'd also like to direct everyone to vote to delete the article to begin with, along with their other hoax/fraud articles such as the following: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nations_and_intelligence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Dysgenics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Miradre/Nations_and_intelligence

I'd also like to nominate User Miradre as the Master's sock puppet, since he has been directly piping in racism from Mirardre's user page that I discovered there. See for yourself!Lord and Sovereign of Truth (talk) 08:00, 6 January 2016 (UTC)


 * I have added User:2600:1017:B429:59DC:24B3:6E45:B269:663 for obvious block evasion and trying to stack the AfD at Articles for deletion/Nations and intelligence. Geolocates to same location as User:104.246.17.37, above. I have blocked for a week, so no action needed - it's just here for the record. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 11:50, 6 January 2016 (UTC)


 * He's also evading the block by continuing to edit from his "World Champion Editor" account while his other account is blocked.  Using the not-blocked account to reply to comments directed at the blocked account makes it rather obvious:  103.47.145.164 (talk) 14:05, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I've issued a provisional 31-hour block as per WP:DUCK, and will leave it to the CU/closing admin to decide on a suitable length between zero and indefinite. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:12, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Could you please also check user:2600:1017:B411:A7AF:E916:21FA:F43:7F94? That IP is edit warring to insert the same material that World Champion Editor, Lord and Sovereign of Truth, and the 104.246 IP all edit warred to add.  103.47.145.134 (talk) 16:27, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Same geolocation. I've blocked and have semi-protected the article. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:51, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Boing, you do realize IP user above is playing you for a fool, correct? All the worthless information he added to the article thankfully just got removed by an honorable editor maunus, who actually bothered to check the claims before just blindly restoring references to what are well known to be pseudoscientific journals by anyone with any familiarity with psychology, biology, economics, anthropology, or academia in general, while you removed definitive refutations from all major academic publishers and other scholarly organizations, because you couldn't be bothered to check if you were linking to a WP: RS before restoring content with a superficial veneer of plausibility that isn't a RS just to show what a tough admin you are. Too bad you don't actually do your job and protect the articles instead of playing at being a Policeman. Isn't it fascinating how vigilant and interested Wiki admins are in patrolling for total irrelevancies ltjat have no effect on the quality of the encylopedia and the information within whatsoever, such as "civility" and "socks" (oh no! I'm going to sock jail! ) and so lax on checking whether or not references added to the articles are actually genuine, real, respectable sources that anyone with a clue rather than an agenda would bother reading? So much of interest to learn about the twisted psychology of the Wiki admins! "Care only about the rules, not whether the article is an unsupported conspiracy theory from the lunatic fringe of the academic world." Slayer Of The Truthless (talk) 18:04, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * CU-wise World Champion Editor and Lord and Sovereign of Truth are very the same person. Materialscientist (talk) 08:03, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * The ya re now blocked as socks of Kingshowman. Closing.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  12:51, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

06 January 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

appeared after WCE was blocked. Quacks with the same aggressive tone. I suspect we will have a rash of these before they realise that it is pointless. CU check at your discretion. Fiddle  Faddle  18:39, 6 January 2016 (UTC)


 * An editor has suggested that the sock master may be a puppet of User:Kingshowman. Fiddle   Faddle  21:04, 6 January 2016 (UTC)


 * The idea has merit. Same histrionic style; user names claiming ownership of "Truth"; lastly, the arrival of "Kingshowman Says Hello!" (added to the above list by me) on the scene. I'm requesting CU to shed light on the matter. Favonian (talk) 21:34, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

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

What's pointless is your participation in this encylopedia, since you couldn't give less of a shit about knowledge or checking if the article is factual, which anyone with eyes and a brain could have seen that what I was saying was correct. I have been vindicated! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slayer Of The Truthless (talk • contribs) 18:45, 6 January 2016‎ (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Blocked for admirably WP:DUCKy behavior. Favonian (talk) 18:47, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ Kingshowman Says Hello! to others and to Sockpuppet investigations/Kingshowman. Materialscientist (talk) 21:45, 6 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Merged here from Sockpuppet investigations/World Champion Editor. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  12:47, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

07 January 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

king of wikipedia, Lerd the nerd  wiki defender  08:41, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

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

How about ? Doc  talk  13:09, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
These two are obvious: Supreme Leader of Wikipedia‎, Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un. And the master is Sockpuppet_investigations/Kingshowman. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 08:45, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks, would someone merge this with Kingshowman-- Lerd the nerd wiki defender  08:54, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅, copied from Sockpuppet investigations/Supreme Leader of Wikipedia.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  11:06, 7 January 2016 (UTC)


 * - Please, perform a sleepers check.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  11:07, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Maybe no CU is needed per a search of "And, in fact, as you can now see" here. I really think there is no justification for a cu of Im the leader now m8. By the way, I am actually negotiating his return. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:57, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Wait, you say that we should trust him? After all his lies?  Vanjagenije  (talk)  12:39, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi Vanjagenije. Well, I am not sure about that. And it's a longshot, but I'm thinking maybe he can change his ways. After all, all he wants is to make articles right. I don't think he's a bad person. I just think he was going about things in an ineffective way. Emotional brute force loses to a calm, calculating brain. I think he has that brain. If he can use it to exclude the emotional brute force, he can be a wonderful editor. To me, that is worth the chance. Wikipedia has everything to gain and so does he. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:12, 7 January 2016 (UTC)


 * . I'm still checking for sleepers but can someone please tell me how Im the leader now m8 got on the list? The account has no edits at all. As for the possibility of unblocking the master, that ain't gonna happen, at least not as far as this CheckUser is concerned, and many of his puppets have been CU-blocked, meaning he can't be unblocked without at least one CheckUser agreeing to it. I haven't discussed the possibility of unblocking them with any other CU or administrator, but it's hard to imagine that there would be any kind of consensus to unblock, even if one CU agreed to it. At best, the person would have to wait at least six months without any more socking and then make an unblock request in the usual way.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:13, 7 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes, m8 should not be on the list. A CU for that account would be an unwarranted invasion of privacy, as you probably have figured.


