Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Jefferson Anderson


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Jefferson Anderson

 * Suspected sockpuppeteer


 * Suspected sockpuppets

ALR 21:32, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Report submission by:


 * Evidence

Frater Xyzzy has previously been blocked, on 19th Jan, based on RFCU evidence as a sock of Jefferson Anderson. Notwithstanding that a more recent RFCU indicated no connection at the IP level. Frater Xyzzy claims to have moved from Boulder Colorado to Seattle. I note that the RFCU statement does not indicate whether either location claim is legitimate.

Evading the block using an unrestricted IP address Frater Xyzzy recently pushed an effort to PROD an article he authored into AfD. Jefferson Anderson initially voted on that AfD before withdrawing that vote when it was noted that there was a likely sock puppet situation ongoing.

Despite no previous interest in the article Jefferson Anderson proceeded to extensively edit the article, indicating an awareness of the history and the available sources which strikes me as unusual. Edit summaries are very similar between the two users, including the use of sock puppetry accusations.

Jefferson Anderson has subsequently moved into another article, Jahbulon, which Frater Xyzzy has previously edited demonstrating an awareness of the extensive and involved history of content dispute, including indications that he is using hard copy of sources. A recent AfD for that article was heavily socked with a number of participants now permanently blocked.

I note in a review of contribution history that the two accounts do show some similar trends and demonstrate conflict with similar users. Both have been involved in an ongoing Arbitration case, Starwood, subject to considerable sockpuppetry. Arbitration discussion and evidence of sockpuppetry is available at the workshop page which suggests that meatpuppetry is a viable alternative assessment.

There is an indication of communication between them, here although I'm not sure why it is deemed necessary to telegraph this by responding to an email by leaving a message on the talk page of a banned user, unless to suggest that they are not one and the same person.


 * Another interesting bit of evidence is this bit of talk where Jefferson takes a level of offense far beyond "heading off incivility" at a comment that was made on another user's page regarding Frater Xyzzy. The subtle ad hominem attacks (of which, incidentally, I was accused of doing when I requested the RFCU that proved my suspicions) are also somewhat reminiscent of Hanuman Das, another editor of Jahbulon in the past and also banned.  I had wondered why I thought Hanuman Das originally wrote the Obligations article, and now I see why: Xyzzy, Das, and Anderson have all seemed to gravitatate towards similar articles despite claiming no relation to each other, and are similar enough in attitude, temperament, and knowledge of what they edit (despite claims to the contrary, trying to play the new user).  One of these things in common is a coincidence.  All three together is not.  Furthermore, the pattern of edits and behavior (including the many RFCs, ANIs, and the ArbCom case involving these same users) makes it very hard to claim there is no relation. MSJapan 21:06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Additional point This is discussed on AN/I which Jefferson Anderson raised in relation to WeniWidiWiki, note that one comment in that discussion has been removed by Addhoc which de-contextualises the explanation of RFCU.ALR 22:11, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Further evidence - SockPuppetry Analysis

Ok, I came across this on my occasional unblock request patrol and decided to do some in depth investigation here. Perhapses my results can be of assistance.

I took a sample of every edit each account (Frater Xyzzy & Jefferson Anderson) and found a day that both accounts had a large number of edits to check for any pattern.


