Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Alexyflemming/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Alexyflemming

Alexyflemming (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
01 December 2014
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Soon after the master got indeffed, we have this brand new account Dosiaab repeating or supporting the edits of the master.  Looks like a duck to me. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 01:07, 1 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence for Dosiaab
Stylistic similarities
  • Unusual typo: Repeatition
  • Sock on "Northern Cyprus" (Undid revision 635624324 by Athenean (talk)Rv. good faith edit. Repeatition.) vs. master on "Panagra": (Population data is already in the infobox. Repeatition deleted.) and again master on Pergamos, Cyprus: (population updated, mayor's name added, official website added. The repeatition of Infobox data in article body prevented.)
Similar activities on Religion in Northern Cyprus
Similar activities on Northern Cyprus
Evidence for Nosophobia
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]
  • The behavioural evidence (not all of which is mentioned above) is enough to leave little room for doubt that Dosiaab is a sockpuppet, and adding to that the CU "likely" it is beyond all reasonable doubt, so I have blocked the account. I have also blocked Nosophobia, and, in view of this continuation of sockpuppetry during a block for sockpuppetry, I shall extend Hadgimarvi's block to indefinite. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 21:00, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
25 May 2015
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Identical MO to master. Their history goes back a long way.  Sounds like a duck quacking into a megaphone to me. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 18:44, 25 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence
Hijacking article and template talkpages using the same primary legal sources
Almost identical locus of interest in articles.
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 June 2015
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Immediately after IP sock 212.174.38.3 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) got reverted on Talk:Northern Cyprus as a sock, (please see recent SPI and the IP block log), this new named account sock reopens the identical thread of the IP sock. Now, as is usuallly the case, the named sock has again hijacked the Northern Cyprus article talkpage using identical arguments to the flemming master. Other edits follow master flemming's MO, i.e. interest in templates, sports memberships right down to billiard memberships. And before I forget, interest in Economic Areas or Zones - a hallmark of the master.  Sounds like a duck quacking into a megaphone to me. Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 22:06, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence
Common behavioural locus
  • Pushing by any means necessary the POV that Northern Cyprus is a country and recognised by anything on the planet as such through a membership or court decision. This includes creation of templates and categories establishing Northern Cyprus as a separate country/entity from Cyprus.
Hijacking article and template talkpages using the same primary legal sources
Interest in European Economic zones or areas (EEZ, EEA) as legally applied to Northern Cyprus
Pushing membership in billiard associations for Northern Cyprus
Creating, or pushing POV on, templates
POV-pushing in category space
POV-pushing in template space
Interest in the article "Sport in Northern Cyprus"
Interest in the article "Education in Northern Cyprus"
Obsession with pushing OR using the United States Federal Court Decision
Please see also
Comments by other users
[edit]
  • I am accused to "POV-pushing in category space": Creating a category for partially recognized states is of usual edits of an ordinary WP user. I am one such.
  • The accuser also says "interest in Education of Northern Cyprus", "interest in Sports of Northern Cyprus" etc. So, I ask: what is more normal than a Wikipedian editing WP articles related with his citizenship? Next time, let him list the articles that we can edit!

These are the ones I immediately catched. There are countless other accusations. I think the above is sufficient to give an idea what the rest could be.Ayka3b (talk) 20:27, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
19 June 2015
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


  • Sock[1] adding "after the hostilities" blurb vs master doing the same.[2]
  • Sock and master share a keen interest in Northern Cyprus sports.
  • Sock[3] depositing paragraph after paragraph of OR on talk page vs master doing the same on countless occasions.[4]
  • Sock reinstating master's template.[5]
  • Sock[6][7] uploading images that are probably not their own with municipality logos plastered on top vs master[8] and earlier sock[9] doing the same. Alakzi (talk) 13:55, 19 June 2015 (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]