 * As for an unblock, the discussion is at User talk:Supreme Leader of Wikipedia. I know getting consensus is a longshot. As for the standard six, hmmmm, I am guessing that the user won't do that. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:21, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Gee, I wonder why. :-) --Bbb23 (talk) 13:37, 7 January 2016 (UTC)


 * The two blocked accounts are ✅, plus --Bbb23 (talk) 13:37, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * All three accounts tagged. -- GB fan 13:48, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Closing the case.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  14:14, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

09 January 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

are similar to the tone of an already confirmed sockpuppet of. The Master (talk) 13:13, 9 January 2016 (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

 * Blocked, closing. Bbb23 (talk) 13:22, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

09 January 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Continuing to create sockpuppets to further the harassment of The Master at ANI.  General Ization  Talk   21:22, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry, this was intended to be added at WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Kingshowman.  General Ization  Talk


 * Wow! Are you really still upset because I apologized that my Kim Jong-un joke had offended your delicate sensibilities? Presumably you are no general either. I am not "harassing" this "user", but since the admins are all asleep at the wheel, and don't care about the continuing decline of your encylopedia, and care only about about playing detective and pretending they are Stabler on Law and Order or perhaps Sherlock Holmes (I don't understand your weird fantasies), I felt it was necessery to continue to call attention to the fact that this user was explicitly told that he lacked the basic linguistic competence to edit articles in English at dispute resolution, and that this user is laughably inadequate as an English speaker to be editing articles, even if he were not a virulent racist troll. These are the people you wish to stick up for Favonian and the General? I thought better of you both. Don't you have better to do than run check user? You know those are my socks. And I asked you to remove the erroneous socks on there (KnowledgeableCitizen and KnowledgeableCitizen2 who were only added due to a typo, as well as "ConspiracyToTellTheTruth" and "HistoryReaderWithPhD" who I have told you are not me.) you have no reason to disbelieve me. I have never lied about my socks, and I am confessing these ones for you, as usual, to end this silly game you like to play.2600:1017:B407:54D9:5132:2B47:6B41:A332 (talk) 21:47, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
 * No, I'm not upset at all. Just reporting your sockpuppets.  General Ization  Talk   21:49, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
 * I wager this is Kingshowman, continuing the activities of his most recent socks regarding "English proficiency". Added two more from today. Favonian (talk) 21:28, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

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

Let me help you out: the above 3 accounts are mine, as I have told you.

Here's another you haven't added here, as a demonstration of my good will, detectives: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Competence_Is_Required

I can also confirm the following "suspected" accounts for you:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:An_Old_Friend_Returns https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BeautifulEncyclopedist https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Convictions_Are_More_Dangerous_Enemies_Of_Truth_Than_Lies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DefenderOfFreedom https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:DisruptiveEditor22 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:HateFascists https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kingshowman_Rises_Again

And I can tell you that the following accounts are NOT mine. (And they are obviously not mine, I am baffled how you thought any of these were me. Please don't insult me.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:HistoryReaderWithPHD https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ConspiracyToTellTheTruth https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Knowledgeablecitizen https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Knowledgeablecitizen2

The last two were NOT "confirmed" to be me, someone added them as a typo, quite obviously. not my MO at all. Always happy to help with the investigations, detective. And Favonian, I should think you would not sneer at my demands that editors be competent and proficient in the language they write in.2600:1017:B424:AED5:7936:130D:8F7D:B3FE (talk) 22:06, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * ThanksForTeachingMeTheDisinctionBetweenDemonstrationAndProposal and Greater East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere are ✅.
 * Obvious Sock Account is . Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:11, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

08 May 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

User has an obsession with Trump and linking him to Nazism (yawn). Goes immediately to white supremacy to dump a load of guilt-by-association of Trump into the lead. User name and personality, if not provocative by likening oneself to Jesus, says "No crucifixitions [sic] this time, suggesting that whoever is behind this account has been blocked before. In general, familiarity with Wikipedia formatting without making common newbie mistakes suggests that this is a sock &#39;&#39;&#39;tAD&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 21:04, 8 May 2016 (UTC) &#39;&#39;&#39;tAD&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 21:04, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Also, compare to other user names with delusions of grandeur, such as User:Supreme Leader of Wikipedia. &#39;&#39;&#39;tAD&#39;&#39;&#39; (talk) 21:19, 8 May 2016 (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

 * Account blocked by Widr. Mike V • Talk 01:38, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

18 May 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Obsession with Trump and totalitarianism (per one and only edit) and rambling user name akin to that of confirmed sock. I have already blocked the account as a uw-vaublock, but would like to keep the case against Kingshowman up-to-date, in case he ever tries to apply for unblocking. The original socks are probably all stale, but a CU against would be useful – if the rules allow it. Favonian (talk) 11:52, 18 May 2016 (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

 * ✅, tagged. Materialscientist (talk) 12:25, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
 * All done here, closing. Ivanvector 🍁 (talk) 12:32, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

18 May 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Same fascination with Donald Trump, same delusions of grandeur, etc.

All edits have been to Talk:Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016, where he's campaigned aggressively for "neutrality" (which is a code-word for POV pushing, in this case). In particular, he seems preoccupied with connecting the Trump campaign to white supremacy. 

Compare a past edit from a confirmed sock where he did the same:

Note also the "grand" username, which is typical of this master. "The Neutral One" is similar to. His mannerisms in his few talk page posts are also consistent with the "grand" mannerisms. ~ RobTalk 19:56, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

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

19 May 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Again, obsessed with Donald Trump, delusions of grandeur, the whole nine-yards of Kingshowman.


 * Created Trumpocracy where Trump becomes dictator and sole sovereign. Also has username "All Hail Emperor Trump". Both of these harken back to the names of past socks, such as.


