Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SmalforaGiant/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Account created November 23, after sock editing with 78.98.54.148 and blocked for it. The IP edits started on November 20, a week after Kaltionis was blocked as a sock of Adrian Fey (@Bbb23 blocked based on checkuser data). The two listed IPs continued abusive edits at Talk:HIV/AIDS denialism through November 22. The editor interaction utility shows more articles in common. BiologicalMe (talk) 01:14, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Adding editor interaction analysis Kaltionis and Symes2017: four common articles plus talk pages. BiologicalMe (talk) 02:30, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

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

I live in Slovakia, not Argentina, and I don't particularly remember ever having a IP address that starts with 181. I can confirm that I have never used these specific addresses, nor did I perform the vandalism (Why on earth would I insult myself like that?) on the talkpage of said article. As for the incident with the 78. IP, I have already apologized to Ivanvector and I have vowed to not repeat my prior conduct of edit warring/block evasion, for which I was later unblocked.

With that being said, I do have something to confess. Yes, I am indeed Adrian Fey, and I have been trying to start over from a clean slate by creating different accounts ever since I was indefinitely blocked on my first account, because I genuinely thought that I would never be able to edit from that account ever again, which I now realize is false, given that indefinite blocks can indeed be lifted if the threat of further disruption is resolved, as had just happened with this account a few days ago. I am sorry, I really am. My foolishness got me blocked, and instead of properly appealing the block and apologizing for my past actions, I have kept fleeing to different accounts as if I was some sort of a fugitive or a spy, and even though my edits through them were mostly constructive, that doesn't excuse my improper usage of multiple accounts.

But as I have learned just now, the past will always catch up with me, no matter what. I regret what I have done by creating all of these accounts, and I wish I could reverse this, but I fear that I may possibly get banned after all of this happened, and I don't know whether is it even possible to reverse this kind of indefinite block. Another problem is that I can't log into my first account and send an appeal from there because I have unfortunately forgotten my password and I didn't enter my email address for it, which prevents me from resetting my password properly. Regardless, I will stop creating further accounts, and this shall be my one and only account, even if I do get blocked again, and I shall not repeat my prior conduct when my username was Adrian Fey, nor will I engage in any kind of vandalism. But is a second chance still possible? Will my block be reversible once a Checkuser arrives? I hope it's not too late. Symes2017 (talk) 02:56, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Based on the confession above please indef Symes2017.
 * , your route back is via an appeal in 6 months - Standard offer. If you have used any other accounts not yet listed at Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Adrian Fey identifying them here or on your talk page would go some way to reassuring the community of your good intentions. Cabayi (talk) 08:09, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The following accounts are ✅ to each other and to :
 * (courtesy ping - FYI)
 * Thanks Anthere (talk)
 * All of these are blocked. I have not tagged because I don't believe at all that Adrian Fey is this user's first account, but I need to confer with the functionaries. Please keep this . Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:18, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks Anthere (talk)
 * All of these are blocked. I have not tagged because I don't believe at all that Adrian Fey is this user's first account, but I need to confer with the functionaries. Please keep this . Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:18, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * All of these are blocked. I have not tagged because I don't believe at all that Adrian Fey is this user's first account, but I need to confer with the functionaries. Please keep this . Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:18, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * All of these are blocked. I have not tagged because I don't believe at all that Adrian Fey is this user's first account, but I need to confer with the functionaries. Please keep this . Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 15:18, 2 December 2019 (UTC)


 * While investigating I identified these older connections:
 * Adrian Fey was created on January 6, 2019, but didn't edit for nearly two weeks. Their first autoconfirmed edit was to move Pope Francis to a vandalized POV title, although it was two months later.
 * - another editor with an SPA-like interest in LGBT issues in Slovakia and right-wing American Politics (an odd intersection) who gamed autoconfirmed by writing antisemitic nonsense in the sandbox, who happens to have been blocked on January 6 (16:15 UTC; Adrian Fey was created that day at 16:13 UTC). Their block stems from moving Template:Same-sex unions to a vandalized POV title.
 * - LGBT issues in Slovakia and right-wing American Politics SPA who gamed autoconfirmed by writing antisemitic nonsense in the sandbox. Checkuserblocked by in November 2018 with no master indicated. They were blocked after moving Antisemitic canard to a vandalized POV title.
 * SmalforaGiant is obviously someone's sock but I have not been able to find any leads suggesting who it might be. Furthermore, according to the checkuser logs SmalforaGiant, Adrian Fey, and all of the accounts marked confirmed above have all used at least three of the same IP ranges on one specific ISP, which along with the quirky behavioural overlaps makes them technically.
 * As for the IPs: based on WHOIS and geolocation it is apparent that 78.98.54.148 is not the same user as 181.21.x.x, and I do not believe either one is a proxy. Of course, no comment with respect to the listed accounts.
 * please move this case to Sockpuppet investigations/SmalforaGiant and tag the socks as proven. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:14, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * The user has also disclosed the following accounts, which are all previously ✅:
 * -- Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:21, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * -- Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:21, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * -- Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:21, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
 * -- Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 17:21, 2 December 2019 (UTC)


