Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ProfessorJane/Archive

03 August 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

All three IPs have been the vandalizing the same article, Special Forces. It's worth noting on their talk page is that 208.168.230.176 inserted a link that contained an unreliable source on to 208.168.230.177 talk page and 208.168.230.177 inserted the same link onto 208.157.149.67 talk page. Clearly evidence of IP hopping.Talk pages: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:208.157.149.67#Special_Forces

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:208.168.230.177#Special_Forces

Special Forces history page: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special_forces&action=history

Also see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#User:208.168.23.177 KeeperOfTheInformation (talk) 19:41, 3 August 2011 (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

 * First, I've moved this case to show as the master. The first IP listed (208.157.149.67) was previously blocked as a sock of that account. All of these IPs come from a very specific region, so they're almost certainly the same. I've blocked all three for a week. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 23:47, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

12 March 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

IPs editing/editwarring against consensus and without reliable sources at Special Forces and SWAT - both targets of ProfessorJane and his previous socks - as well as edits at Republic of China (another previous target) and edits at Homo erectus pekinensis with  strong leanings towards Chinese nationalism and racialism. Tells include: All diffs labeled as "confirmed" above are taken from the IPs listed in the previous SPI about this editor. In addition, the edits at Homo erectus pekinensis - clear misrepresentation of academic sources to support a racialist agenda - are effectively identical to earlier edits at that article and at Human evolution by User:71.68.251.209 and User:68.222.236.154, who are themselves almost certainly IP accounts of ProfessorJane: same distinctive style of edit summary, repeated use of "Undeniable!/Indisputable!", similar edits at ninja, Special forces, and SWAT, etc. Ergative rlt (talk) 13:53, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * identical material added to Special Forces: previous sock (one example of many of this particular edit), suspected socks , ,
 * Frequent use of "indisputable!" and "undeniable!" as explanation for edits: previously confirmed socks, , currently suspected , ,
 * Same dubious source presented as evidence (but never actually cited in edits): confirmed, , suspected
 * Statement directed at 114.229.255.127 answered as 222.186.101.77  (evidence of IP-hopping despite denials; IP also claims to have not been blocked, when in fact they just came off one).

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

The above user Ergative seems to enjoy slandering people when their edits differ from his own opinions. First of all you can just see that the ip addresses of the so-called "sockpuppets" of whoever this Professor Jane is and realize that we are not even from the same location, as a matter of fact, NOT even from the same country, who's he trying to kid? And just because I occasionally use the same words as other editors does not mean anything except for the fact that I've either learned from other editor's or even took the privilege of copying some aspects of their style in much the same way a person would copy someone whom they agreed with. For example, a little kid who agrees with Justin Bieber would try emulating him by dancing around in the same manner as Justin Bieber or equally so.. Michael Jackson perhaps? And, I'm reverting the edits to previous versions by the other editor you mentioned as it was more accurate, unbiased and with a neutral point of view as opposed to Mr. Ergative's heavily biased non-neutral pov pushing. Mr. Ergative is also using wording which at some point in time is similar to someone elses edits that he may have read or studied, so a word to Mr. Ergative, please don't judge other people! Judge Not lest ye be judged! Go read the Bible my friend! :) And as for the edits to Homo Erectus Pekinensis, I simply support the previous editors position because it is indeed supported by the published scientific papers that specifically show that modern Chinese are either a hybrid of Homo Sapiens and Homo Pekinensis or a direct descendant of Homo Pekinensis. And this is supported by the scientific papers which are list there, if only he would read it instead of attacking it simply because it goes against his personal beliefs that all humans are "supposed" to be descended from the "same" ancestor when even Europeans and Middle Easterners are NOT even full blooded Homo Sapiens, due to their 1% -4 % genetic admixture of genes inherited from their Neanderthal ancestor. This also is confirmed and supported by the scientific evidence.