 * Made "grand" posts at Talk:Donald Trump presidential campaign, 2016. Examples from current/past socks:  Note the similar long rambling section titles and the fairly obvious anti-Trump content. ~ RobTalk 05:54, 19 May 2016 (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

 * ✅, blocked, tagged. Materialscientist (talk) 06:08, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

27 May 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

New user with a user name similar to previous socks. Created White nationalist and supremacist support for Donald Trump in 2016 focused on support of Donald Trump by white supremacists and in a similar writing style as previous socks. Compare White nationalist and supremacist support for Donald Trump in 2016 with this edit by The Neutral One. - MrX 16:15, 27 May 2016 (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
✅, blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:41, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

01 June 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Recreation of the page White supremacist support for Donald Trump, clear sock based on editing. RickinBaltimore (talk) 18:23, 1 June 2016 (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

 * . Favonian (talk) 18:27, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Specifically per this edit here:. Same M.O. of trying to add white supremacist info to the Trump or Trump campaign page. RickinBaltimore (talk) 15:20, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

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

I concur with. The style of quacking is especially duck-like.- MrX 15:23, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * -- GB fan 15:37, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Quack, quack! Created an attack page on Donald Trump, and has a similar bombastic username as. GABgab 01:08, 10 June 2016 (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

 * Blocked and tagged -- GB fan 01:51, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Verily. Ivanvector 🍁  (talk) 05:18, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Quacking yet again with another article about how Donald Trump is a racist RickinBaltimore (talk) 15:43, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

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

Suspected sockpuppets



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

More of the same obsession with Donald Trump. Created Appreciate the congrats for being right on Islamic terrorism, a coatrack article similar to Short-Fingered Vulgarian. Also, note the account name's relation to Trump: clpo13(talk) 23:24, 19 June 2016 (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

 * Account blocked. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 23:51, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

The three accounts and the IP are obviously the same person, with a "keen interest" in the Thomas Pogge article. The grandiose user names, and Jurist's obsession with Trump University plus the rather belligerent attitude points at Kingshowman. The IP geo-locates to Brooklyn, but since CU won't etc., etc., etc., you may just consider that random rambling. Favonian (talk) 20:13, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

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

Adding a few more IPs that were mentioned on the AN thread. DUCK for them (attaching Pearce, attacking Sarah, continuing crusade on Thomas Pogge).  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 22:12, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Added 2 more based on edits on this SPI page.  Eve rgr een Fir  (talk) Please &#123;&#123;re&#125;&#125; 01:56, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Why did you request a CU?--Bbb23 (talk) 14:03, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah, sorry. Two reasons: a) Jurist has been around since June 9, so it could be interesting to see if any sleepers were lying around; b) though my suspicion was strong, I felt at the time that confirmation would be reassuring. The latter concern has been rendered somewhat moot by various bits of IP-noise, in particular this one, so maybe we should just call it a day. Favonian (talk) 16:24, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Telltale long-winded Godwinizing on Donald trump articles. See contributions and previous SPI reports. - MrX 23:49, 27 June 2016 (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

 * Blocked 1 day --Neil N  talk to me 23:56, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

WP:DUCK what with the name and the creation of White supremacist support for Donald Trump in 2016. Sro23 (talk) 17:05, 25 July 2016 (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

 * Blocked by . ~ Rob 13 Talk 17:08, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked. <b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 17:08, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Similar username, behaviour. Created article along the lines of previous articles created with other accounts. Dschslava Δx  parlez moi  19:55, 30 July 2016 (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

 * . Favonian (talk) 19:57, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Characteristically posting lengthy lists of sources and theories about Trump. Geolocates to the same city as previous socks. - MrX 13:29, 3 August 2016 (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
Blocked 72 hours based on behavior. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:38, 3 August 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

The first user name matches up with previous grandoise names about truth. See  as an example. clpo13(talk) 16:45, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm also adding Wikipedia Sovereign. I've been suspicious, given the name and the focus on anti-Trump theories at Conspiracy theories of the United States presidential election, 2016, but it can hardly be a coincidence that shortly after WS requests an unblock that PtDYSoFFIATT (try saying that ten times fast) appears and continues WS's POV pushing (compare language of and /). clpo13(talk) 16:48, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Also, use of "friend" or "friends" in edit summaries:,. Compare the usage to Sockpuppet investigations/Kingshowman/Archive and Sockpuppet investigations/Kingshowman/Archive. clpo13(talk) 16:53, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Report filed at AIV here: . RickinBaltimore (talk) 16:46, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Edited David Hume, one of Kingshowman's favorite articles, but then Donald Trump became too big a temptation and we got an edit like this one. I've already blocked the duck, but in view of this person's habit of making socks for a rainy day, I request CheckUser. Favonian (talk) 15:58, 1 September 2016 (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
✅. No other accounts seen. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:53, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Creation of content comparing Trump to Hitler. See contributions and previous SPIs. - MrX 19:34, 16 September 2016 (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

 * Blocked as a duck. Not sure we're gonna need CU, but I'll leave that decision to them. Favonian (talk) 19:41, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Same type of Godwinizing, overcited contributions as previous socks. Same general geolocation. - MrX 18:46, 22 September 2016 (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

 * Yes, indeed. Blocked. Closing. Favonian (talk) 18:49, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Same type of bold, aggressive, Godwinizing, overcited contributions as previous socks. Same general geolocation. See contributions. - MrX 20:46, 24 September 2016 (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

 * Re-blocked 24.47. The IPv6 is probably to ephemeral to block at this point. Closing. Favonian (talk) 20:50, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

User created Donald Trump tax evasion controversy (not unlike the other Trump related articles Kingshowman has made) and piled citations on it, similar to what Kingshowman has done in other articles, such as Donald Trump and White Supremacy.