24 December 2015

[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets
Introduction

This IP is a previously blocked sock of Alexyflemming. Please see the old SPI on the very same IP: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Alexyflemming/Archive#25_May_2015 as well as my edit on 5 June 2015 mentioning this very fact. IP has reactivated again edit-warring and restoring the master's edits. Dr. K. 11:27, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Recent evidence
Additional historical evidence
Please see also the IP's block log
Level of quacking

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. The phrase "the TRNC purportedly operates as a democratic republic with a president, prime minister, legislature and judiciary.. and..TRNC is not vulnerable to a lawsuit in Washington" is from US' Federal Court's decision:
Here, here, and here. Changing even a word from a court decision gives rise to "prejudice, biased, POW" etc. accusations. Anybody using the same phrases cannot be attributes as socks. Definitely, there are many people that thinks and acts like me: They handle the "court decisions, international agreements, scientific discoveries etc." just as is written in original sources.212.174.38.3 (talk) 13:11, 24 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

06 July 2016

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]
Evidence
Very similar postings to past IP sock IP 212.174.38.3
  • IP 212.174.38.3:

    Northern Cyprus being a country is not disputed. The definition of "country" is bigger than whether being a UN member or not. There are countries that are not member of UN. See, “country” definition in WP: A country is a region identified as a distinct entity in political geography. A country may be an independent sovereign state or one that is occupied by another state, as a non-sovereign or formerly sovereign political division, or a geographic region associated with sets of previously independent or differently associated peoples with distinct political characteristics. That's why, even the sources from UN cite Northern Cyprus as a different country: World Happiness Report 2015 of United Nations' Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN) ranked Northern Cyprus 66th among 158 countries, directly above the Republic of Cyprus, which was ranked 67th.

  • Woodgridge:

    Northern Cyprus being a country is not disputed. The definition of "country" is bigger than whether being a UN member or not. There are countries that are not member of UN. See, “country” definition in WP: A country is a region identified as a distinct entity in political geography. That’s why, even the sources from United Nations (UN) cite Northern Cyprus as a different country: World Happiness Report 2015 of United Nations’ Sustainable Development Solutions Network (SDSN) ranked Northern Cyprus 66th among 158 countries, directly above the Republic of Cyprus, which was ranked 67th.

  • Rest of material of the edits is also very close.
Similar activities on Religion in Northern Cyprus
Stylistic similarities
Editing the same obscure article "Cittaslow"
Interest in European Economic zones or areas (EEZ, EEA) as legally applied to Northern Cyprus
Linguistic peculiarities
  • Both master and sock use the same style of broken English
  • Example 1: Improper use of suffix "-er": Master Flemming: Greek Cypriot soccerer vs. Woodgridge on this very SPI: This indicates that the accuser/suspecter parties...
  • Example 2: Use of plural for "evidence": Master Flemming: Every serious wiki-user supports its arguements with references and strong evidences., vs. Woodgridge on this SPI: I already gave up removing his non-ending "evidences"., plaintiffs are required to present all their "evidences" at once at the beginning of the case etc.
Confession by Woodgridge sock about "channeling" master's blog on Wikipedia
Accusing his opponents that they use IP socks
  • Master Flemming: Why is this misinterpretation? This actually happened in the way I described above (click links). Also, How do we know that you (31.153.94.183, 85.179.156.55, Dr.Κ.) are all different? How do we know that there is really not a personification around of the same person (socks case!)? vs. Woodgridge on this SPI: My Talk page is vandalized by IP24.15.68.186 (Chicago, Illinois/ USA). I wonder IP's location of Dr.K. and Athenean.
Advertising a decision by ICJ in loud edit-summaries
  • Please note the similarities in the formatting:
  • Master Flemming: The President of the Int’l Court of Justice (ICJ) Hisashi Owada, 2010: “International law contains “NO PROHIBITION” on declarations of independence.
  • Master Flemming: International Court of Justice is also an organization of UN and decided in 2010 that "International law contains no prohibition on declarations of independence"
  • Master Flemming: United Nations' International Court of Justice (2010): "International law contains no prohibition on declarations of independence".
  • Woodgridge: International Court of Justice: "International law contains no prohibition on declarations of independence"
Advertising a decision by the US Federal Court of Justice in loud edit-summaries
  • Please note: For Master Flemming, this is a representative sample only. By no means exhaustive.
  • Please note the similarities in the formatting:
  • Master Flemming: USA Federal Court (09 October 2014): "Northern Cyprus is a democratic republic."
  • Master Flemming: United States Federal Court:"Greek Cypriots cannot claim that the government in control of Northern Cyprus gave their homes to Turkish Cypriots... TRNC purportedly operates as a DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC with a president, prime minister, legislature and judicia
  • Master Flemming: Article is of NC. USA Federal Court Decision is just in the context of Northern Cyprus. USA FC: "1. Greek Cypriots cannot claim NC's government gave their homes to TCs 2. NC is a democratic republic with a president,prime minister,legislature,judiciary"
  • Woodgridge: USA's Federal Court (13.10.2014):"Northern Cyprus is a democratic country"; The European Court of Human Rights (02.07.2013;02.09.2015): "The laws and the court system of Northern Cyprus are legal"
  • Woodgridge: Northern Cyprus has legal sovereignty. See Talk: Definition of legal sovereignty; ECHR:"the laws and legal system of NC have legal basis"; USA Federal Court:"NC is democratic republic"
Adding long quotations in edit-summaries trying to rebut their opponents