 * 1) FX First: 15:56, 4 December 2006 (hist) (diff) User talk:Rockthing (→Article space categories on your user page)
 * 2) (18 intermediate edits)
 * 3) FX Last: 17:14, 4 December 2006 (hist) (diff) Homosexuality and Wicca (revert vandalism)
 * 4) JA First: 17:59, 4 December 2006 (hist) (diff) White & Nerdy (revert insertion of "hello hello hello...")
 * (47 intermediate edits)
 * 1) JA Last: 20:32, 4 December 2006 (hist) (diff) Clay S. Jenkinson (rm missing image)
 * 2) FX First: 20:38, 4 December 2006 (hist) (diff) Neopaganism (→Historical sources - rm argumentation)
 * (13 intermediate edits)
 * 1) FX Last: 20:56, 4 December 2006 (hist) (diff) Neopaganism (article is pretty clearly written mostly from experience rather than sources and reflects the editors' opinions rather than facts)
 * 2) JA First: 21:05, 4 December 2006 (hist) (diff) Benin (rv anons, not sure what changes, if any, are true)
 * (22 intermediate edits)
 * 1) JA Last: 21:55, 4 December 2006 (hist) (diff) John Wycliffe (revert anon who is removing all wikilinks and references)
 * 2) FX First: 22:03, 4 December 2006 (hist) (diff) Kemetic reconstructionism (article appears to cite no sources whatsoever)
 * (6 intermediate edits)
 * 1) FX Last: 22:11, 4 December 2006 (hist) (diff) Kemetic reconstructionism (looks like original research)
 * 2) JA First: 22:15, 4 December 2006 (hist) (diff) Sierra (revert anon vandalism)
 * (32 intermediate edits)
 * 1) JA Final edit: 23:13, 4 December 2006 (hist) (diff) Private screening (film) (huh?)
 * 2) FX First: 23:20, 4 December 2006 (hist) (diff) Altar (Wicca) (article appears to be unsourced)
 * (9 intermediate edits)
 * 1) FX Final edit: 23:31, 4 December 2006 (hist) (diff) The Invisible College (article appears to be unsourced)

This was just a look at a single day. Take it for what it's worth.

The second search I made was a "edit-overlap" search. Of all articles where both accounts made major contributions (5 edits or more) only one article came up: Celtic Reconstructionist Paganism. However, both accounts seemed to focus most of their energies on similar topics (paganism and related articles).

The last search I did was a subjective writing style analysis. I would make this as likely due to the similarity in punctuation and writing style (as perhapses illustrated by this edit and this edit among others). ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 21:13, 10 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Related evidence - An additional comparison of writing style - And possible transfer of account to other banned user

FX and JA make the same mistake here and here. Both refer to a nonexistent "Pagan Reconstructionist Paganism" (FX) or "Pagan reconstructionism" (JA) article. FX catches the mistake and changes it to "Celtic Reconstructionist Paganism (probably because it resulted in a red link), but the JA mistake stands (probably because a redirect under that name (to "Polytheistic Reconstructionism") keeps the link blue).

Additionally, the current defense is that FX is not a sockpuppet because the FX IP has changed from the one used by Anderson to a new IP in Seattle. However,, banned sockpuppet of also showed a Seattle IP. There is the possibility here of no move having been made, but merely use of a second ISP that reads Seattle. Another possibility is that the new IP is due to the FX account now being used by banned user Hanuman Das/999/Ekajati. ~ Kathryn NicDhàna ♫ ♦ ♫ 22:02, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Additional evidence from Mattisse - target of sockpuppets User:Hanuman Das, User:Ekajati, and User:999 and the similar pattern of preoccupation with me and sockpuppets on the part of User:Jefferson Anderson.

Example one This is one episode occurring October 23-24 in 2006. Ekajati and Hanuman Das had not posted on the page, John Lee Hooker, before or since.''' (I was blocked for 3RRR rule - I did not know then that edits were considered reverts.)


