Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Philip Cross/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Phiip Cross is topic-banned from post-1978 British politics, broadly construed. Cross has a long history of attacking peace activists, posting negative material on their articles, or removing positive material.. Similarly he promotes people such as Oliver Kamm that support military intervention, by adding favourable material to their articles, and removing unfavourable material. NomdeA has edited Oliver Kamm, from which Cross is banned, here, here and here, plus several other times. The account has edited Tim Hayward here, David Miller here, academics who have questioned the justifications for military intervention in Syria. Similarly on Piers Robinson, for the same reason. The account has been going around removing links to RT and Sputnik, sources he dislikes, just as Cross has been doing. Many others like this, mixed in with innocuous edits to actors and film articles. The pattern is almost identical to Cross. NSH001 (talk) 20:48, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Additional evidence

See User_talk:83.218.151.178. The IP user asks Cross, "Please confirm that amending Oliver Kamm's page is not in breach of your topic ban from edits relating to post-1978 British politics". Cross replies, "Oh, I am not worried IP 83.218.151.178, reverting vandalism is not covered by topic bans". But, note well, it wasn't Cross that reverted the edit (he can't, Cross is banned from that article), but NomdeA. The only explanation for that reply seems to be that it was Cross himself making the edit in the guise of NomdeA. --NSH001 (talk) 21:28, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

More evidence

In my (admittedly limited) experience of looking at SPI cases, people wrongly accused of sockpuppettry will usually respond rapidly and indignantly on the SPI page, with evidence. So far we have silence from the NomdeA account, which must be aware of the notification, as it has continued editing after being notified. --NSH001 (talk) 16:08, 30 November 2019 (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

 * On the one hand, NomdeA was created the day after the clarification request. On the other hand, the two accounts are at best, different ranges and devices with no evidence of proxies. ST47 (talk) 21:04, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Please note the additional evidence above, posted after the above (very quick) response. --NSH001 (talk) 21:33, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm going to take some notes for cuwiki, and then see where to go from there. Behavior on the IP talk page is pretty convincing. ST47 (talk) 21:40, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Upon a closer look, I noticed Philip Cross has made a few recent vandalism reverts to that article, and . Possible that's what he was referring to on the IP's talk page. More, the two users fairly consistently geolocate to locations that are far enough apart that their interleaved editing today does not seem feasible. ST47 (talk) 22:15, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Hmm, well, those reverts aren't that recent (5 days and 19 days ago). If they really are widely separated geographically (how can we know for sure?), something very odd is definitely going on here. --NSH001 (talk) 22:45, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * See "More evidence" above. I have posted a note on NomdeA's talk page, encouraging NomdeA to respond one way or the other. --NSH001 (talk) 07:35, 1 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Closing with no action. TonyBallioni (talk) 04:45, 3 December 2019 (UTC)