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

  • Comment Quacks very loudly. All the hallmarks of Alexyflemming, especially the lengthy diatribes about how NC is a "normal" country like any other, the tireless energy, etc...Alexyflemming is a prolific sockpuppeteer, this is just the latest in a long line of socks. Athenean (talk) 04:57, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I concur with the evidence and the comments, thank you Dr.K. for bringing this up. Having a look at his editing history, I recall reverting this, which is actually an argument consistently parroted by Alexyflemming and his socks: see this for instance. --GGT (talk) 10:59, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"Evidences"? You're really getting desperate, aren't you? Athenean (talk) 17:34, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Defence 1st I emphasize that I will answer only the accusations till now. I'll neither respond nor accept any further accusations. Continuously accusing someone by creating new allegations at each time is not accepted in any normal law system; even the claimers are requested to present all of their proofs at the beginning of the case. Any further proofs are not accepted unless the defender accepts them.

Now, there are 3 users mentioning about this. So, as only 1 user, it will take time to respond them. So, I apologize if I don't disprove all their accusations at once. Slowly, I will cover them all.

1 The diff of my edit clearly includes this: "I found the above facts by googling, there are many others as well.". This indicates that the accuser/suspecter parties did not read all of my edits before accusing. There are evidences that some suspecter party (Good Olfactory ) finds my edits very long; even complaining about my lengthy edits. One expects that this faithful and smart user did not read the my edits completely. But, never misunderstand here. I wrote it here not for accusing him. I made use of his edits organizing my edits. I am thankful to Good Olfactory in that. I specified this to clarify the situation.

So, I found some of the context of my edit from internet. Exactly it is here: https://alexyflemming.wordpress.com/ As a user, I cannot know the blocked/sockpuppetred users in Wikipedia, and I do not think that the users of WP check this each time before they make an edit, and the edits of blocked/sockpuppetred users outside of Wikipedia in the web can be reached and used in WP unintentionally.

2 That said,
When a blocked/sockpuppetred user made a plausible/correct/referenced/proven issue before his/her blocking, are the WP users not permitted to use them at all?
Does the blocking/sockpuppetring of a user make all of the their edits before blocking illegal as well (even though they are shared by the other WP users and proven by the papers of famous gurus)?
Is there such a WP policy? I do not know anything about this if there is such.

3 To the accusation (Stilistic similarities):
I clearly specified in this diff of my edit (3 days ago) that "I found the above facts by googling, there are many others as well.". I googled and found some facts that reflects only a small subset of what I think. Without any rephrasing, I transported this facts from outside of the WP (https://alexyflemming.wordpress.com) to WP. Therefore, it is more than similarity; it is completely the same if that user entered his arguments to WP already.