 * 1) 17:31, 24 October 2006 Mattisse (Talk | contribs) (you are vandalizing by moving the citations missing tag to the bottom of the page under Footnotes - I have place a tag at the top - do not remove or you will be reported for vandalizing)
 * 2) 16:40, 24 October 2006 Ekajati (Talk | contribs) (Revert to revision 83439393 dated 2006-10-24 15:36:48 by Ekajati using popups)
 * 3) 16:38, 24 October 2006 Mattisse (Talk | contribs) (you are vandalizing by moving the citations missing tag to the bottom of the page under Footnotes - I have place a tag at the top - do not remove or you will be reported for vandalizing)
 * 4) 15:36, 24 October 2006 Ekajati (Talk | contribs) m
 * 5) 15:10, 24 October 2006 Mattisse (Talk | contribs) (replacing tag removed by User:Hanuman Das,User:Anger22 & User:Ekajati with citations missing tag - removing tags without fixing problem is vandalism)
 * 6) 13:43, 24 October 2006 Hanuman Das (Talk | contribs) (wrong tag, article has a references section so is not unsourced)
 * 7) 23:06, 23 October 2006 Mattisse (Talk | contribs) (replaced unsourced tag reverted by Ekajati without explanation and removed by Anger22 previously)
 * 8) 18:52, 23 October 2006 Ekajati (Talk | contribs) (Revert to revision 83222918 dated 2006-10-23 15:45:16 by Anger22 using popups)
 * 9) 18:02, 23 October 2006 Mattisse (Talk | contribs) (article does not cite its sources for verification of material)
 * 10) 15:45, 23 October 2006 Anger22 (Talk | contribs) m (rm large gap in EL section)
 * 11) 14:30, 23 October 2006 Mattisse (Talk | contribs) (?External link - added external link Willie Dixon induction into Blues Foundation Hall of Fame 1980)
 * 12) 14:27, 23 October 2006 Mattisse (Talk | contribs) (article does not cite its sources for verification
 * Note User:Anger22 was solicited by User:Ekajati to harass me on October 19, 2006
 * Note" On the same day, October 24, several ANI complaints were filed by the above users against me and my alleged sockpuppet User:Timmy12. Diffs provided if desired. At least one as on John Lee Hooker.

Example two Just recently, in the short time Jefferson Anderson has been an active user, he has made the following edits on John Lee Hooker, not his usual area of interest.
 * 1) on Jan 2
 * 2) on Jan 3
 * 3) on Jan 12

Example three Additionally, on Jan 12 Jefferson Anderson shows up on my talk page on January 12, having had no interactions with me before and posts many times all on that day, then lists me as a rude editor on his user page along with a Mattisse sockpuppet box.


 * Sample of January 12 diffs:


 * JA (his first edit on my page about Sockpuppet Harrassment.
 * JA post #2, part of a seriies of postings listing my named sockpuppets
 * JA post #3 lets me know he made changes in the Sockpuppet policy
 * JA says he says I am wrong in my point of view regarding those named as my sockpuppets
 * JA after my apology he denies I offended him
 * I copy my replies from his page to mine
 * JA says I have offended him
 * JA denies I offended him
 * I apologise again
 * and again


 * JA expresses anger at me
 * JA accepts my apology
 * JA starts his list of rude editors (me) on his page

 and 
 * JA complains about me on his user page


 * another user advises him to remove it
 * JA puts I am not a Mattisse sockpuppet box on his user page
 * someone else, User:Salix alba removes Mattissee sockpuppet box from his page although he was requested to do so  by User:BostonMA

The last edit summary I made asking him not to post on my page again has been used repeatedly since as an example of my harrassment of him and my violation of WP:CIVIL. On January 18 he posted on my talk page again: I am suspicious of him now because he posted on my page repeatedly without knowing me, his subject was sockpuppet (known preocupation of Hanuman Das and Ekajaki), he was overly invested in me as shown by his posts, after I apologised deeply three times, he listed me as a rude editor and posted the Mattisse sockpuppet box on his user page (which User:Salix alba removed. Why would a disinterested user invest so much time in me? Sincerely, Mattisse 15:18, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Additional note, linguistic similarities The discussion referred to above on AN/I has been described as Bragging by both parties Frater Xyyzz and Jefferson Anderson in a generously reciprocal SSP draft. Odd choice of word to describe the discussion.ALR 20:02, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Duh, his talk page is on my watchlist. I read his comments this morning. No need to create a Gordian knot when a simple explanation suffices. Jefferson Anderson 20:24, 12 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Evidence against- Overlapping edit sessions with 204.122.16.13 (Frater Xyzzy's IP)


 * 204.122.16.13
 * 22:11, 1 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Obligations in Freemasonry (→Obligations in Freemasonry)
 * 21:52, 1 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (→Conflict of Interest issues on Obligations in Freemasonry and related AfD)
 * 21:38, 1 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Talk:Obligations in Freemasonry (→Conflict of interest