Mr. Ergative is the one who is deleting and misrepresenting the sources and pushing his non-neutral and biased pov. All articles on Wikipedia should be non-biased and give a neutral presentation, it's Wikipedia's policy. Thank You! 114.229.255.146 (talk) 15:44, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Here is an interesting article from CNN talking about a different species of human found in China, please read here:

http://lightyears.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/15/red-deer-cave-people-possibly-a-new-human-species/?hpt=hp_c2

114.229.249.30 (talk) 23:37, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Obvious ducks, but they are already checkuserblocked which is interesting with no other accounts listed. Is there another master behind this? (If the privacy policy allows comment, if not, just wanted to make sure it's been looked into) -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  22:56, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure, but I think this editor may be the same person as the one behind the cluster of socks at Sockpuppet_investigations/AkramBinWallid/Archive and connected disruption at Talk:Republic of China, and the CU block may have come from that. The behavioral evidence isn't as strong, but there are some similarities: choice of page, cut and paste edit summaries with slightly off English, hopping between accounts to create an illusion of support, and even a few "undeniable/indisputable" and variants. Two of the IPs recently edited there as well. The editors involved in that dispute and blocking would likely know more. "ProfessorJane" is itself a somewhat recent identity for this editor, who has been making these sorts of edits, usually as IPs, since at least as far back as 2007 (see ninja and and Special forces  for example). There could well be other cases under different names - this is just the one I'm aware of. Ergative rlt (talk) 05:35, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Nothing more that can be done here. Much of this activity is related to, a socker who was dealt with an a very recent investigation. AGK [•] 16:25, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

17 March 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

The ip addresses were involved in voting regarding a page move on the Talk:Republic of China article.

114.229.254.215 and 114.229.158.96 both start out their editing with a support vote in favor of the move, the second showed up one day after the first. they never made any previous edits to wiki, they both have the same initial six digits, and after I traced both of their ip addresses on http://www.ip-adress.com, both of them use exactly the same isp "Chinanet Jiangsu Province Network", and both trace back to beijing. They share together five edits to this talk page, and the second ip made two minor edits to other articles right after they voted.

If I read the rules and other cases correctly, I don't think ips can be indeffed, these ips need a temporary block and a warning for socking, and since they were WP:SPA's anyway, their vote doesn't count.Bunser (talk) 01:06, 17 March 2012 (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

 * Has already been handled in context of Sockpuppet investigations/AkramBinWallid. See also Sockpuppet investigations/ProfessorJane. Only thing that may be left to do is consolidate this investigation page with the others. Amalthea  11:38, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

114.229.0.0/16 has already been blocked, so there is nothing else to do. --MuZemike 20:09, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

15 July 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets

166.248.64.77


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

IPs at ProfessorJane's/other sock accounts stomping grounds of Special forces, Gavin Menzies, SWAT, and AIDC_F-CK-1_Ching-kuo, with typical behavior of editwarring, making claims without evidence or misrepresenting sources, and otherwise behaving disruptively. Common behavior: While not as closely tied, see these edits at Dark Ages and Developed country  for more examples of asserting the inferiority of Europe, or for boosting Taiwan (in the latter case, in clear contradiction of the sources). Also, User:68.222.236.154 has a prior history of these edits, and was brought up in my 12 March investigation request. Ergative rlt (talk) 23:58, 15 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Adding dubious material about ninja to the Special forces article, complete with claims about Chinese origin, appeals to Hatsumi in the edit summary (but not in any article citation), and the distinctive formatting of the See Also link to Ninja as Ninja (Special Operations) or close equivalent: new suspected IP sock edits, , , ProfessorJane or confirmed socks , ,
 * Editing against consensus to have SWAT teams listed as special forces/special operations: suspected, confirmed ,
 * similar expansion of names of PRC and ROC at AIDC_F-CK-1_Ching-kuo and addition of flag icons: suspected, , confirmed ,
 * Similar attempts to claim support for the writings of Gavin Menzies: suspected, , previous likely socks (I don't believe they were confirmed, but the similar sets of edits arguably make this a case of WP:DUCK) , (the 1421 and 1434 articles have since been merged with Menzies, and note the Chinese nationalist/European inferiority slant of the edits and summaries)
 * Adding two more IPs: User:166.248.64.77 made the content of the reply below and admits to being the other editors, and User:166.248.81.6 has begun reverting in favor of User:68.222.236.154 (already a part of the investigation) at Developed country, a target of this editor since 2006. Ergative rlt (talk) 14:12, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

