Wikipedia talk:Long-term abuse/Best known for IP/Archive 2

July 2019

 * (identified by as a "possible sock puppet" )
 * (identified by as a "possible sock puppet" )
 * (identified by as a "possible sock puppet" )
 * (identified by as a "possible sock puppet" )
 * (identified by as a "possible sock puppet" )
 * (identified by as a "possible sock puppet" )
 * (identified by as a "possible sock puppet" )

This batch of IPs seemed to have the kind of familiarity with Wikipedia that comes with long-term editing, so I got curious. Their distaste for calling anything "unique" was the kind of rejection of anything deemed subjective that made a connection with WP:BKFIP seem at least plausible. I went to the most recent IPs listed there and skimmed the edit summaries. This from one of those resembled this from this week. This edit by a "Best Known For" IP made a very similar complaint to 125.238.207.194 at Bogdanov affair; compare No reader is so stupid that they need a hint to find the rest of the article and Exactly who is supposed to be so dumb that they need help to find the article from the lead section? . Parallel phrasing, in complaints about something I don't think I've ever seen anyone complain about before (and which the Manual of Style explicitly gives instructions on how to do!). Also, the history of Alraigo incident indicates that this is the same editor as 124.150.164.201, who shares with a BKF IP a vehement dislike of supposed non-native English speakers making edits. 80.189.156.156 on the BKFIP list had an attitude about italics and boldface also displayed by one of the IPs from Bogdanov affair. Another IP on the list has a bugbear about "non-free text" and how it degrades "the encyclopaedia", just like the IP at Bogdanov affair. (They changed one word in a sentence, turning a close paraphrase into another close paraphrase.) Here is an IP from the BKFIP list asserting as this is English wikipedia, links to German articles are not useful, just like at Vienna bread here. Who else, ever, has complained about inter-language links? Ever? I'd never seen anyone gripe about that, and I spend an unhealthy amount of time here. Likewise, here is BKFIP last September removing an image gallery for the same reason as 101.98.126.25 on the 9th.

Full disclosure: I got irritated enough in trying to deal with this that I crossed the 3RR line, which was bad, and I have been duly admonished; I'd just really like somebody to take a look at all this so I can get back to editing occasionally rather than frequently, which makes me both happier and more useful. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 16:01, 16 July 2019 (UTC)


 * That's BKFIP, without a doubt. I just blocked for a week. The obsessive edit-warring, obnoxious edit summaries and self-righteous unblock requests all fit. This person is known to travel quite a bit, and NZ appears to be where they hang out these days. Favonian (talk) 17:39, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you. You may wish to take note of the discussion they opened at Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Linking, which pretty clearly seems intended to change the documentation so they can win an argument with me. (They clearly know how to find me, but I didn't get so much as a ping about it and only noticed because I happened to skim their contributions after I saw you add to the list. That seems less than cricket.) They may come back to that page with a different IP. Since a couple other editors have made good-faith contributions to that discussion, it seems the result may actually be productive. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 17:45, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Another key sign it's them is debolding of text in the opening sentence like this. Every so often they follow me round election and referendum articles doing the same. Number   5  7  21:51, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Is bold text just not their thing? XOR&#39;easter (talk) 22:07, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

We have another candidate: Their very first edit was to remove content while asking if it's not in the article, why is it in the lead? &mdash; failing to notice that the line they cut was not in the lead. Repeated invocations of MOS:N'T. Geolocates to Tonga; maybe they've moved on from New Zealand. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 14:18, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Oh yes, that's our friend. I have a strong feeling that 103.237.136.221 is as well. NZ to Tonga via Melbourne? What's next? Favonian (talk) 15:07, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Yep. The vendetta against image galleries; the complaint "would be nice if people had a clue about how to write encyclopaedic prose in English"; the classic "npov" about which of an artist's works are the most memorable. That's him. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 15:36, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Also the repeated insistence that links are "pointless", coupled with the complaint about "jargon" (i.e., a term of maritime law in an article about a Coast Guard vessel). The link explains the meaning of the term; either it's "jargon" or the link is "pointless" &mdash; pick one! XOR&#39;easter (talk) 15:49, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * And objecting to describing the Beatles' 1964 appearance on the Ed Sullivan Show as "famous". If ever the adjective were warranted! XOR&#39;easter (talk) 16:06, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