The "Return of the King" username is also similar to the sock " Kingshowman Returns". Sunmist (talk) 19:04, 28 September 2016 (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

 * Blocked. --<b style="color:navy">Neil N </b> <i style="color:blue">talk to me</i> 19:28, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Another agressive username, creating Donald Trump white supremacy controversy with the same content as past sock articles. McGeddon (talk) 09:42, 29 September 2016 (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

 * . Favonian (talk) 09:46, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Both created pages about the Trump tax, and both made aggressive replies to the "deleted" notice. Names are similar in meaning. NasssaNser (talk/edits) 12:25, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Also, when facing such deletion notices, IP 92.225.94.224 made aggressive replies, and declared an "not by me" on its talk page. Looks like a duck to me. NasssaNser (talk/edits) 12:36, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

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

Are you sure this isn't User:Kingshowman? Sro23 (talk) 12:32, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for noticing that. NasssaNser (talk/edits) 12:44, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Blocked both named accounts for creating attack pages. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 13:32, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Created Donald Trump tax scandal, same as socks User:The Discloser of Truth and The Last Honest Man did earlier today as well. Please delete and salt. Sro23 (talk) 19:23, 2 October 2016 (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

 * Blocked. Closing. Favonian (talk) 19:28, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Quacking on my talk page in an manner similar to IP User:2600:1017:B40B:560:5923:E719:3E34:A508, an IP sock, who was quacking on this page gonna take on this page someday. NasssaNser (talk/edits) 00:47, 3 October 2016 (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

 * - Obvious sock is obvious. Blocked.  Dennis Brown - 2&cent; 01:09, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Telltale edits to articles and talk pages making comparisons of Donald Trump-related people to Nazis. See previous SPIs and contributions. IP address geolocates to the same region as previous IP socks. - MrX 12:37, 14 November 2016 (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
Blocked 72 hours based on behavior. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 13:59, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

The IP user is heavily embroiled in a content dispute where, at the time, he was the only one in support of the inclusion of certain material. Then, the suspected sock account, created only fifteen or so minutes ago as of this writing, suddenly came in, with his/her first edit being a talk page post in complete support of the IP's position. The suspected sock's only two edits also concern the Protests against Donald Trump article, which the IP user has frequented for 99% of his history (outside of talk page and AN discussion threads).

In addition, both have a tendency to lack spacing between their messages and their signatures:


 * IP user:
 * Suspected sock:

As for the other IP account, he/she responded to a question I had to the suspected sockmaster in the WP:ANI thread, as if the question was directed at him/her instead. Parsley Man (talk) 22:19, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

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

This is silly. My IP address refreshed. That's why I responded with a different IP address to the statement addressed to me. That's how IP addresses work.

How is someone saying that they agree with my argument grounds for suspecting they are a sock? Others posted there as well in agreement with my view. It was a well-reasoned position. This is now the 4th different adminboard on which you've tried to report me. Maybe you should spend your time collaborating as I suggested, or offering solutions, rather than clogging up as many administrator notice boards as you can over a confent dispute? How many times did I tell you I was open to collaboration, only to have you sneer that it was "ironic" that I wanted to collaborate when I objected to your wholesale removal of sourced content, against policy? OP keeps filing inappropriate reports against me rather than deal with a content dispute. At least one he admitted I was correct, and withdrew his spurious report of "vandalism."209.140.37.39 (talk) 22:45, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

And who is this King of whom you speak? I am but a humble foot soldier in the battle of truth, the only sovereign I recognize. The record will show my edits were all constructive and impeccably sourced.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Brave Edit Warror is ✅ and blocked (no tag per WP:DENY). I've blocked the IPs for 72 hours. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:54, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Telltale edits comparing Trump with Hitler. Same geolocatio as previous socks. - MrX 03:58, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

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

I have given short-term blocks for vandalism to 209.140.34.231 and 209.140.40.52. A rangeblock may be in order here. --MelanieN (talk) 15:43, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * One-month range block put in place. Closing. Favonian (talk) 15:54, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

attempted to recreate deleted page sockpuppeteer had previously created WNYY98 (talk) 17:27, 29 December 2016 (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

 * Already blocked, no tag, closing. GABgab 17:34, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Edit warring on First 100 days of Donald Trump's presidency, Inauguration of Donald Trump, Newspaper endorsements in the United States presidential election, 2016, etc., emphasizing how the KKK endorsed Trump:. This is exactly the sort of thing Kingshowman would do. Sro23 (talk) 19:34, 9 January 2017 (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

 * . Favonian (talk) 19:50, 9 January 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Edit warring at Inauguration of Donald Trump. This is almost certainly Kingshowman based on the user name, focus on Donald Trump, and over-the-top rhetoric once challenged. Blocked account was also edit warring on the inauguration page. In particular, compare this and this. clpo13(talk) 20:19, 10 January 2017 (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

 * . Favonian (talk) 20:22, 10 January 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

See deleted for same Donald Trump POV-pushing. Already blocked but I'm sure we can uncover a massive trove of sleepers. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 06:39, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Note Kingshowman recently claimed, , and were his only unblocked sock accounts. The accounts never edited, so I guess there's no way of telling, but the usernames certainly check out. Sro23 (talk) 06:44, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - King of  &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 06:39, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
 * - Katietalk 16:27, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ along with and . No other sleepers that I can see. Katietalk 16:41, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Please note that found only already blocked accounts. I came close to declining the endorsement as generally a "sleeper" check for this master is a waste of time.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:54, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Suggestive user name. Creates yet another Trump controversy page, initially without the usual excesses. However, when the page is sent to AfD, we find this vintage Kingshowman outburst, followed by this personal attack on. I'll block the duck immediately, so this entry is just for the record. Favonian (talk) 22:14, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

