Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nitramrekcap/Archive

25 August 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

-- Francis Schonken (talk) 13:01, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Evidence
 * 2.27.131.74 was blocked 22 August 2014
 * 2.30.207.146 is posting the same type of disruptive messages, on the same talk pages:
 * Talk:List of Bloomsbury Group people
 * 2.27.131.74 — 21 August 2014: "I CAN DEBATE THE SHORTCOMINGS OF WIKIPEDIA UNTIL (AS WE SAY IN COLLOQUIAL ENGLISH) "THE COWS COME HOME", (etc.)"
 * 2.30.207.146 — 25 August 2014: "'WIKIPEDIA' : "This place is a lunatic asylum!" etc..."
 * Similar edits by both IP's at User talk:Jimbo Wales:
 * 2.27.131.74 — 21 August 2014
 * 2.30.207.146 — 25 August 2014
 * See also
 * Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive851
 * Regarding probable identification with Nitramrekcap, see also:
 * Dispute resolution noticeboard/Archive 97
 * User talk:Nitramrekcap
 * 2.30.207.146 — 25 August 2014

There's no doubt any more that "Martin Packer" = "Nitramrekcap" (see this edit) = 2.30.207.146 (he sent me an email this afternoon from that IP): --Francis Schonken (talk) 20:52, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Update
 * Is there anywhere I should send the header info of the e-mail to in order to help with this SPI?
 * Of course I don't appreciate this kind of spam, and would like to ask to stop this user from sending e-mail.
 * I suppose he logs in from time to time - does that make CheckUser an asset for analysing this case? If so, please set the checkuser to "yes" on this investigation request.

Posting the same typical "all-caps" messages on Jimbo's page, geolocates to the same area (South of Birmingham), same provider (Orange Home UK), same MO (i-know-all and fellow editors are nothing but a nuisance), adding/removing content and factoids because they are The TruthTM,... --Francis Schonken (talk) 06:53, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Follow-up — editor has moved activities to Pre-Raphaelite content area

...and more abuse: e.g., returning to previous wording: 'WIKIPEDIA' : "This place is a lunatic asylum!"... — [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Nitramrekcap&diff=prev&oldid=622998817 DO NOT ... OR ELSE!] (this last one includes an ad hominem edit summary) --Francis Schonken (talk) 09:47, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * One of them is blocked and the other hasn't edited for a couple days. Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:12, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

23 May 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

In January 2015 the IP 2.27.112.161 made notion] of the burial of an eleventh member of the Cambridge Apostles at Ascension Parish Burial Ground. Due to the quickly changing IP-numbers I did nothing with that except getting alarmed for sockpuppets/block evasion as the IP was also interested in the Darwin-family alike the earlier sockmaster and sockpuppets/IPs. And indeed, an IP placed the info some two months later. This IP was quickly blocked for block-evasion. Around this time there was also a lot of Darwin-family related discussion on User talk:Nunh-huh, including IPs clearly evading a block. After several mild warnings that subsided but on 26 April 2015 FindingJohnCornford appeared. He started editing in a way that is inconsistend with new users (1st edit, 2nd edit). Due to the earlier interest by Nitramrekcap for the Darwin-family is got worried by this but could see nothing illegal, only remarkable coincidences. I originally missed his edits at Gwen Raverat née Darwin. But today he reverted an edit here, in fact restoring an edit proposed by a suspected sockpuppet and placed in the article by another sockpuppet. This is too much of a coincidence and I suspect FindingJohnCornford of being a sockpuppet of Nitramrekcap to evade an indefinite block. The Banner talk 11:03, 23 May 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 master, which is the only other named account, is stale.--Bbb23 (talk) 15:54, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
 * I moved the case to the list.  Sorry, but your evidence is very confusing. Can you try to explain all again in a simple way and using diffs that clearly illustrate related edits?  Vanjagenije   (talk)  10:00, 11 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I'm not so sure that a strong connection can be made here. The account and IP used a noticeable amount of exclamations, which is missing with FindingJohnCornford (FJC). Nitramrekcap, 2.27.131.74, and 2.30.207.146 primarily edited around the 12-20 hour timeframe, while FJC edits primarily in the 8-12 range. I must say that I'm not very convinced by the evidence provided and don't feel comfortable issuing any blocks or warnings. I'm closing this case with no action taken. Mike V • Talk 00:57, 14 June 2015 (UTC)