Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ThomasC.Wolfe/Archive

20 April 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

User:ThomasC.Wolfe has utilized a number of IP socks in the same range to edit war/evade 3RR violation in a pattern of tendentious editing across a handful of articles over the past year. User claims to "have difficulty logging in" or "too busy to use my account" as the reasons for this consistent pattern of evasion, but seems to have no trouble entering username and password after making a number of reverts with an IP sock and receiving a warning.

Example 1 (98.94.204.96): 3RR was filed against IP user by myself after this series of edits/reverts, and suddenly User:ThomasC.Wolfe appears as if by magic to file a retaliatory report against me , using 2-4 year old diffs in an attempt to make his report seem somehow credible. As if this weren't blatant enough, ThomasC.Wolfe then responds to the 3RR report against the IP user.
 * 1st diff:
 * 2nd diff:
 * 3rd diff:
 * 4th diff:

Example 2 (98.94.194.37/98.94.211.199): IP user removes a free-use image and replaces it with a non-free image in the above edit and revert, and after being notified that this is in violation of WP:NFCC#1, guess who shows up to revert the logo again, having solved his difficulty with logging in? NFCC violation is corrected, and then a little over a month later, we get this revert, by an IP user in the same range: But I suppose ThomasC.Wolfe was just having his usual trouble logging in once again, or maybe he was just too busy to bother doing so. It can be very tricky and time consuming to type words in two boxes and click a button.
 * 1st diff:
 * 2nd diff:
 * 3rd diff:
 * 4th diff:

These IPs do not appear to be connected with an organization such as a school, business, etc., and therefore it is unlikely that individuals other than User:ThomasC.Wolfe are responsible for the edits made by the IP users. Logging in/out of Wikipedia to edit war/avoid 3RR is in violation of policy and disruptive behavior of this nature is not beneficial to the project. GarnetAndBlack (talk) 04:08, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Example 3 (74.250.160.49):
 * 1st diff:

Wow...using an new IP sock to edit an open SPI report that accuses you of using IP socks. This has got to be a new low in either outright boldness or sheer stupidity. GarnetAndBlack (talk) 19:15, 21 April 2012 (UTC)

Comments by other users
"Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page": I have reached out to a couple of administrators, so I think we will come to a compromise when we have time to discuss it. I also contacted my ISP about "all" matters (harassment), and it's not uncommon for an IP to geolocate to their communication center (since 74.250.160.49 is mine; this report was WP:OUTING), or get "piggybacked" because of the location I reside. As far as the discussion over my revert on January 11, I stated the facts below concerning GarnetAndBlack's ip sock User:129.252.69.40,WP:Boomerang, I reverted, and link to the the talk where I resolved the matter. This case should have been closed already due to much larger issues. This is my main concern: I am respectfully requesting an admin familiar with WP:PRIVACY to take a look at the last 3 paragraphs of that section to be followed to the letter-- especially since possible WP:OV may be needed since personal information is still sitting here before this case is archived. If Oversight is used, I also request (possibly) that my last contribution to Magog be removed, since I have received several bizarre and anonymous harassing messages in my mail folder since (I wonder who from). If I don't respond, it is only because of my busier schedule this week. Sincerely. ThomasC.Wolfe (talk) 10:13, 25 April 2012 (UTC) 
 * The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.  No further edits should be made to this discussion.


 * Closing per that. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  01:11, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' (it's late here)This whole "exaggerated" situation (especially my demeanor) was nothing like it was described above, and only dates back to GarnetAndBlack's own editwarring in January. I had to read the section of "defending against claims" and am floored by how well this user can manipulate policy & prejudice to make it sound persuasive. Archival evidence suggests User:GarnetAndBlack has a history of filing reports against other editors "masking" the very policies he's been breaking. I actually have not made many edits of late due to my schedule / personal life, changed email account, but more directly, the last time I made an edit with my account was on Critique of Pure Reason on January 16, which was a spelling correction to my own edit, and fail to see how this account is sockpuppetry. The truth of the matter is User:GarnetAndBlack is angry with me for connecting him through research to his other accounts User:129.252.69.40, User:129.252.69.41, User:ViperNerd, User:CockNFire, and because I caught him attempting to restore inappropriate biased content on Clemson University related athletic pages, that the user had already been warned by various editors & administrators to not be editing / edit-warring on. I would like to point out more details, but for time constraints will attempt to "keep it simple." ThomasC.Wolfe (talk) 09:08, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Please note that at no point in the above "defense" does sockmaster ThomasC.Wolfe deny using three different IP socks over the course of the past year to make repetitive reverts (edit war) in more than one Wikipedia article, only to login under his username when it becomes necessary to avoid 3RR violation. GarnetAndBlack (talk) 06:38, 20 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Just realized user mistakingly documented his own "puppet" User:129.252.69.40 in 3/4 of the diffs above. I apparently mediated a revert of a revert by his own sockpuppet 129.252.69.40 editwarring back in January.  I was focusing on facts I uncovered; was struggling with templates, & time, which sockmaster seems to have plenty of; is it possible that user may be engaged in meatpuppetry rather than sockmastery?  It's also worth noting that user has continued doing random reverts on the articles in question.  ThomasC.Wolfe (talk) 10:12, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Again, no denial by User:ThomasC.Wolfe that he is using/has used multiple IP socks to edit war and skirt 3RR. Discussing the actions of others in your SPI defense pretty much says it all. GarnetAndBlack (talk) 15:06, 20 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Added a fourth IP sock to the report after sockmaster ThomasC.Wolfe used it to edit this report. I'm sure user will claim that he forgot his password again, or some such nonsense. Unbelievable. GarnetAndBlack (talk) 19:15, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Sockmaster ThomasC.Wolfe miraculously remembers how to login, and then uses his account to delete one of my comments from this report, replacing it with his own, including a personal attack for good measure . How much longer do we have to put up with this type of disruptive editor? GarnetAndBlack (talk) 21:38, 21 April 2012 (UTC)