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

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Both are SPAs regarding the article Donald Trump Russia dossier. The article was created by Sockhunter who was banned on Jan. 14 as a Kingshowman sock. User:You'llNeverGuess was created Jan. 15 and went straight to the talk page. MelanieN (talk) 03:19, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Additional information: Kingshowman has admittedly and in quick succession used the IPs ‪209.140.39.72‬ ‬ and ‪209.140.43.102‬  Any chance of a range block? --MelanieN (talk) 04:08, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

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

The IPs noted by are also edit-warring about inclusion of the "dossier" document at Commons and copiously insulting me in the process. See my report at Sockpuppet investigations/Jasonanaggie. Possibly they are all Kingshowman socks? — JFG talk 12:30, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Kingshowman and You'llNeverGuess are ❌.
 * You'llNeverGuess is ✅ to . I’ve indefinitely blocked and tagged You'llNeverGuess and blocked TheTimesAreAChanging for one month. Please create a case for TheTimesAreAChanging and put this report in it.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:11, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅. I'm leaving this file here as well for the result to Kingshowman. Case closed. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:23, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Usual-style nonproductive screed from one of the usual IP address ranges — JFG talk 09:30, 17 January 2017 (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

 * Range blocked – again. Closing. Favonian (talk) 09:34, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Those IPs came to my attention in an edit war about Commons file Commons:2017 Trump dossier by Christopher Steele, Ex-MI6 Russia Desk Intelligence Agent.pdf. None of those IP editors ever contributed to the project except for this specific edit war, although they are able to argue vocally citing 1RR and COPYVIO policies. The original uploader of the file, User:Jasonanaggie, misrepresented the license as PD-USGov, then changed it to CC-by-2.0. Both are unsupported. Later, when contested, IP 63.143.203.101 removed the license tag entirely, and reverted the license dispute tags several times. Soon, IP 24.188.103.14 appeared and continued the revert war with the same rationale and aggressive edit messages.

Meanwhile, a parallel war developed about the insertion of this file in Donald Trump Russia dossier, where both IP 63.143.203.101 and 209.140.46.252 intervened to restore the contested file. I placed a warning for disruption on User talk:63.143.203.101, which was ignored. Finally, 63.143.203.101 reported me to WP:ANEW for edit-warring, and 209.140.39.119 admitted being the same editor by saying "So sorry that my IP is not stable, your majesty."

To be fair, I am not sure whether the sockmaster is User:Jasonanaggie, and I apologize for accusing them if they are not the culprit. From circumstantial evidence, this could be any other experienced and opinionated editor in the US politics domain. But whoever it is, the disruption and aggressiveness need to stop. — JFG talk 10:57, 15 January 2017 (UTC) — JFG talk 10:57, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Adding as suspected sockmaster, per analog reports including IPs in the same range: 209.140.39.72‬ and 209.140.43.102‬. Adding the lot to this request. — JFG talk 12:36, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Gasp, Sockpuppet investigations/Kingshowman/Archive is chock full of addresses in the same ranges, creating attack pages on the same subject and exhibiting the same aggressive behaviour towards fellow editors. The disruptor's identity looks obvious now. I don't know how to move this report to the appropriate master name, please some admin help me out. — JFG talk 12:54, 15 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Gasp, checkusers don't connect IP addresses to named accounts, as a matter of policy, Einstein. You are thus completely wasting your time with all of this. And no, I did not "insult" you by pointing out your obvious lies. If you don't like being called on your dishonesty, please don't make demonstrably false claims.63.143.196.107 (talk) 13:09, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

I have blocked the following - 63.143.196.107, 63.143.203.101, and 63.143.193.78 - as not only obvious socks but disruptive. I earlier blocked 209.140.39.72 and 209.140.43.102 as ADMITTED socks of Kingshowman. --MelanieN (talk) 14:53, 15 January 2017 (UTC)


 * I just was alerted to this discussion, I assure you I am not doing anything related to that file. I just uploaded it erroneously with the License PD-USGov, if you look at my other uploads those are PD-USGov, and the upload wizard just carried over the settings when I uploaded this one file.  I then changed it to CC-by-2.0 when it was pointed out to me that it was not PD-USGov, which was obvious to me as well.  Since then I have had nothing to do with any discussion. I find it disturbing that someone thought that I was so invested in this one file.  I would implore anyone to look at the number of edits I have been doing while this discussion has been going on. Jasonanaggie (talk) 18:08, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Again, my apologies for initially suspecting you. Meanwhile the real sockmaster and aggressive edit-warrior has been identified and blocked. No worries on your side. — JFG talk 18:18, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Great, no problem, I am just happy you got to the bottom of the issue. Best, Jasonanaggie (talk) 18:21, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

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

1. I removed your copyvio tag because you declined to present evidence the document was copyrighted. I explained this to you, but you insisted on lying and saying the file is copyrighted. There is no evidence of this.

2. I asked you to go to the talk page and get consensus for removal, since the file had previously been added and removed twice today prior to your revert.

3. You violated 1rr and 3rr on the article, which I warned you about, and you have no defense for.

4. I already told you the above IP addresses are all me, and I never tried to hide this fact. Thus I don't understand your accusation of sock puppetry. Not only do I own at least 6 devices ( phones, tablets, laptops, and desktops, etc.) but my IP address seems to change on each device every time I log on and off the internet. Editing from unstable ip addresses is not evidence of sock puppetry. I told you the addresses were mine.

