Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Sheodred/Archive

14 December 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Suspicious behaviour including removal of IPSock templates.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF] 17:02, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

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


 * I was not even notified by the editor who has this personal issue with me and is giving me grief. I have not abused multiple accounts or IPs and have not breached the policy on meat-puppetry. There is no good reason for the evidence provided. Sockpuppet inquiry pages are only about account and IP misuse, nothing else. If the evidence is not there, then this case should be closed.


 * This accusation and report made by this editor on this page is in bad faith, observers will see that if they look at User: MarcusBritish's interactions and contributions


 * One of the edit summaries I was falsely accused in engaging in negative sockpuppetry and using one of the IPs as vandalism: (IP ID & sockpuppet tag - vandalism only account). Where did I engage in vandalism, I have never ever vandalised an article, the worst thing I have ever done is get involved in an edit-war.


 * I forgot to log on with my username with one of the IPs, I corrected my mistake when addressing Marcus, I honestly don't see what the problem is because I quickly signed in after noticing my error. Also, the term dick in the context I used in the post I made utilising the IP refers to, if the MarcusBritish had bothered to do their homework they would have known that, one could label it as a personal attack (but the term is referring to their behaviour not the person) but personal attacks are not vandalism. Sheodred (talk) 17:37, 14 December 2011 (UTC)


 * MarcusBritish on the comments below will mention, the problems he has with my edits because he is desperate to have me blocked...edits made on my own account (Sheodred)...and (lol) which as we all know is not sockpuppetry, because as I reiterated, I have not abused any accounts. Sheodred (talk) 18:01, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Not seeing any case here. MarcusBritish has been in disputes with Sheodred elsewhere, for instance at WP:ECCN and WT:IMOS. The logic of this report escapes me. MarcusBritish's latest remarks at WT:IMOS will not win any awards for maturity. EdJohnston (talk) 17:18, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * 93.107.193.247 was very obviously Sheodred logged out - seeing as he signed in and signed the message moments later. Just as a reminder to Marcus; you don't go and tag such IP's as sockpuppets unless there is long term reason to. It's very definitely a shared IP. The others... I see nothing to indicate the October one being linked to this used (evidence please?) and I'd have a hard time seeing the IP editing ECCN as Sheodred given the content... --Errant (chat!) 17:21, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * EdJ. you seem to be going out your way to attack me over Sheodred in several instances, today. If you have tools, why don't you use them and apply some of that wholesome AGF before introducing a COI just because he begs for help on your talk page. Errant, RE: the IP change on WP:ECCN. Normally, one clicks "Undo" to remove an IP edit that edits your text, and we know Sheodred knows how to do that.. instead he retyped a completely different message, affecting the context of the following comment. For all we know this "attack" was manufactured. WP:ECCN has had little attention, unlike AN/I gets, strange that an anon IP matching the same geolocation/ISP used by Sheodred before should wander along and edit his text via an SPA, of all the pages and discussions on Wiki, isn't it? Just happened to pick him.. Smells WP:FISHY exist?  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF] 17:41, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Normally, one clicks "Undo" to remove an IP edit that edits your text, and we know Sheodred knows how to do that..; really? That's something of a leap (I often click undo... then delete the summary and write my own more informative message...) For all we know this "attack" was manufactured.; that's called assuming bad faith, come one! It's less than circumstantial; and if it was manufactured you've simply risen to it... --Errant (chat!) 17:47, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Give the 43 line long list of questionable contribs atop that page, the removal of copyvio and SPI tags, canvassing, war-editing, PA's against numerous editors, and 3x AN/I against 3 editors opposing his behaviour.. I can't even spell AGF where he exists. There is a lot of bad faith going on with this user. SPI can confirm if there is suspicious behaviour. You can't by refuting it on "AGF" alone. A smoking gun but no one is willing to check the prints.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF] 17:55, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * SPI can confirm if there is suspicious behaviour.; Check Users will not connect IP's to accounts. IP SPI's are done on behavioural evidence - but there isn't very much to go on here, not to the extent we could actually action anything. --Errant (chat!) 18:10, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * This is a waste time, can an admin please close this. Sheodred (talk) 19:29, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * If anyone read User:MarcusBritish's latest contributions, he is now tagging me as a sockmaster on other IPs,despite being told the details on the SPI (which is still open?), it is becoming obvious this is being done in bad faith yet nothing is being done about it.

