Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Vigilant~enwiki/Archive

29 April 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Hweinblatt/Herb516,NaymanNoland/Once more into the breach and  Nick (talk) 22:25, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Vigilant took ownership of "Once more into the breach" and the one that commented on Qworty's page, but is saying Nayman is not him. Given what Salvio has said it seems you can add some new gods to the pantheon.-- The Devil's Advocate tlk.  cntrb. 22:50, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
I have currently blocked NaymanNoland for 48 hours for abuse of multiple accounts, and Once more into the breach indefinitely, but would appreciate a more thorough investigation into this and any other socks that might be floating around, I'm struggling to tell if Hweinblatt is trolling, telling us he has another sock or what, the contributions of Hweinblatt only started editing again today after four months which I find odd, these accounts are mentioned as they started editing around the same topic area today, and after NaymanNoland and Once more into the breach were both blocked. Nick (talk) 22:25, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * has now appeared and is interacting unfavourably with existing user Qworty (assuming username is a deliberate act to cause friction). Nick (talk) 22:36, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * and are ✅.  and  are ✅.  is technically ❌.  Salvio  Let's talk about it! 22:45, 29 April 2013 (UTC)


 * All socks blocked. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 21:42, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
 * I've moved the case here from Sockpuppet investigations/NaymanNorland, who is unrelated. Reaper Eternal (talk) 03:14, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

14 June 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Vigilant is in the San Fran area and use Comcast. They also admit that they are socking on "that" website. Russavia (talk) 05:38, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

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

14 June 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Admits on-wiki in postings (and username) and off-wiki (on wikipediocracy). Mindless edit warring, targeting of Prioryman and Russavia. Mindless conspiracy theories that I use IRC. Disruptive trolling and edit warring on Jimbo's talk page. The user contributions are self-explanatory, so I won't reproduce the diffs from the small number of edits so far. Postings are similar in style to those on wikipediocracy. Mathsci (talk) 06:59, 14 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Account indefinitely blocked by FPaS. Anonymous IP in previous report, unrelated to Vigilant, also blocked by FPaS. Mathsci (talk) 20:38, 14 June 2013 (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 don't think the IP is Vigilant. The account has already been blocked. Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:28, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

06 July 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Evident from the username (WO=wikipediocracy and Vigilant). If Vigilant wants to send a personal message to KillerChihuahua about her operation, he can do so through the private message system on wikipedia (Vigilant's email access appears not to have been disabled in 2006) or on wikipediocracy where KC also has an account. (Disclosure: KC is a wikifriend of mine; she told me in private what her operation would involve.) Mathsci (talk) 07:14, 6 July 2013 (UTC) Mathsci (talk) 07:14, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' For the record, I wish KillerChihuahua nothing but the best with her surgery, treatment and recovery. Nothing about our tiff on WO would ever trump human decency about someone's fight with cancer.

My remark on her talkpage was genuine and kindly meant.

Fuck cancer. WOVigilant (talk) 17:25, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Did you receive the WP email message containing more details as explained on my talk page? Mathsci (talk) 17:35, 6 July 2013 (UTC)


 * The report was made here as a matter of record. KC has been updating wikipedians on her serious health problems since the beginning of the year. In late May, just before the final diagnosis, there was a problematic thread on WO involving KC and Vigilant, which must have been stressful. (I myself was back in intensive care at that time.) Vigilant's post-operation postings here were obviously well meaning. Nobody, including me, has suggested removing them, Reaper Eternal. Before posting on this page, amongst other information Vigilant had been sent KC's email contact address, which is also linked to her account on WO. That's how I send messages to KC. Mathsci (talk) 04:41, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * No action needed. Under all the circumstances no useful purpose is served by this request. Newyorkbrad (talk) 14:45, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Closed. I'm not going to block the sockpuppet account since it seems to have been created solely to wish another editor well. I'd feel like a colossal dick if I did that. @Mathsci, if KillerChihuahua doesn't want his well-wishes, she can remove the notes and/or block his account herself. Regards. Reaper Eternal (talk) 02:39, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

19 July 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

This request is for the record, since there has recently been increased sockpuppet disruption/harassment that can be traced to wikipediocracy and in particular Vigilant. The last disruptive sockpuppet of Vigilant was the self-admitted sock. These accounts correlate with Vigilant's postings on wikipediocracy using the same language. There Vigilant wrote, "bunch of whiny bitches." The accounts are being used to participate in a campaign of harassment of Andy Dingley and others originating at wikipediocracy. The perjorative term in the second and third account names was used there by Vigilant. (I have recently discussed the first account in private with a checkuser.) Mathsci (talk) 04:33, 19 July 2013 (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

 * - These accounts have already been reviewed by a checkuser, and no sleeper socks were found. They're also already all blocked, and the latter two are globally suppressed. Closed. Reaper Eternal (talk) 10:24, 19 July 2013 (UTC)

22 January 2015

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Identified in the edit on User talk:Kevin Gorman Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 00:04, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Quacking on the same user talk page. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 02:08, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

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

A person discovers that someone has been seriously ill and posts best wishes in a place where they are likely to be seen. Then some jobsworth comes along and removes the good wishes and starts an SPI. What possible use does this serve?

This isn't the first time that this has happened when Vigilant has shown his human side. I can't remember who the idiot was back then but the SPI clerks should do IAR closes whenever something like this happens. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.238.57.40 (talk) 00:57, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

There's no evidence that the IP is Vigilant.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * No need for CU, this is self-admitted. I take no pleasure in this however; everybody knows socking has to be blocked and I'm sure Vigilant knows better than most, but I understand why it was done and the intentions seem excusable. His talk page message should be allowed to stay. Account blocked without tags, IP blocked for a week. ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  02:17, 22 January 2015 (UTC)