 * Moved, (re-)tagged, closing. Cabayi (talk) 20:07, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Usual MO of linking essays in their edit summaries and edit warring. Edits at HIV/AIDS denialism parallel those of User:Kaltionis.

No CU since they can't comment on IPs, but this is the same Slovak ISP as has been associated with this editor in the past as well. VQuakr (talk) 16:42, 12 December 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

 * IP blocked for 2 weeks. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:48, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

IP from same block expanding previous edits rejected for block evasion. old first edit from new IP compared to last from blocked IP BiologicalMe (talk) 19:06, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Yeah, I'm afraid that could be the same user. The IP literally reverted Social democracy to its favorite version (including all of Symes2017's favorite title sections, despite the fact a third opinion by PrimalBlueWolf which seemed to support my arguments and version which already included many of Symes2017 edits that I have been more than accomodating to add when they really did improve the article anyway, so it's not like I only kept mines). I have reverted that, linking to the discussion, but it's frustrating as it got reverted back again and the IP is either playing dumb or it's someone else. If it's really the same user, I even already told here not to use any IPs so it's not like it wasn't warned again this time.--Davide King (talk) 17:09, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Now the IP is again edit warring on Social democracy (which is already bad in itself, but it's made worse by the fact one IPm described as [the] same Slovak ISP as has been associated with this editor in the past as well, already got blocked on 12 December, so it shouldn't be editing until this investigation is on). Another pattern I noticed was leaving template warnings on talk pages (such as here and here or here, so it could be the same user/IP again.  Let me know what you think and if my comments were/are being helpful.--Davide King (talk) 21:07, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Reply The pattern at Social democracy including Symes, Kaltionis, and the previous IP is suspicicious, to say the least. I saw the Social democracy edits and should have included them in the initial report, so from my standpoint, it was helpful. I missed a restoration of an edit at Wingnut (politics) by the last blocked IP. BiologicalMe (talk) 21:50, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply. 195.91.48.3 seems to continue right from where it left, too. Let me know if it's still the same or at least suspicicious too.--Davide King (talk) 18:00, 19 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Now it seems to continue edit warring as 91.127.128.189. I don't know what to do anymore, it seems to be always the same user/sockpuppet; what should I do in this case?--Davide King (talk) 07:22, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Latest IP blocked and I have protected the social democracy pages. I'm likely going to protect more pages but I've run out of time. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 11:21, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets


This is my first time doing this, so please forgive me if I did something wrong.
 * Tools:

As admitted here, the user in question seems to have a Wikipedia addiction problem and I'm afraid new accounts could be created (and new IPs used). Izuru Kamukura (and perhaps other IPs) could be another one, created not much longer after that message. Symes2017 edited the Democratic socialism page and the pattern seems similar, mainly making huge rewording edits (some good, mostly worse). Removing brackets or editing spelling in quotes when they should be copied exactly as they are; change -ise to -ize even when there's the use British English template and the whole page is written in British English spelling (labour, -ise, etc.); add (pictured above) in image's caption and edit it in an unnecessary way so as to add a dot at the end, etc. I've seen and been involved in all of Symes2017 et all edits at Social democracy, so I've been accostumated to them; it strikingly seems to be the same pattern and it looks suspictious to me. Let me know if this was helpful and if it matches.

Another thing is the same mistakes. Compare an left-wing anti-Leninist and anti-Stalinist big tent (Social democracy) and a authoritarian Marxist–Leninist state (Democratic socialism); and leftwing populist (Social democracy) and Tony Benn, a prominent leftwing populist and a Labour Party politician (Democratic socialism). Also compare the same tendency [trade union]s ---> [trade unions] (Social democracy) and policy [reform]s ---> policy [reforms] (Democratic socialism). Similar edit summaries (Social democracy; Democratic socialism). Similar tendency not to like parenthesis, brackets and dashes. Both IPs at Social democracy and Zuru Kamukura at Democratic socialism restored Symes2017 edits to the lead. In general, compare all edits made at Social democracy by Kaltionis, Symes2017 and IPs with Zuru Kamukura's edits at Democratic socialism.