Here are the three more IPs he has tagged, none which he has added here to be subject to SPI.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:143.239.102.198 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:93.107.209.165 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:93.107.194.109

Sheodred (talk) 00:20, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Closing this. MarcusBritish has provided nothing firm to suggest that the October editor was Sheodred. One of the recent IP's was clearly and admittedly him editing whilst logged out (AGF by accident, and corrected later) so that is fine. The other IP nothing either way. No idea on those three new IP's but they seem unrelated. --Errant (chat!) 00:36, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

17 December 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

I find it highly suspicious that this has turned up amid s 1-week block. Not only that he hails from Ireland, and Cork (same as Sheodred), per his userboxes, but also the pattern in text:


 * Sheodred: "Response to MarcusBritish.....here we go again......" — Note excessive use if periods, no space between last period and word. (from AN/I)
 * TheOneWhoWalks: "Nasty IP insulted you......badly." — Also excessive periods and no space.


 * TheOneWhoWalks: "Nasty IP insulted you......badly." – Note full stop at end of a heading.
 * Sheodred: "Your deliberate false accusations of sock puppetry." – Also uses a full stop in headings. From Richard Harvey's talk page.

Also highly suspicious is that the user has only been registered a month, yet pays a great great of attention to my talk page. Funny how he runs to AN/I also, with his trivial complaints. And that he posts duplicate details on admins pages. See s talk page.

If this isn't enough to prove socking, agenda pushing, attempts to influence admins, and disruptive behaviour, then I don't know what is. Typing patterns are not that coincidental.

Request CU.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;Chat &bull; RFF] 23:16, 17 December 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
✅. TheOneWhoWalks is now blocked, and Sheodred's block has now been extended to 2 weeks. –MuZemike 23:24, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

13 January 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

This one doesn't jump out as an obvious WP:DUCK, but there are several behaviour concerns to consider.


 * Note CamelCase username, like previous known sock User:TheOneWhoWalks.
 * First contrib line when Registered of each:
 * 14:08, 16 November 2011 User:TheOneWhoWalks (New user page through Outreach:ACIP)
 * 18:14, 18 December 2011 User:AndThenTheWindsOfWinterShallHowl (New user page through Outreach:ACIP)
 * Note: my bold.
 * AndThenTheWindsOfWinterShallHowl registered the day after:
 * 23:21, 17 December 2011 changed block settings for  with an expiry time of 2 weeks (account creation disabled) ‎ (Block evasion)
 * First contrib of User:AndThenTheWindsOfWinterShallHowl
 * 
 * Note: notable, as identified as studying in Cofk Uni, but not incriminating per se.
 * New user suddenly interested in the infamous "Anglo-Irish" debate to the point of creating discussions?
 * 
 * In both these cases, he changed "Irish-born American officer in the U.S. Army" to "Irish officer in the U.S. Army", or similar, without consensus or references.
 * 
 * 
 * Other little things. Editor already seems to be aware of who the more pro-active (i.e. vocal) members of WP:Ireland are and is using their usertalk pages with some familiarity.
 * Is questioning trivial edits, such as category swaps, with a defensive attitude towards removal (albeit mistaken) of "Irish" links.
 * 
 * AGF seems to be assumed by other responding editors, but these initial talkpage comments were strongly worded, with overt familiarity.
 * Evidence as is, requesting CheckUser.
 * Cheers,  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh &#91;chat] 22:21, 13 January 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
Marcus asked me (I guess as a previous critic of his SPI's :)) to look into this before he posted and I advised him to post it for a CU. The timing is interesting - this may well be a coincidence but the editor feels like a returning user. If that is the case I wouldn't worry about it (and sorry to the user) but if it is Sheodred he has returned to areas he was blocked for and so needs to be blocked again. Behaviourally this is a "swings both ways" so a CU to clear it up would be handy. --Errant (chat!) 22:24, 13 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I agree that the evidence is more subtle. I did my own homework too, and on that basis, took a look. It's a ✅ match. Blocked and tagged. WilliamH (talk) 23:44, 13 January 2012 (UTC)

16 January 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

This IP editor came to my attention because he filed a complaint at the 3RR noticeboard against Seanwal111111: Seanwal has been engaged in undoing some controversial changes of nationality on biographies of people born in Northern Ireland. In the cases I checked, these are all articles where User:Sheodred had previously changed the person's nationality from 'British' to 'Irish'.
 * Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring.

