Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/LithiumFlash/Archive

< Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations | LithiumFlash


LithiumFlash

10 January 2018

edit

Suspected sockpuppets

edit


The killer piece of evidence is these three edits restoring the same (ridiculous) text with the same edit-summary pattern (including the same bad-faith parenthetical reference to the talk page, with "Talk" capitalized).

There is also substantial circumstantial evidence. The three have major overlap in editing patterns: OOT's first edit was to Protests_against_the_Iraq_War, and so was MK's fourth edit. MK's first two edits involved the 2017 solar eclipse, which is something LF has edited on substantially. OOT and LF in particular have allied together (see last link) on this topic, to argue (deeply implausibly) for inclusion of material about the solar eclipse (including some hand-filmed YouTube video) onto the page Western_Carolina_University. The largest area of intersection of all 3 involves chess and game theory: LF & MK have edited Claude Shannon (but only to discuss chess), LF & OOT have edits on fairy chess piece, all have edits on chess variants of various kinds, etc. Finally, when they are editing in the same place, they inevitably end up pushing the same position, no matter how ridiculous: the WCU example above is one, the more recent one is at Talk:First-move_advantage_in_chess (mentioned as the killer evidence above). JBL (talk) 14:28, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

edit

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

edit

10 March 2018

edit

Suspected sockpuppets

edit


Edits focus on chess, particularly the subject of "fairy chess pieces", which is characteristic. Account was created 3 weeks after master and known socks were blocked. First batch of substantive edits include a lot of pointless disambiguator changes (moving "Article (chess)" to "Article (fairy chess piece)" or whatever) but one actual move to change a piece name (here) that was a change suggested by LithiumFlash (and rejected by others). (Even if this turns out not to be a sock, a lot of its edits are disruptive and deserve administrator attention.) JBL (talk) 22:39, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

edit

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

edit

31 May 2018

edit

Suspected sockpuppets

edit


This is an old account (opened 2007) that was dormant for years until after LithiumFlash was blocked. It edits the same topics (chess variants, eclipses, etc.), and it has actively identified itself with the blocked sockmaster. --JBL (talk) 12:14, 31 May 2018 (UTC) JBL (talk) 12:14, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

edit

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

edit

This case is   Stale. CU declined.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:45, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

20 July 2018

edit

Suspected sockpuppets

edit


First edit is to restore verbatim this edit by a blocked sockpuppet. Given the history of sockpuppets, CheckUser is requested to check for other violating accounts. JBL (talk) 11:59, 20 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

edit

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

edit

25 July 2018

edit

Suspected sockpuppets

edit

See history of Talk:Mica and Mica. Accusing good-faith editor of vandalism for using a valid redirect. DuncanHill (talk) 14:13, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

edit

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

edit

02 August 2018

edit

Suspected sockpuppets

edit

All have been used in the last two weeks to restore the last edits of the master on Mica (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), List of unsolved problems in mathematics (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), or their talk pages. (The previous IP sock fits in the middle of this group time-wise, and addresses seem to be discarded after a day or two.) --JBL (talk) 16:01, 2 August 2018 (UTC) JBL (talk) 16:01, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

edit

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

edit

IP edits too old. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:39, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

28 March 2019

edit

Suspected sockpuppets

edit

All four IPs have added a link to Solved game to List of unsolved problems in mathematics (diff 1, diff 2, diff 3, diff 4), an inadvisable edit originally made by the sockmaster diff and then by a series of related IPs soon after the master was blocked (diff 1, diff 2, diff 3, diff 4, diff 5). JBL (talk) 13:14, 28 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There has been continuing disruption from one of the IP addresses, see the article talk page. Is there anything that a filer of a very straightforward case like this can do to help it receive attention? --JBL (talk) 22:00, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

edit

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

edit

23 April 2019

edit

Suspected sockpuppets

edit

Just submitting for the record: same obsession with solved games (see contributions), now at Talk:List of unsolved problems in mathematics since the article itself is semi protected. JBL (talk) 12:06, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

edit

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

edit

14 January 2020

edit

Suspected sockpuppets

edit

Edit-warring over this [1] [2] old pointless avoidance of redirect [3] [4] is typical. JBL (talk) 14:15, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

edit

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

edit
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/LithiumFlash/Archive&oldid=935869338"