 * Jefferson Anderson
 * 22:14, 1 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Ripley St. Thomas C of E High School (rm template which did not add to the article and bold subject)
 * 22:06, 1 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Dudley Lynch (clean up and tag)
 * 21:52, 1 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Dom Kavash
 * 21:46, 1 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Kimball High School (rm self-link) (top)
 * 21:44, 1 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Voting bloc
 * 21:40, 1 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Rotary screw compressor
 * 21:38, 1 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Alabama State House (top)
 * 21:30, 1 February 2007 (hist) (diff) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Obligations in Freemasonry (yes, ma'am, but if you insist on leaving them here, I strike only the vote)


 * Comments

A checkuser has already been done here. This is a bald attempt to neutralize two out of three parties on the opposing side of a content dispute on. Jefferson Anderson 19:22, 5 February 2007 (UTC)


 * As ALR has noted with the AFD diffs, the situation was peculiar enough to me to warrant an RFCU. The purpose of said RFCU had absolutely nothing to do with Jefferson Anderson; it was to establish a link between the anon IP and Frater Xyzzy, which the user did himself on the RFCU page, because he thought it would get him unblocked.  Nevertheless, while the IP claimed not to be hiding, diffs show he rm'ed a prod on the article (by reversion, not removal), then claimed COI on the AfD without disclosing that he was the original "author" (rather, copy and paster) of the article.  Given the result, requesting the RFCU was prudent. MSJapan 21:06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Since you are replying to my comment, I'll respond here. There is no restriction in WP:PROD that prohibits the author of the article from removing the prod tag. It happens all the time on prods that I place. You're not supposed to put the prod back. I always either immediately AfD it or tag it in some other way to get attention. Jefferson Anderson 21:53, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

In context of the previous allegations of sockpuppetry /meatpuppetry involving the tag-team harassment of participants of the Starwood Arb, I suggest that Blnguyen and Thatcher131 be contacted for their opinions before acting, as this is hardly the first time this issue has come up. Same exact behaviour, different articles and editors.- WeniWidiWiki 22:19, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * You should note that Thatcher131 concluded that no harassment existed. That all the edits and comments were appropriate to address COI issues, "The good news is that, except for the sockpuppetry (both accounts editing several AfDs and the Celtic Paganism article), the edits were (in my unofficial opinion) more or less reasonable as to questioning the appropriateness of the CR Faq as a source", and that the issue was thus dropped from the Starwood arbitration as having nothing whatsoever to do with it. Jefferson Anderson 22:24, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

That is an improper characterization of events. You left out this part from the same comment:
 * "The bad news is that while I was analyzing the case I became convinced that Frater and Anderson are the same editor. It may not be proveable in a court, but the evidence is much stronger than is normally required on Wikipedia..." Diff

She should probably speak for herself, though. - WeniWidiWiki 22:41, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Which was disproven by checkuser, here. Your following me around with these accusations is probably harassment and I will be taking it to WP:AN/I. Stalker. Jefferson Anderson 22:44, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Groan.. This is what the second or third time you've made that allegation against other users today? My contrib history speaks for itself - we have very little overlap or even interaction. - WeniWidiWiki 22:50, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * As a matter of fact, no, I haven't. Point to these accusations if they exist. You are just trying to tar me with a broad brush for reasons of your own. Jefferson Anderson 22:57, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

How about MSJapan's userpage? Diff The talk page of Jahbulon HERE? ANI? Diff1, Diff2 Filing an AMA "complaint"? Diff - WeniWidiWiki 23:02, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Um, asking another user to be more civil is distinctly different from what you are accusing me of. As for AN/I, MSJapan provably went admin shopping to get Frater Xyzzy blocked again, and his buddy ALR is now trying to silence me in the same way. Pretty low way of trying to win a content dispute, if you ask me. Jefferson Anderson 23:10, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Frater Xyzzy has been indef blocked as a sockpuppet of User:Ekajati. --Akhilleus (talk) 02:23, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Conclusions

Jefferson Anderson has apparently left Wikipedia, and at any rate the alleged sockpuppetry is part of an ongoing arbitration (Requests for arbitration/Starwood), so I'm closing this case. --Akhilleus (talk) 05:24, 28 February 2007 (UTC)