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

These are false slanderous accussations being leveled against me and the other editors for writing the truth. for example, everyone agrees that the SWAT Team is a special forces unit of the police  except the user ergative who continually pushes his pov that only that they are not special forces. stop slandering me and accussing me of being another user. everyone has a right to edit on wikipedia understand that as this is why we have a democratic society. You wanna ban people for making good faith edits then you should go live in the communist People's Republic of China or North Korea. I have done nothing wrong and yet I am having these pov editors constantly slander and blackmail me because they want to push their pov edits without reaching a consensus. And the edits by the other IP editors also appear to be in good faith as well to improve the articles. Some articles such as the Gavin Menzies page have come under extreme attack by his haters resulting in character assassination of Mr. Menzies and a very pov biased article thus violating Wikipedias policy of neutral point of view.
 * The above post was made by User:166.248.64.77 in 3 edits between 02:32 and 02:43 (and this IP has not made any other edits except to this page), and copy-edited by User:98.122.109.80 in 2 edits between 03:53 and 03:59. Dougweller (talk) 05:26, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
The IPs except for the 166 IPs have been blocked (those are Cellphone IPs and they reassign quickly). Elockid  ( Talk ) 20:04, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

18 August 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

These are all of the IP addresses used by an individual who is pushing a nationalist POV that Taiwan is not to be called Taiwan but "Republic of China (Taiwan)" and that you should not ever confuse it or its capital city with that of the PRC. I had raised this issue at WP:ANI this week and Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive850 last week. Sample edits include this by 98.122.109.101 in February of this year and this edit by 74.3.6.26 two days ago. Several other IPs all performed the same types of edits to the Taipei article as follows, , , , , , , and then moving to the Beijing article when Taipei was fully protected. He also likes to prove Godwin's law fairly quickly. I've only made this determination when I saw that an editor had tagged two separate IPs as belonging to this user,. And apparently, in past cases, Gavin Menzies and AIDC F-CK-1 Ching-kuo were favored targets of the user, as edits by recent socks seem to corroborate. Other behavior is identical. Past IPs have insisted that Taiwan be recognized as the developed country it is and it should be referred to as "Republic of China (Taiwan)" and nothing else in prose. — Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 18:47, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Also note his screed of accusing me of promoting a PRC POV simply because he thinks that referring to the nation as "Taiwan" than his preferred "Republic of China (Taiwan)" somehow indicates that I don't think Taiwan is an independent nation despite afirming every time when I attempted to talk to him that he's wrong in assuming that of me. I only requested this as a formality so any and all future IPs used by ProfessorJane in his constant insistence that Taiwan not be referred to as Taiwan when referring to the nation that governs the islands of (formerly known as) Formosa, Penghu, etc. but rather "Republic of China (Taiwan)" even when "Republic of China" is used throughout these articles on their own. These are all obviously the same person operating all of these IPs, as most of them in the past month have all been operating out of southern California while the older ones were in South Carolina, which isn't an impossible task to move across the country in four months' time.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 21:18, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

The three latest IPs (at the top of the pile) appear to be in Taipei now, but they all restored text originally written by the other IPs.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 12:26, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Is it possible we have another example of this? – See this diff from User:Stno1... --IJBall (talk) 01:27, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if it's related to this case. That template seems to have some use.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 04:44, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I think my point was that it was a first-time editor who changed the long-standing use of "Taiwan" at List of metro systems to what you were saying above – "Republic of China (Taiwan)". It just seemed very strange timing to me, after I noticed your report... --IJBall (talk) 05:18, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
 * It might be related but I'm just not sure considering it doesn't have his other hallmarks.— Ryūlóng ( 琉竜 ) 05:32, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I've blocked two IPs, apart from that not a lot we can do. Closing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:45, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

I've been fighting ProfessorJane socks for 3-4 years, but never filed an SPI report before because the sockmaster keeps using an ever-shifting number of dynamic IPs (probably a VPN service: several IP subnets used by the sock in the past have been recently blocked by as VyprVPN/Powerhouse Management, see   ). I'm filing today because had reported 69.167.22.74 to WP:AIV as a likely sock of ProfessorJane, but  suggested SPI instead.