This just in from Tonga: 202.134.31.182 picked up where the previous IP left off. I've blocked a range to give the poor guy a chance to savor the palm wine and listen to the surf. Favonian (talk) 20:31, 19 July 2019 (UTC)
 * For anyone watching, 82.132.222.58 has picked up the edit-warring. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 14:08, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
 * What must BKFIP be like in daily life? You can just tell he'd be the guy who starts setting his groceries on the conveyor belt after the cashier has put the "Closed" sign out, whereupon he insists that the lane is still open because the light is still on, while the haggard cashier tries to explain that she's an hour overdue for her break and the lanes on either side are open and empty, and he just gets louder and louder, insisting that the light being on means the lane is open and that is a matter of policy, young lady, and nobody as incompetent as she is ought to be working at a supermarket, and don't they know his time is valuable.... Years later, he keeps coming back, acting like he doesn't know why the burly guys in Loss Prevention have been shown his picture. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 01:20, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

August 2019
Oh look, 51.6.138.58 is complaining about boldface and contractions and geolocates to Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire. (CC Favonian, Number 57.) XOR&#39;easter (talk) 00:12, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Groan! Favonian (talk) 12:36, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * 51.7.17.134 was reported at User talk:Favonian; making a note here for whoever wants to deal with it first. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 18:41, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

I'm not directly familiar with the "best known for IP" but is 98.217.9.220 it, or a false alarm? It geolocates to the US, but they can geolocate anywhere. Not only are they complaining about "best known for", but they're also claiming refs are broken when they aren't. Graham 87 14:40, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Hmm, sounds a lot like BKFIP, though they do say "encyclopedic" instead of "encyclopaedic", which is how BKFIP has been spelling it lately. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 15:54, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
 * They didn't resort to calling me a wanker or anything of the sort, despite me mostly undoing some of their edits. I'll leave them be for now; their edits seem useful. I'm OK with another admin blocking if they feel it necessary. Graham 87 04:09, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

September 2019

 * Now from Spain editing the same articles. Same obnoxious edit summaries. Zoolver (talk) 05:42, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

October 2019

 * Single edit (so far) IP adding to a long string of similar and identical edits at 1977 South African Grand Prix. Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:24, 6 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Yep, looks like. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 22:41, 6 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Hutchison 3G UK mobile, netmask 188.31.0.0/16. Got personal when challenged. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  17:32, 8 October 2019 (UTC)


 * — needs evaluation. Dislike of image galleries, "unencyclopaedic text", "jargon" (even when explained), and inter-language links. Geolocates to New Southgate, England. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 20:39, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

November 2019: Suspect IP socks
Having been made aware of this case recently, I think that the behaviour of some IPs I've noticed falls in-line with the individual in question. Is anybody interested in confirming this? I can provide more detail if this is desirable


 * Both IPs are pushing the same against-consensus lead changes, identical edit descriptions, on the Birmingham Airport article currently. Kyteto (talk) 21:09, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Both IPs are pushing the same against-consensus lead changes, identical edit descriptions, on the Birmingham Airport article currently. Kyteto (talk) 21:09, 27 November 2019 (UTC)

January 2020

 * Typically snarky edit summaries; similar IP to very recent range block Bahudhara (talk)
 * Looks like it's been range-blocked now. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 15:49, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

February 2020

 * Using 3 month anon only block consistent with previous block in 2017. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  17:03, 4 February 2020 (UTC)


 * I suspect 66.130.253.101 and I submit it to the group for review. — Smuckola(talk) 13:17, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