We know that Sheodred has previously used an IP in the 93.107.* range because it is listed higher up in this SPI report. In my opinion, a block of this IP on behavior would be justified, but I'm requesting another admin to review this because I issued the current indef block of User:Sheodred. Explanation of that block is provided at User talk:Sheodred. The block was reviewed at Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive735.

Per WP:SOCK, socks should not edit Wikipedia space, so if this IP is Sheodred (a) he should not be evading his block, (b) he should not be filing at WP:AN3, which is in Wikipedia space. EdJohnston (talk) 16:20, 16 January 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

 * Blocked. T. Canens (talk) 17:22, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

29 May 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

On 1 Dec 2011 administrator EdJohnston topic-banned the editor Sheodred from edits relating to Irish nationality (details at User_talk:Sheodred). On 4 Jan 2012 Sheodred was indefinitely blocked from all editing due to rules violations on Irish nationality issues. On 3 Feb 2012 Sheodred requested to be unblocked and the request was denied by administrator Tnxman307 on grounds of (among other things) block evasion by several sockpuppets; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Sheodred

On 16 Mar 2012 a new editing account was created under name Killmallock1. It has had just six edits since March. I feel it is likely to be another sockpuppet of this banned editor on the basis of the following two edits to the article John Tyndall on 27 and 28 May:
 * 27 May 2012: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Tyndall&diff=prev&oldid=494699117
 * 28 May 2012: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Tyndall&diff=prev&oldid=494920976

The edits of Killmallock1 on 27 and 28 May 2012 are identical to the edits by Sheodred on the same page on 1 Dec 2011 and 3 Jan 2012, which back then were part the reason for the blocking actions of the administrators:
 * 1 Dec 2012: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Tyndall&diff=463494833&oldid=463493308
 * 3 Jan 2012: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Tyndall&diff=469348095&oldid=468762411

I undid the the edit on 27 May and Killmallock1 undid my undo on 28 May without seeking a consensus on the Talk page although he did put a short assertive remark on the John Tyndall Talk Page on 28 May at ref. That behaviour of Killmallock1 was also the manner of behaviour of Sheodred.

Among Killmallock1's four other edits, two insert deliberate falsehoods (lies) into Wikipedia:
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kilmallock&diff=482270848&oldid=479285633
 * http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Coimbra_Group&diff=483610836&oldid=467984094

Inserting deliberate falsehoods or nonsense -- if done by Sheodred -- would be consistent with the bitter attitude that Sheodred developed about Wikipedia and it would be consistent with the following nonsense edit on 1 Feb 2012 by Special:Contributions/Hasta_Illustrata who's already designated as a sockpuppet of Sheodred: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rooster&diff=prev&oldid=474451666.

The second of the two deliberate falsehoods inserted by Killmallock1 was undone by an editor under raw IP address Special:Contributions/109.77.204.226. It's possible that that undo too might be another action by Sheodred because the IP server is Vodafone Ireland and Sheodred had edited through a Vodafone Ireland IP server, in addition to other IP server companies. User:93.107.94.93 is a Vodafone Ireland address which is another already designated sockpuppet of Sheodred. Seanwal111111 (talk) 18:50, 29 May 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
Unfortunately, all of the accounts in the archive are. Any action taken will need to be based on behavior. TN X Man 20:17, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Closing case as insufficient evidence. Feel free to refile if there is new evidence. ⋙–Berean–Hunter—►  16:18, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

31 August 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Since registering as a Wiki editor, there has only ever been one Irish editor, using Vodaphone IPs, to make personal attacks such as this, and that was Shedored, whom I have not had contact with for months, literally. Today's unwarranted string of reverts and the personal attack comment, for whatever reason, can only come from someone with a long-running personal grudge. How else were they to know my interest in Napoleonic history editing? Very suspect behaviour, hardly a "random" Irishman would choose to act like this, without cause.. in short, a WP:DUCK.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh {chat} 01:41, 31 August 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

 * I have indefinitely blocked . Administrators: Do not unblock without emailing me directly or without the direction of ArbCom or BASC. Thanks, Tiptoety  talk 23:11, 31 August 2012 (UTC)

28 September 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets






 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Please note SPA comment. A loud WP:DUCK – this persistent Irish boy is the only person pathetic enough to claim to be an anon-IP-editor who searches 10,000+ contribs and only mentions interaction relating to Sheodred from a year ago (so very unlikely), and then to register an account purely aimed at me.. because IP would be geolocatable to Cork, probably Vodaphone Ireland. Request CU and block of my #1 WP:Stalker as account is circumventing indef. block for disruptive/non-constructive intents only.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh {chat} 11:35, 28 September 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

