Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Systemizer/Archive

Evidence submitted by Christopher Thomas
Added this essay to ultimate fate of the universe (and its talk page). This is contains elements suspiciously similar to the essay that indef-blocked user kept inserting into physics articles. Common elements are comments to the effect that blue-shifting will reduce a proton's wavelength below the Planck length, causing some great change in the nature of the universe. Checkuser is the simplest, fastest way to check to see whether or not User:Weltherr is evading a block (they might just be another person quoting the same external crank theory). Christopher Thomas (talk) 20:38, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * .  E lockid  ( Talk ) 02:11, 23 August 2010 (UTC)


 * That being said. Blocked and tagged.  E lockid  ( Talk ) 02:11, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

20 January 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

They edit the same type of OR into physics articles like Negentropy,Speed of gravity and One-electron universe and also edit articles Terence McKenna and Pierre Teilhard de Chardin. 89.110.14.26 made a typical edit to Action at a distance (physics) after Antichristos was banned for 72 hours. The other ips made edits between when Systemizer was blocked and Antichristos started up. Dmcq (talk) 23:04, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

I notice also that User:Weltherr, a short-term suspected sockpuppet of Systemizer, edited Negentropy which was edited by Antichristos. The ip 89.110.4.94 only edited the two unusual articles Omega point and One-electron universe which are two shared by Antichristos and Systemizer. Dmcq (talk) 00:45, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

We now have 91.122.1.73 coming along looking like Antichristos and sticking up for Antichristos as if they were a different person at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics Dmcq (talk) 13:24, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Ugh I'm starting to think anything in the ips 89.110.*.* 91.122.*.* 92.100.*.* could possibly be them especially if they start mentioning compton wavelength. Dmcq (talk) 13:41, 21 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Well I have a little extra evidence that ip 91.122.87.244 who is currently editing Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics‎‎ is the same as Antichristos by saying he/she/it when referring to them and the ip corrected it to he. Dmcq (talk) 22:53, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

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

See also this recent revert by 91.122.93.63. I have reverted. The article Action at a distance (physics) might need semiprotection as well. DVdm (talk) 18:52, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
 * and
 * (from September) also look like the same user, they have been editing similar pages to Antichristos. 91.122.6.123 also edited Mechanical explanations of gravitation; this page was eventually reverted due to original research and undue weight to non-mainstream POV after edits from
 * and
 * --Physics is all gnomes (talk) 19:48, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
 * and
 * --Physics is all gnomes (talk) 19:48, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
 * --Physics is all gnomes (talk) 19:48, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Another revert without comment at Thesis, antithesis, synthesis and a string of 10 edits by a currently blocked person with an apparently non-blocked IP:

Perhaps the articles should indeed be semi-protected. DVdm (talk) 13:30, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Another IP has recently been active at WT:PHYS, continuing old arguments where 95.55.112.204 left off:

I've tried archiving the thread. Neither the IP editor nor the person he's arguing with appear to have noticed, and it's becoming disruptive through sheer volume on that page. --Christopher Thomas (talk) 22:01, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the semi-protection; just be aware that longer protections would have collateral damage problems, as there's at least one long-term IP editor who makes valuable contributions but for whatever reason does not wish to create an account. --Christopher Thomas (talk) 23:46, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Other similarities are the interest of Systemizer and Antichristos in "instantaneous transmission" of information, e.g. and  by Systemizer;  by Antichristos. Note that the phrase "instantaneous transmission" occurs only four times in WP article-space:. Another peculiarity of both is the use of diamonds "♦" in the references added to articles, e.g. by Systemizer and  by Antichristos. -- Crowsnest (talk) 14:11, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
I'm not sure CU would do any good here since Systemizer hasn't edited in 7 months. They certainly share a fondness for crackpot physics and edit in similar areas. I can't see an occasion where Antichristos has edited an article previously edited by Systemizer, though. HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   23:30, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note for clerks: Antichristos is currently blocked for edit warring and block evasion and all the IPs above are rangeblocked in my attempt to prevent further block evasion, so there's no need to block any of them. HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   23:30, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

I blocked 91.122.0.0/21 for the remainder of the block. The 92.100 IP hasn't edited in months so isn't worth blocking, but would seem to fit the pattern. HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   16:41, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Per the Wikistalk report offered by User:Crowsnest at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Physics, there are five articles that have been edited in common by Systemizer and Antichristos. Since some of these articles are well off the beaten track, it seems plausible that these two accounts could be the same person. Someone reading this SPI who is willing to perform a public service might look for more precise similarity. Systemizer has 1200 edits and Antichristos, more than 400. This is quite a bit of data. EdJohnston (talk) 23:50, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
 * That would suggest that the same person is behind the two accounts, but not conclusively enough for me to be comfortable blocking. Systemizer has edited 69 unique pages and Antichristos 23, so five overlaps doesn't seem an awful lot. HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   04:58, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
 * HJ, since 91.122.93.63 is outside the range you blocked, and it's continuing to edit Negentropy, I've semiprotected that article two months. EdJohnston (talk) 18:37, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The set of additional IPs from 95.* and elsewhere that were just added by User:Physics is all gnomes are not active since September, though they help to complete the picture. EdJohnston (talk) 02:18, 22 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Another range to consider for blocking for one month is, since Antichristos has resumed using those IPs. Leaving the range open should be considered, since he is now giving us clues as to which articles need semiprotection. Click this rangecontribs link to see what edits are coming from there. EdJohnston (talk) 16:04, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I've semiprotected WT:WikiProject Physics for three days. EdJohnston (talk) 23:02, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I hardblocked that range. I'd say it's fairly obvious that we the person behind Antichristos is also behind the recent IP spate of disruption to physics articles, so I've indef'd Antichristos. It looks like this has been going on for some time, though I'm still not certain enough to make the call on whether it's Systemizer. It's looking increasingly likely, though. Keep the updates coming—if the ranges are small enough, we can just implement relatively short hard blocks and hopefully avoid the need for too much semi. HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   08:17, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I guess I'll close this for now, as there's not much else to do, I think. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 13:15, 24 January 2011 (UTC)