March 2020

 * - a UK Hutchinson 3G range. On the face it, looks draconian, but arguing about whose prose is the better is futile. AFAIK this consistent with our procedure documented here over several years. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  12:43, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

April 2020

 * The usual snarky edit summaries, and an IP address similar to examples from August 2019. Bahudhara (talk) 14:19, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

June 2020
and, the latter of which has previously been blocked under this LTA case, may be the same person. See these personal attacks. CMD (talk) 17:04, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Now blocked by Favonian. CMD (talk) 17:34, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

User:Flm rvn seems a likely sock. Cheers, Bahudhara (talk) 08:36, 17 June 2020 (UTC)

July 2020
Number  5  7  11:27, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

May 2020

 * Returning to the scene to repeat the same edit he made last time. He seems to delight in targeting articles I've edited ever since a clash with him over a decade ago. WCM email 09:20, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
 * Haha, that is very amusing. This person, complaining about me below, is complaining about someone else here. I certainly had nothing to to with this situation. As below, this looks to me like deliberate disruption, trolling, vandalism, or some mixture of the three. A very unpleasant attempt to block edits he doesn't like (for whatever reason) is just about the most charitable explanation I can think of. Nodal yield (talk) 16:50, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

July 2020
Seems like he's back again with the same attitude. WCM email 06:47, 27 July 2020 (UTC)


 * This is very interesting. A wholly unexpected response to my simple fixes to obvious errors and mistakes! For what reason would this person have objected to things like making the article text consistent with the article title? Aggressively making things inconsistent is what vandals do. Nodal yield (talk) 16:46, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Blocked. Perhaps a CU may be helpful given this account has been lurking since late last year. Sro23 (talk) 17:56, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

September 2020
Special:Contributions/2605:E000:8401:8800::/64: that extremely insulting tone plus unfounded accusations plus dubious edits makes this a strong suspect. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 11:24, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Now edit warring at Clade. -- --Jules (Mrjulesd) 22:55, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

This guy also looks likely – non-stop insults in edit summaries, editing Formula One articles, which our man quite frequently does. Bretonbanquet (talk) 00:08, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

looks a lot like him. Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:34, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Yup! Favonian (talk) 19:41, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

same guy, restoring one of his previous IP's edits at He's Gonna Step on You Again. Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:18, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

October 2020

 * The usual debolding introductory text and snarky edit summaries. Number   5  7  21:42, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

And more recently: An IP-hopping anonymous user posting way behind the scenes to complain that somebody else is "pretending to be new". They geolocate to the same corner of England as the last couple IP's in the "confirmed and suspected" list. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 18:32, 14 October 2020 (UTC)

November 2020
The usual hallmarks of his MO, incl snarky comments and edit warring. Although this account was initially active 5-9 October, the current activity commenced on 24 October, just after the last IP block. Bahudhara (talk) 07:05, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Looks like a likely candidate, this edit removed an image gallery which is a common thing they do.  Jules  (Mrjulesd) 17:59, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
 * Yup. Blocked. Sro23 (talk) 18:33, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Was a user recently banned for a CU association of the long time abuser? I'm a bit perplexed by it. – The Grid  ( talk )  14:10, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

has the usual hallmarks of obnoxious edit summaries, random editing, sprinkling of F1 articles. Bretonbanquet (talk) 12:00, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
 * The very same. Blocked for a month. Favonian (talk) 12:04, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

December 2020
Similar bitey tone as BKFIP, once again remarking at about how they have no right to be instructing about policies. See Special:Diff/981332256, where almost identical comments were made, the IP was blocked as a confirmed candidate. IP details. Fits the criteria, O2 IP in London. — Yours, Berrely  (🎅 Ho ho ho! 🎄) • Talk∕Contribs 19:50, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Blocked for being profoundly tedious. Favonian (talk) 19:59, 6 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Exact same reasons as above. — Yours, Berrely  (🎅 Ho ho ho! 🎄) • Talk∕Contribs 20:43, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