 * I have been looking into this, and unless TCW is in the habit of reverting his own edits using an IP he is in the clear here. I am unsure why G&B thinks the IP is TCW who has but one edit to he article in question, which was a revert that actually favored G&B. Darkness Shines (talk) 21:16, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
 * WP:PP Violation- User:GarnetAndBlack who acts as WP:HOUND (misusing watch tool/disrupt), deleted a warning / request concerning personal information revealed because my cache cleared out on a revert on my own edit accidentally in this defense section, and GarnetAndBlack / ViperNerd has published it here out of spite, which is in violation of privacy laws, and attempted WP:OUTING, WP:PP. ThomasC.Wolfe (talk) 02:16, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * All I see is another excuse by an dedicated sockmaster. If we were talking about one single edit, it might be believable, but it was five edits over the course of an hour, some of which were reverts even after being asked by User:Darkness Shines to either login or cease editing. Stubborness or incompetence? GarnetAndBlack (talk) 02:26, 22 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment- "I" have a problem [to Magog] with checkuser being "used and shared" (here) and certainly not because of some silly report filed on some website by an unstable web-user. I took the publishing of personal information WP:HA, WP:OUTING. WP:PP pretty seriously when I first noticed it.  I normally don't mind people knowing the region I am from (but perhaps not in such an irresponsible way).  It's not a "sock" if my personal computer rebooted because of an automatic virus scan, and cleared my cache out accidentally, and I certainly wasn't using my IP (74.250) erroneously to "puppeteer" anything (like an article).  In fact, I fail to see the puppeteering in this case, which seems pretty frivolous in hindsight.  I shouldn't have to explain the obvious here, to editors who should know better.  WNC also has ECU, UNC-Charlotte, UNCA, APP State, Chapel Hill, Duke alums, all residing in this portion of the state (one of which was mine); I am sure there are some Usc and University of Clemson alumni here too, which is beside the point.
 * Note--geolocate is incorrect. Hendersonville (over an hour and a half away from here), thankfully, is not where I live (apparently it is a major location of an ISP for this region), which is odd because I live closer to Charlotte.  The other 2 (according to the map) are outside of another major city which is 2 hours away in another direction.  This goes beyond more ceaseless "warring", & on my minor defense section (more exposition of character).  I think that this Garnet idiot took things a bit far this time. ThomasC.Wolfe (talk) 11:37, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I fail to see how any of this rambling nonsense has bearing on the only issue at play here, which is the repeated use of IP socks by User:ThomasC.Wolfe to disrupt Wikipedia as demonstrated by the evidence above. This sockmaster admits that the 74.250.160.49 IP (geolocated to Hendersonville, NC) is his own, but wants people to believe that the other three are merely coincidental? These IPs just happen to make their disruptive edits at dates and times (and in a handful of articles) that mirror ThomasC.Wolfe's activity (which isn't exactly regular), and they geolocate to Hendersonville, NC (98.94.211.199), Candler, NC, (98.94.194.37) and Fletcher, NC (98.94.204.96). None of these are exactly bustling cities, Clemson University isn't located in any of them, and one can pull up Google Maps to see where these towns are in relation to one another. But I'm sure there will be another excuse coming shortly to explain all this. GarnetAndBlack (talk) 08:00, 23 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Note-- In addition to attempting to remove citations off of this report section, GarnetAndBlack is currently trying to dismiss the "range" argument (even though there isn't a 2 hour difference for him) on yet another sockpuppetry incident filed against him.

Enough - please do not post any more comments unless they are directly related to whether or not ThomasC.Wolfe and the IPs (or any other users) are the same person. The ad hominems are not helping your cause. Magog the Ogre (talk) 10:39, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


 * The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Comment - First off, I'm not going to comment on the alleged socking by GarnetAndBlack; that can go on the other report. Secondly, it is fairly obvious to me that this is the same user, but there's not much I'm sure there is to be done about it other than revert, block, ignore. Blocking the sockmaster account won't be particularly effective. In any case, would a checkuser feel comfortable commenting on the user agents and what's shared among whom? And how about the 98.94 range; is that range dynamic or static (i.e., using different computers on the network or just resetting the router?) - I'm just not familiar enough to figure that out on my own. Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:23, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I would not comment on the relationship between the IP addresses and TC Wolfe unless it is unavoidable, but I am perfectly able to advise you that those IP addresses are probably not dynamic. The addresses are probably the result of, as you say, a router reboot. Does this give you enough to make a more confident evaluation of the behavioural evidence? AGK  [•] 23:50, 24 April 2012 (UTC)


 * This IP stuff is right up my alley. I can say that these IPs from my expirience are pretty static, and i'm not even sure a router reboot would flush them. I do note that this says special configurations on this ISP can look like a dynamic ISP. But again fairly certain this is a static ISP. They do all geolocate to the same area, and 3 are on the same range. All are registered to the same company. Feel free to poke my talkpage if you have questions. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  04:55, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
 * We are not going to get a yes or no on if it is the same user because checkusers won't do IPs. Nevertheless, I find that ThomasC.Wolfe is likely the same user as the IPs. However, I do not think that blocking the user would do much other than simply drive him to edit more as IPs so that we just would play whack-a-mole. Therefore, anyone should feel free to revert the IPs (not the user himself, as we are encouraging him to edit with his main account) on sight per WP:RBI and ask for page protection if it becomes unbearable. If you get warned or blocked for edit warring, feel free to mention this sock report and state that I explicitly advised you in my close to ignore all rules. Magog the Ogre (talk) 22:15, 6 May 2012 (UTC)