The user can be identified by the following behaviour:
 * Assertion of racial/cultural superiority of the Han Chinese.
 * Virulently pro-ROC/Taiwan and anti-Communist, accusing people reverting them as Chicom/Communists.
 * Obsession with glorifying the surname Huang and people with the name: Lord Chunshen/Huang Xie, Huang (state) , Huang Chao  , and Huang (surname)   have all been protected multiple times because of this user.

See my conversation with regarding a previous encounter with this sock. -Zanhe (talk) 20:24, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

- Zanhe (talk) 19:30, 28 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Update: the user is now stalking my edits at Hua Mulan and Second Sino-Japanese War, causing those two pages to be protected as well. I've added the new IPs to the list. -Zanhe (talk) 17:12, 29 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Update for the sake of record keeping: the 69.167.0.0/19 IP range was blocked by on 27 December 2017. See block log. -Zanhe (talk) 22:13, 30 January 2018 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Comment. I have only one small issue to add to this comprehensive report from User:Zanhe. For years under various identities, ProfessorJane has deployed the term "Chicom," a synonym for Chinese communist. It's clearly a nasty attack and could be considered outright racist.  City O f  Silver  19:54, 28 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment I did indeed ask for this to be taken to SPI, as I could not block somebody as an obvious sock based on the say-so of one individual. However, if this is a well-known phenomenon, and if the behavioral evidence if found convincing by uninvolved admins (I don't have the time to check it at the moment, though I may come by later) it might be worth creating a long term abuse page: thus, subsequent reports can link to that page, and allow IPs to be dealt with at AIV or on sight by folks unfamiliar with the case. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 05:12, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Closing as most of these IP's are stale and semi-protection of the affected pages seems to be effective. Sro23 (talk) 04:21, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

All the accounts are obsessed with the article Honorary Aryan, repeatedly inserting racist language that declare the Japanese and Chinese are "True Aryans" or "Honorary Aryans". See S25454541: ; Ssman123 ; Isquen ; Dr.Holmes. The behavior is very similar to blocked ProfessorJane IP socks from last year, see. After I reverted some of their their edits, they started launching a racist attack against me from multiple proxy IPs (the first three), even following me to an unrelated article I recently edited, which is also signature behaviour by previous ProfessorJane socks. Zanhe (talk) 19:07, 11 October 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the CU. Please note that this user is known for using VPN services and their IPs can be from anywhere in the world. -Zanhe (talk) 23:28, 11 October 2018 (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 case is . Isquen and Dr.Holmes are ✅ to each other and blocked without tags. The other two named accounts are ❌.--Bbb23 (talk) 22:37, 11 October 2018 (UTC)
 * Nothing more to do here. Closing.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  20:28, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
Similar edit summaries and similar targets - using a whole range (2600:1011:b000::/40) to target LGBT rights in Taiwan and Religion in Taiwan Panian513 22:07, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
 * Linked the whole range.  Liliana UwU  (talk / contributions) 22:54, 21 December 2023 (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

 * - Be it for block evasion or be it for disruptive editing, I'd suggest a block on the range (there's already a p-block). MarioGom (talk) 22:54, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅, closing. Izno (talk) 23:33, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets
Manually reverting to previously blocked IP address' (the one on the 21st) edits on Religion in Taiwan. Displays characteristic POV-pushing, such as the sentence "The Taiwanese people are steadfast in protecting those ancient Chinese religious beliefs pertaining to the continued preservation of the ancient 10,000 year old Han Chinese culture and religions". Panian513 02:48, 23 December 2023 (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 blocked the IP for a week. If IP evasion continues on a particular page, consider requesting page protection. Izno (talk) 03:08, 23 December 2023 (UTC)