5. I have no association with the named account you are accusing, or any named account (I always edit as an IP) and you provide no evidence of a connection with the account you accuse.. Because he uploaded the file, and I didn'tt agree with your deletion request made on spurious, dishonest grounds? This SPI request is childish. 63.143.193.78 (talk) 11:15, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Further, JFG lies as often as he breaths. He lies above in his account of the edit war, in which he says I warred to include the document when it was already included when he arrived, at which time he reverted the addition. I then reverted him since he falsely claimed the document was copyrighted, and asked him to go to the talk page, since the document had been restored multiple times, so consensus appeared to favor inclusion, and its removal required discission, and anyway he was only allowed 1 revert, and was the 1st reverter of Caspring's edit to include the material. .that should have been the end of it, but he chose to violate 1rr. That's where the conflict started. I then saw that he had placed the same lying tag over at commons, and refused to allow him to do so, until he produced proof that the document was copyrighted, no one claims the document is copyrighted. Jfg then proceeded to continue reverting, lying and saying the article wasn't under 1rr (doesn't even matter, since he violated 3rr too), lyimg again and claiming no other wiki pages uses the document (the corresponding German article also uses it), and claiming a policy about burden of proof for which he sent me a link to two empty, none istent pages. I do not think I have ever seen an editor who lies as often as JFG. 63.143.193.78 (talk) 11:46, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes, it's hard to keep track of how shocking your lack of English literacy is. CHECKUSERS DO NOT CONNECT NAMED ACCOUNTS TO IP ADDRESSES.

Please read WP:COMPETENCEISREQUIRED and please come back when you've learned to read and communicate in English with passable proficiency. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.143.196.107 (talk) 13:31, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Are you illiterate? Please read : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CheckUser#CheckUser_and_privacy_policy

Checkusers do not connect accounts to IP addresses. Thus your entire request is contra policy. I hope you enjoy wasting your time.63.143.196.107 (talk) 13:23, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * The IPs are clearly all incarnations of Kingshowman, behaviorally as well as geographically. There may be problems with Jasonanaggie's choice of license template, but there is no indication that he and Kingshowman are the same person. As the necessary measures have been taken, I'm closing this and please merge this to the Kingshowman SPI case. Favonian (talk) 17:02, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Created yet another attack page on Trump; pompous user name, highfalutin prose. Currently blocked for edit-warring. Requesting CU to be on the safe side, considering the toxic nature of this general topic. Favonian (talk) 16:02, 29 January 2017 (UTC)


 * Never mind; this outburst sealed it and off he goes. Closing. Favonian (talk) 16:04, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

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

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Created Border policy of Donald Trump with first edit, tone to now deleted Donald Trump Russia tape is different, but this comment is typical of the puppet. Flat Out (talk) 05:38, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Doesn't sound like him. is a notorious inflammatory anti-Trump crusader, whereas  is being chastised for attempting to tone down Trump-related subjects, and speaks rather politely when addressed. — JFG talk 12:38, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * This is definitely not Kingshowman, closing. GABgab 00:19, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Recently indefinitely blocked for disruptive editing on AFD articles. Shortly after, this username is created. Obviously no question. Sock puppet is blocked; creating case for record-keeping purposes.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   06:10, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * AIV report claims he is a sock of User:kingshowman and this diff by Supervoter seems to confirm it. . TonyBallioni (talk) 06:15, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * , I seem to have edit conflicted with you on this. Opps. The diffs are there anywho. TonyBallioni (talk) 06:16, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * TonyBallioni - No worries, dude! Thanks for being diligent and for adding information here. See what happens when I try to assume good faith? LOLOL!!! ;-)  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   06:18, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * , obviously ;). Could a clerk please tag the account? Class 455  ( talk |stand clear of the doors!)  21:48, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Well, fun... looks like this is another kingshowman sock. A clerk will want to combine this with the master SPI case. Sorry..... :-/  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   06:15, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅. Merged from Sockpuppet investigations/Supervoter. GABgab 02:47, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

WP:DUCK Sro23 (talk) 19:34, 27 February 2017 (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

 * . Favonian (talk) 19:36, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Quacks loudly, recreated attack redirects created by the previous sock.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:03, 1 March 2017 (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

 * The Grand Puppeteer is already blocked and the behavioral evidence is indeed overwhelming. I have added HervéDuchat with the following rationale: 1) Edit-warring on Demagogue (and temporarily blocked by me for same) over the inclusion of Donald Trump, in particular with the typical "reductio ad Hitlerum" (compare this contribution by a previously blocked IP sock); 2) intimate knowledge of Wiki-speak, uncommon in newbies, in particular this promise to "raise the stakes"; 3) self-congratulatory biography on user page. Request CheckUser to shed light and sweep for sleepers in view of the current high activity rate. Favonian (talk) 12:21, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
 * The Grand Puppeteer appears to be them. HervéDuchat is at best. --  Amanda  (aka DQ) 03:34, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Regarding Hervé, I'll pay out the WP:ROPE and see what happens. Nothing more to do here, so closing. Favonian (talk) 13:49, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Seems pretty. Chrissymad ❯❯❯  ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  13:37, 3 March 2017 (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

 * Certainly the same as The Grand Puppeteer as well as recently blocked . Closing this one. Favonian (talk) 13:44, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Obvious quacking here Sro23 (talk) 01:12, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Blast!King of Edit Wars (talk) 01:13, 9 March 2017 (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

 * Account now blocked. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 01:27, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

This edit is vintage Kingshowman: adding Trump to the Demagogue article an old favorite, compare this edit by a previous sock. The screed contains the usual deluge of "sources" and pompous references to philosophy. User has already been blocked, but I've submitted this as it might be needed in future CU etc. Favonian (talk) 12:31, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

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

Suspected sockpuppets



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

I guess this could just be a standard vandal, but the username and Donald Trump edits make me suspicious. Sro23 (talk) 18:14, 15 April 2017 (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

 * Yeah, that's certainly him. Already blocked so closing. Favonian (talk) 21:09, 15 April 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Quacks like a Kingshowman (long time no see). Similar grandiose prose and innocuous-looking edit summaries, e.g., exclusively focused on Trump-bashing. Already blocked but may be useful to file for posterity. — JFG talk 22:59, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Comments by other users
At least he deleted the expletive this time.