How to document that a sock was blocked?
I recently interacted with User:Toleco and wish I knew they were a sock. Because they were active, I thought it was prudent to let others know. Please advice, what's best way to document this. I tried at User talk:Toleco Shushugah (talk) 14:40, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
 * I don't remember who started this tradition, but I've been documenting sock accounts I block here. It probably goes against the spirit of WP:DENY, as keeping a collection of sock users may serve as a sort of bizarre shrine, but my reasoning is someone potentially could find it useful in terms of tracking the LTA. Sro23 (talk) 17:52, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

April 2021
- usual “I’m right, everyone else is wrong” attitude. Ritchie333 <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  07:35, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Agreed with the above - Redrose64 has also been reverting these edits too. Turini2 (talk) 08:36, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

May 2021
Looks BKFIPish. Can I have a second opinion? <b style="color:#7F007F">Ritchie333</b> <sup style="color:#7F007F">(talk) <sup style="color:#7F007F">(cont)  09:56, 7 May 2021 (UTC)

June 2021
I ran into this user a few weeks ago when they edit warred across multiple articles removing the word "famously". The account has since been blocked User:Relsekk but they have returned to some of the same articles removing the word famously using Special:Contributions/2A00:23C5:9001:1F01:3D2D:A5C7:4AAE:4C0C --  Green  C  17:26, 12 June 2021 (UTC)

October 2021
What do people think about this ? Somewhat snarky edit summaries and removing bolding from election/referendum article intros rings some bells. Cheers, Number   5  7  11:15, 2 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Also, . The geolocation and the hostility to interlanguage links have aroused my suspicion. I noticed them because I still have Vienna bread on my watchlist from the last time BKFIP got angry at it. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 14:21, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Definitely him. Thanks! Favonian (talk) 14:30, 23 October 2021 (UTC)
 * might be the same person, given the conversation at Template talk:Interlanguage link. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 22:37, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

December 2021
is our man, childish edit summaries and return visits to past battlezones. Bretonbanquet (talk) 20:03, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

New IP?
sounds a lot like them in tone, this IP is registered to IPConnect in Bonn, Germany. wizzito &#124;  say hello!  00:56, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Another sock
should be added to the list 47.227.95.73 (talk) 12:03, 5 August 2022 (UTC)

New IP: 195.224.241.178

 * The user reverts all my edits in the same way. See also here. 85.193.215.210 (talk) 23:50, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

New (though similar) IP: 86.187.165.112}
The vandal keeps reverting all of my edits but now calls me an 'immature troll' because I used their own absurd edit explanation: . Of course, they do understand the meaning of "almost", but I do understand the meaning of "all but". What a double standard. 85.193.215.210 (talk) 13:53, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, this guy sets out to upset people, and belittle them, breaking every rule in the book. Don't let anything he says get to you, just keep editing. Bretonbanquet (talk) 20:56, 17 October 2022 (UTC)

New IP: 109.144.219.119
This vandal is also a gaslighter and wants me to believe that I am an incompetent troll. As a non-native English speaker, I do suffer from impostor syndrome, at least to some extent, even without gaslighting. But accusing me of trolling is insulting. 85.193.215.210 (talk) 12:47, 20 October 2022 (UTC)


 * You might want to read WP:DNFT. And WP:BEANS too. BilCat (talk) 19:27, 20 October 2022 (UTC)


 * @BilCat I may well be a native English speaker, living in Poland, who feels compassion for non-native speakers and promotes readability and plain language. But even if I had a PhD in English at the University of Oxford and provided a reliable proof, the vandal would still accuse me of language incompetency, and do it even more passionately.
 * PS. Thank you for the links, but the essays here are not written in plain language, just the opposite. The New York Times is much easier to read. 85.193.215.210 (talk) 15:46, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Try this then. BilCat (talk) 15:59, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

New IP: 85.193.144.134 (similar to mine!)
The vandal keeps reverting, but he cannot revert my edits because I stopped editing. I does not make any sense to me. 85.193.215.210 (talk) 16:13, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

New IP: 213.133.155.137
85.193.215.210 (talk) 23:52, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

New IP, and I am the only target so far.