Not listening to my advices not to edit the page when there's a dispute (see here and here), or for why brackets are used in quotes; a tendency to edit war, even after I told the user not to edit until we reach an agreement and discuss about it; the same tendency to disregard other users edits and simply revert to the favourite version, without including copy editing like typos, etc.; knowing several important rules for being a new user like writing here that in Wikipedia s case, reliable sources trump the opinions of individual editors, as original research is not allowed here (also already knowing how to move a page); and writing because the consensus of reliable sources is that pseudoscience, by definition, is not equivalent to real science; it reminded me of the multiple edits and problems SmalforaGiant et all caused at HIV/AIDS denialism, specifically wanting to call it pseudoscientific.

All in all, considering the long history of sockpuppetry, both newly created accounts and IPs, the message I received and not much long after it appears this new user that seems to make the same edits and have smilar patterns, I hope my suspiction is at least justified for a check.--Davide King (talk) 20:22, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Although Izuru Kamukura made the first edit on 1 January 2020, the account was actually created on 26 December 2019, five days after that Symes2017 message. Likewise, Symes2017 was blocked on 2 December 2019 and ten days later it was already back editing.--Davide King (talk) 14:38, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
 * , the user in question now just did the same argument (compare Social democracy sidebar and Democratic socialism). Both users seems to have pretty much the same vision of social democracy. I'm still waiting for, who has been involved with the user pretty much like and can tell whether the pattern is the same like it seems to be in my humble opinion.--Davide King (talk) 13:47, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

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

Comment from previous reporter: the biggest common feature I see is the insistence that instead the onus of support being upon the editor making the changes, new edits are sacrosanct unless harmful: account under discussion ("res" in edit summary was a typo for "rules") account under discussion Kaltionis, confirmed sock Kaltionis Symes2017, confirmed sock Essays are no longer being cited as policy, but otherwise, it seems to be the same argument. BiologicalMe (talk) 03:41, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * ✅, . Courtesy ping : I have reduced the protection at Democratic socialism to semi. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:51, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools:

Reporting results from a request on my talk page and updating the public logs.


 * -- Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:03, 4 July 2020 (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

 * DongxingJiang is ✅, . This user is banned from English Wikipedia.
 * HoboKenobi47 is ❌.
 * courtesy pings. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 13:03, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

The 2 anonymous IP intervene on topics related to far-right, which are favorite themes of SmalforaGiant. In addition, the IPs are located in Slovakia 1, 2. A similar IP, also located in Slovakia, tried to make this change to Svoboda a year ago, and they delete notice on their talk page like SmalforaGiant (in fact, this request that I opened last year is probably linked to SmalforaGiant, but at that time I did not know this user yet). All these IP should be blocked for block evasion and articles in question potentially semi-protected at least. --Martopa (talk) 11:37, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * This one, also located in Bratislava, Slovakia like the 2 previous ones, intervenes on the same articles. --Martopa (talk) 12:13, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: Fidesz has been indef semi-protected yesterday due to edit warring, a RfC is currently taking place. The third IP is continuing to make changes on other pages. --Vacant0 (talk) 12:48, 26 June 2021 (UTC)

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

Hi. I first ran into trouble with this user: on 15 May 2021 because of disruptive edits to the page on Efraín Ríos Montt, which eventually led to that page being semi-protected. After that, the disruption moved on to the page on David Stoll. The same user has probably been using another IP to edit the page on Rigoberta Menchú: Like all of the other IP's listed here, these are based in Bratislava, Slovakia, and there is a consistent pattern of disruptive editing focused on pages connected to far-right or anti-Communist political topics. This seems to me to be a serious problem, since this editor apparently has evaded a previous ban for using many sockpuppets, simply by sticking to IP editing. At the very least, the pages that this editor has recently been active in should be semi-protected. The one on David Stoll seems to me to be a priority, since the editor is making accusatory statements in the biography of a living person. - Eb.hoop2 (talk) 14:00, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * --Blablubbs&#124;talk 11:54, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
 * These are dynamic IP ranges, so blocking is not the best tool. I see that Efraín Ríos Montt and David Stoll have already been semi-protected.  I did the same to Rigoberta Menchú.  We'll see how that works out.  My guess is additional semi-protection is going to be the long-term answer here.  Closing. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:13, 1 July 2021 (UTC)