Added 173.220.27.26 who made nearly identical edits and geolactates to the same region.- MrX 23:17, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

The usual quacking, check any of his contribs. Please block IP. — JFG talk 19:03, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

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

Suspected sockpuppets



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

The usual. — JFG talk 21:36, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

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

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Same geolocation and same type of telltale anti-Trump edits. See contributions and previous SPI reports. - MrX 17:45, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I blocked the IP for 24h per duck test which likely concludes this investigation.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:04, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Yeah, it's him. Already blocked, so we can close this case. Favonian (talk) 20:08, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Same telltale edits as all previous socks, obsession with, and geolocation to Brooklyn. - MrX 23:09, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

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

I have blocked the second and third, per WP:DUCK. --MelanieN (talk) 02:16, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - Is it too late to block the latter two IPs? Thanks, GABgab 01:12, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks; closing. GABgab 15:11, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

The "new user" Mishigas, is already indeffed for disruption. But I think it would be worthwhile investigating whether it was Kingshowman. They created an article, James Comey Senate Intelligence Committee testimony, which was strongly anti-Trump; that of course is Kingshowman's only POV here. The account is obviously not new, throwing around terms like GNG and IDONTLIKEIT with familiarity. For the most part they avoided Kingshowman's usual diatribes and Hitler comparisons, but sometimes they slipped one in.


 * Hitler reference:


 * Diatribe, and referring to opposing editor as a "Trumpkin":

It's true the user is already blocked, but I think it would be good to definitely establish whether this actually was Kingshowman, so that we can recognize this newbie-with-an-article approach if he tries it again. MelanieN (talk) 15:58, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

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


 * I assumed good faith and tried to help this user. I don't think I was wrong per se, but, per MelanieN, I don't like wasting time on sockpuppets. —Guanaco 16:41, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - Please compare to previous socks in the archive. Thanks, GABgab 16:48, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Too bad - nice username. ✅. No other unblocked accounts seen.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:54, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Case closed.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:53, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Focusing on Covfefe and the deletion review process which Kingshowman was previously involved in.

No need for CheckUser, because he provided IP evidence on this very page. —Guanaco 08:40, 13 June 2017 (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
— Berean Hunter   (talk)  11:17, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Blocked IPs for two weeks and closing.

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Smells like a DUCK. —Guanaco 21:51, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

As you wish is admittedly the same person as Covfefe Crusader. —Guanaco 21:56, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Requesting CheckUser to confirm and indef block. —Guanaco 22:40, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

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

"As you wish" blocked 36 hours for edit warring. --MelanieN (talk) 22:38, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I only beat Bbb23 by 3 minutes! 0;-D --MelanieN (talk) 22:44, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
. Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:41, 13 June 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Compare contributions to previous socks. Geolocates to the same area. - MrX 17:45, 18 June 2017 (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

 * Blocked; closing. Favonian (talk) 17:49, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Nothing says Kingshowman like pompous anti-Trump recitals coming from the 63.143… IP range. — JFG talk 07:11, 21 June 2017 (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

 * Blocked and closing. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 11:58, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

. GABgab 01:36, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

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

See also. Already blocked but quite kingshowmanducky as well… — JFG talk 21:28, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - Thanks, GABgab 01:36, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * if you tell me which ones of these edits are his, I can possibly do a range block. I blocked this IP for 31 hours, though. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:11, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Nevermind. Figured it out myself.  63.143.192.0/20 range blocked for six months. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 12:35, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Obvious Duck name "Truth", and Defensive gun use is one of his favorite trolling grounds.

As sock is prolific, CU is requested to find additional socks.

For at least one of the socks, they admit their socking "At least the lunatics running this page backed off from the "33 million DGU's" they were pushing last time I was here. " https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Defensive_gun_use&diff=803914417&oldid=803914020 — Preceding unsigned comment added by ResultingConstant (talk • contribs) 13:57, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Note: I am not including the diffs below as actionable on DS/AE grounds (although I think tthey are) because this is the wrong venue. There are merely included to help identify the sock. If the SPI is declined I plan on taking these diffs to AE as actionable in their own right.

Similar arguments and polemics on Defensive gun use Compare new sock diffs :
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Defensive_gun_use&type=revision&diff=803838830&oldid=803836428
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Defensive_gun_use&type=revision&diff=803791603&oldid=803784779
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Defensive_gun_use&diff=803509616&oldid=796251617
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Defensive_gun_use&diff=782586471&oldid=782571838
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Defensive_gun_use&type=revision&diff=782540431&oldid=782035674

To prior diffs from confirmed socks
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Defensive_gun_use&diff=prev&oldid=697029427
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Defensive_gun_use&diff=prev&oldid=696938508
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Defensive_gun_use&diff=prev&oldid=694068806 ResultingConstant (talk) 12:19, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

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

Where are your priorities? What is more important: alleged sock puppetry, or a proven WP: Hoax article that claims that, in the United States, "4 million violent crimes are prevented by a defensive gun use", when crime statistics in fact show only 1.2 million violent crimes attempted, 63 percent of which are simple assaults for which a "defensive gun use" would be judged criminal, thus entailing that our article implies that over 1000 percent of crimes are prevented by "defensive gun uses"? Have the lunatics really taken over to an extent that you do not care if there are WP:HOAX articles in your encyclopedia, so long as you do not like the messenger? Asinine. My Only Weapon is Truth (talk) 13:59, 5 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Cyberduck icon.png It looks like a duck to me  G M G  <sup style="color:#000;font-family:Impact">talk   14:36, 5 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Shouldn't I be given leniency, nay, a hero's welcome, for exposing this corrupt WP: HOAX page? Three Cheers for Kingshowman!My Only Weapon is Truth (talk) 15:04, 5 October 2017 (UTC)


 * GAB, see .  G M G  <sup style="color:#000;font-family:Impact">talk   14:24, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * ,, closing. GABgab 15:19, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

DUCK. Brand new account, editing with similar style and arguments on a new article after prior socks banned today and previous article locked. ResultingConstant (talk) 20:45, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