The user reverts only my edits (as "unnecessary dumbing down"). Here are some of their reverts: 85.193.215.210 (talk) 13:13, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
 * "almost" -> "all but"
 * "ease" -> "assuage",  "courage" -> "fortitude
 * "bad" -> "desultory"
 * "of them" -> "thereof"
 * "limited" -> "hamstrung"
 * "instead of" ->  "in lieu of"


 * This is definitely the guy. I've added the IP he has used to revert the OP, as it's obviously all part of the same sad pattern.

Bretonbanquet (talk) 14:31, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, but that vandal has at least 11 years of experience and will keep reverting my copy edits forever. So I am considering to quit Wikipedia. By the way, what do you mean by OP? 85.193.215.210 (talk) 19:47, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep reporting him here, and admins will keep blocking him and reverting him. Don't let this ridiculous person stop you editing. OP means "original poster" – in this case, that's you :) Cheers, Bretonbanquet (talk) 20:01, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
 * People like you keep me alive. Thank you so much :-) 85.193.215.210 (talk) 01:14, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Any time, my friend :) Bretonbanquet (talk) 19:38, 15 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @Bretonbanquet What you wrote was more important to me than the fact that the vandal is active again. Thank you :-) 85.193.215.210 (talk) 13:55, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
 * That's awesome to hear! My pleasure :) Bretonbanquet (talk) 20:56, 17 October 2022 (UTC)
 * @Bretonbanquet Somebody (probably the vandal in question) accused us of mutual brown-nosing. Well, I expressed my real emotions and do not regret anything I wrote. Best. 85.193.215.210 (talk) 23:52, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Well, it removes any doubt that he reads this page, at least. Other than that, his input is not worth our consideration. Cheers, Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:12, 25 October 2022 (UTC)

A new modus operandi.
Though I no longer change less common words to more readable synonyms, the vandal keeps attacking me even on article talk pages, for example here you can read that I am 'not welcome here' and should move to Simple English Wikipedia, and that I am incompetent in English and maybe in general - who knows ;-) And here is his contribution to the talk about English grammar. 85.193.215.210 (talk) 19:09, 19 November 2022 (UTC)

Paranoia?
Is there any proof all those IPs and accounts are actually the same person? 2A02:8108:2C3F:AC2C:6C0B:27A0:8A85:BDB7 (talk) 07:29, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

New IP: 86.28.234.94
Bahudhara (talk) 04:37, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

131.251.253.0/24
The IP editor blocked as a result of this ANI thread is giving me BKFIP vibes. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 02:53, 6 May 2023 (UTC)

Harboured and IP friends
- «removed unencyclopaedic crap» - «Removed infantile gallery and incompetent text.» - ''«‎See also: not necessary to list other similar things. Categories serve that purpose»''
 * Anyone can take a look at these? Two IPs are from a british provider. Thanks!

AXO NOV (talk) ⚑ 12:57, 24 May 2023 (UTC)

62.121.132.130
This time he emerged from Poland. Please, take a look. See also this reply: [Jul 11, 2023, 10:18] AXO NOV  (talk) ⚑ 10:59, 11 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Stale now, but it sure looks like him. The location, Kraków, matches that of, who was overjoyed to find that protection on Joseph Conrad's career at sea had expired. It's now back, and the IP is blocked. Favonian (talk) 15:28, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
 * It seems like he is traveling somewhere in Poland. Here is another IP:  AXO NOV  (talk) ⚑ 15:38, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Same old charmer. Blocked as well. Favonian (talk) 15:40, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you. AXO NOV  (talk) ⚑ 15:46, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Please, check this one. It's the same subnet:  AXO NOV  (talk) ⚑ 06:37, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
 * – Favonian (talk) 14:46, 20 July 2023 (UTC)