 * MarcusBritish, no matter how annoyed you may be, do please remain civil. It's, quite simply, not helpful, and may make Sheodred only more determined if he thinks he's getting to you. WP:INSULT applies. That said, based purely on technical evidence, it's very very possible that Exquisiterottingcorpse is Sheodred -- almost likely. Amalthea  13:38, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I'm not angry.. given a month of Sundays, I wouldn't get angry. I simply refuse however, to be civil with regards to a stalker, and until WP:INSULT becomes policy and not an advice essay I have nothing good or polite to say about anyone with motives that leans towards harassment or prejudice. IMHO, Wiki should be working with law-enforcement authorities on behalf of the safety of editors in the most severe of cases, not imposing it's own blind-to-reality WP:NLT conditions.. blocks don't stop most stalkers, they encourage them further. And then people do get angry, and even the best editors/admins have been known to break as a result. And editor retention fails, because no editor who feels harassed should be expected to work under such-conditions.. it doesn't happen in the real world, only Wiki's pseudo-law prevents stalkers being punished properly, in a Court of Law. Rant aside, the only reason I don't need to get angry at blockee Sheodred however, is because I'm better than him: his own inferiority-complex behaviour proves that to me.. I benefit more from his twisted neurotic remarks, than he does.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh {chat} 15:26, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

— Berean Hunter   (talk)  23:17, 3 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Additional IP to CU
 * Please see Special:Contributions/109.78.112.208.
 * Indeffing and tagging sock and closing.

9 September 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets



Shoedred has been permanently banned for -- among other things -- repeatedly and warringly changing the nationality label of biographical persons to "Irish" when the person had any connection with Ireland, and for using sockpuppet accounts to do so. It is well established since last December and January that Shoedred has internet connections from both (a) Vodafone Ireland and (b) University College Cork campus. The first of the above two IP addresses is from Vodafone Ireland and it changed the nationality label of Thomas Andrews (scientist) to "Irish" on 17 Jul 2012. When I undid that edit earlier today 9 Sep 2012, my undo was soon after undone by the second IP address above, which is from University College Cork Campus. Shoedred under the name Shoedred made the same change to this particular article on 29 Nov 2011 and 3 Jan 2012. Seanwal111111 (talk) 14:26, 9 October 2012 (UTC)


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

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

What a load of nonsense, do you realise there are thousands of students who attend this university not including postgraduates and doctoral students? Honestly? Vodafone is also the largest ISP in Ireland, over 2 million people use it if not more so are they all this one person too? You are the one with the problem here, you continue to ignore the points I have and all the academic sources I have given you about two notable Irish scientists whose work composes a critical element in my course. I have no idea who this Shoedred person is, and just because he/she attend/attended by coincidence the same third level institution I am in does not mean I am a "sock", you ignoramus. I have informed you that you are wrong, given you academic sources to corroberate what I have said and you try this. Nazi Germany would have suited you down to the ground. Seriously get a grip. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.239.7.5 (talk) 14:36, 9 October 2012 (UTC)


 * Correction: Eircom is Ireland's largest ISP (source). I see Cork Uni. also teaches Godwin's law; hardly "academic" behaviour. —  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh {chat} 05:34, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
— Berean Hunter   (talk)  15:55, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Blocking IP 1 month and closing.

18 October 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Self-confessed – see contribs.  Ma &reg;&copy; usBr iti sh {chat} 11:14, 18 October 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
No need for checkuser, blocked on self-admission. --Errant (chat!) 12:15, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

20 July 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Same pattern of harassment as previous accounts Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:27, 20 July 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

 * Revert and ignore for now, not enough activity on the range to block, and they will already have a new IP. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  22:25, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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


 * per below.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 18:28, 5 March 2018 (UTC) Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 18:28, 5 March 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

 * Sheodred requested an unblock via . Checkuser found that they were ✅ from, an account that has been used intermittently to edit the same topics as Shedred and their socks, with the same vitriol. As Tyrsóg was previously editing under the account , I have blocked that account as well. It should be noted that, although the IP that Sheodred used to make their unblock appeal is a shared IP, it is not located within the same country as the IPs listed in this SPI archive, which makes the behavioural overlap between the accounts exponentially more suspicious.-- Jezebel's Ponyo bons mots 18:28, 5 March 2018 (UTC)