As sockmaster is prolific, I request CU to find other sleeper accounts. ResultingConstant (talk) 20:48, 6 October 2017 (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

 * Following are ✅, :
 * Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:55, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:55, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:55, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 00:55, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Admitted here Sro23 (talk) 06:01, 10 November 2017 (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

 * - Please block the sock. Sro23 (talk) 06:05, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Blocked. Widr (talk) 06:10, 10 November 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

User account Peacebroker was created at 18:21, on 11 November 2017, 18 minutes after the creation of the master account. Master starts edit-warring at adding BLP violations for Donald Trump. Master stops edit-warring at 18:18 UTC, 4 minutes later, sock joins the fray and starts reverting to the same version as the master. Both use edit summaries in a similar manner, using witty expressions. Their usernames are of the good hand, bad hand variety. Master was reported at UAA and is already blocked as NOTHERE. . Dr.   K.  04:01, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

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

This reminds me of Kingshowman, think it should be merged to that case. 79.66.4.79 (talk) 08:50, 12 November 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - This is definitely Kingshowman. Too obvious for CU. Please extend Peacebroker's block to indefinite and move this case to Sockpuppet investigations/Kingshowman. Sro23 (talk) 18:54, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * I have extended the block to indefinite., I am among the newest administrators with little experience so far dealing with socks. Can you please point me to the proper procedure for moving this to the other investigation? Thank you. <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328  Let's discuss it  21:10, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
 * You'll find detailed instructions for patrolling administrators at WP:SPI/AI. The case merge, however, should be handled by an SPI clerk. Sir Sputnik (talk) 02:44, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you, . <b style="color:#070">Cullen</b><sup style="color:#707">328  Let's discuss it  03:14, 13 November 2017 (UTC)


 * ✅ - no tags. Closing. GABgab 03:01, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Most Valuable Editor is already blocked as sock, see (WP:BLPN) - just listed for documentation. Ignore All Rules continued Draft:Views on Donald Trump and Fascism, created by Most Valuable Editor (needs G5 deletion as well). Similar username style and rambling political soapboxing - obvious ducks. GermanJoe (talk) 06:13, 23 November 2017 (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

 * - Please indef sock, delete draft per G5. Thank you. Sro23 (talk) 06:31, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
 * No tags per WP:DENY. Sro23 (talk) 09:01, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Similar username, trolling at Village pump (idea lab) and WP:CLEANSTART policy page. GermanJoe (talk) 00:46, 25 November 2017 (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

 * Blocked by GB fan. Closing. Sir Sputnik (talk) 01:16, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Quacks loudly with the creation of Draft:Views on Trump and Fascism. Sro23 (talk) 06:31, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

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

I plead guilty, your honor.

During my lifetime I have dedicated my life to this struggle of the African people. I have fought against white domination, and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons will live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal for which I hope to live for and to see realised. But, My Lord, if it needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die.An Anonymous Editor (talk) 06:57, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Admits to being a KS sock. --bonadea contributions talk 11:12, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Blocked; closing. Favonian (talk) 13:31, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Brand new user shows up a couple of days ago, makes a few minor edits to assorted articles, then immediately finds their way to WP:DRV where they start shotgunning vague comments to multiple reviews. I have no idea who they're a sock off, but this is clearly not the behavior of a brand new user. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:16, 26 December 2017 (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

 * ✅ to plus:
 * Blocked and tagged. Please merge this to the correct case.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:44, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * We also have the ✅ . GABgab 17:24, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * There is no doubt that Schracq, Kinetic bombardment, and Rocckker13 are socks of each other as they match technically and behaviorally. However, although they are technically related to Kingshowman, they do not have the obvious behavioral earmarks of Kingshowman. You are one of the best administrators I know in identifying socks by behavior, and that, of course, includes your most recent ID of Profane Username. What do you think?--Bbb23 (talk) 18:32, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Unless Kingshowman is branching out, I don't think this trio is him - he's usually less subtle. There's the involvement on the Fascism page, but not much else is similar. Usernames are also different, and he denied being this batch on my talkpage. GABgab 18:40, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Profane Username is unquestionably Kingshowman, and his latest socks have attested as much (meaning, of course, that his previous professions of innocence were blatant lies). As for the other batch, it is not behaviorally obvious. There is something about the condescending, slightly obnoxious tone of the AfD/DelRev statements that rings a bell, but that's about it. Favonian (talk) 18:41, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I've revisited my check and found technical quirks that I ignored/overlooked the first time as too minor. Given the behavioral issues, they take on a new importance. I didn't bother reporting an account because it was already blocked, but is ✅ technically and behaviorally to the Rocckker13 socks. Therefore, I think it best to create a new SPI for Rocckker13 and their three socks.  I apologize for making extra work for you, but could you please do the honors? You can then retag and close this report and the new case. No hurry, when you have the time. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:22, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Profane Username is unquestionably Kingshowman, and his latest socks have attested as much (meaning, of course, that his previous professions of innocence were blatant lies). As for the other batch, it is not behaviorally obvious. There is something about the condescending, slightly obnoxious tone of the AfD/DelRev statements that rings a bell, but that's about it. Favonian (talk) 18:41, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I've revisited my check and found technical quirks that I ignored/overlooked the first time as too minor. Given the behavioral issues, they take on a new importance. I didn't bother reporting an account because it was already blocked, but is ✅ technically and behaviorally to the Rocckker13 socks. Therefore, I think it best to create a new SPI for Rocckker13 and their three socks.  I apologize for making extra work for you, but could you please do the honors? You can then retag and close this report and the new case. No hurry, when you have the time. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:22, 26 December 2017 (UTC)


 * ✅. GABgab 01:07, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Editor's single, now deleted, contribution amounts to a signed confession. The account has been blocked but it was created three days ago, justifying a sweep for sleepers. Favonian (talk) 18:34, 26 December 2017 (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
✅. No other accounts seen. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 18:54, 26 December 2017 (UTC)