That said, notice I said "only a small subset of what I think" above. Hence, there are hundreds of other facts/proofs/reasonings/references not covered by this user (as far as I cover his past edits) and his socks; these are all peculiar to me.

4 "Tireless energy" argument of Athenean:
This very abstract, unplausible, and illogical accusation (A has tireles energy, B has tireless energy, so A is B) shows the quality of the accusations. I will not defend against this genius reasoning!

5 Equivalence to IP212.174.38.3 argument:
I deny neither that some of the arguments of my edits are completely taken from the web (see above) nor that I copy-pasted from the edits of WP users to whom I participate in the reasoning. This does not make me carbon-copy of them. There are many other reasonings that I do not participate and I strongly reject. See the end of this diff:
http://hudoc.echr.coe.int/sites/eng/Pages/search.aspx#{"fulltext":["Pavlides"],"documentcollectionid2":["CASELAW"],"itemid":["001-122907"]}

Very untidy, corrupted link! My edits are well organized, my links are smart, clickable, and working. If I see a broken link in my edit, I correct it. I am careful. This IP212.174.38.3 seems not!Woodgridge (talk) 11:57, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

6 Pre-determined votes!:
Dr.K.: reverted my edit with the edit summary "Abusing multiple accounts", after the sockpuppetry claim, but before the final decision.
GGT: reverted my edit with the edit summary "rv sock", after the sockpuppetry claim, but before the final decision.
Athenean: mentioned "Greek Muslim", "Greek Genocide", etc. a lot.

7 Enmity towards Northern Cyprus by the party (Dr.K.) who started the sockpuppetry claim:
Dr.K. deletes everything on Northern Cyprus from Wikipedia articles. See this and this for example. Also, look at the edit summary "rv edit and probably copyvio map by sockmaster". He deletes by claiming copyright violation without any research or proof of this. Just saying "probably". Based on possibilities (not the facts!), he acts. I will report his misbehaviours towards Northern Cyprus here whenever I catch.Woodgridge (talk) 16:26, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

8 Never-ending accusations by the party (Dr.K.) who tries to drive to an infinite loop of defence/accuse helix:
new accusation; my warning; new accusation; new accusation; my 2nd warning; new accusation; my 3rd warning; new accusation;...

At each time I am emphasizing that "I am closed to never-ending accusations!", and at each time he is trying to bring forward new things.Woodgridge (talk) 21:52, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Question. @Woodgridge: why not just directly address the suspicion that you are the same person that was using the account User:Alexyflemming? Are you the same person? Good Ol’factory (talk) 23:58, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Answer. My answers above directly address that suspicion. As for your 2nd question, I am definitely not! If you want me to address Dr.K.'s newer and newer never-ending accusations, I will not do that since even if I address them, you can be sure that he will come with new sets of never-ending accusations. He has also bad intention: Since all of their reasonings are baseless (as was known by himself!), he diverted to block me this time via forcing me violate 3 Revert Rule (3RR); see his edit summary: Rvvx2.Woodgridge (talk) 07:22, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Woodgridge, the things being added by Dr.K. as not "accusations". They are more like pieces of evidence that he is providing to support this investigation. Regardless of how you feel about what is being added, you should not be deleting anything posted by another user. In doing so, you're certainly not helping your case! Good Ol’factory (talk) 09:35, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you are right. I already gave up removing his non-ending "evidences". Unfortunately, the things in WP is not the the same as the real world. In the law system of any normal democratic country, plaintiffs are required to present all their "evidences" at once at the beginning of the case, and they are not allowed to present any new evidence (they cannot extend their claim) unless the defendants accept so. This must be a WP policy according to me to prevent the abuses in SPI. Note that plaintiffs may present millions of "evidences" at once, they are allowed to that.Woodgridge (talk) 10:00, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yes: this is not a legal trial, Dr.K. and other users involved are not full-time lawyers doing what they do as an occupation, and you are not being prosecuted or sued. We're just trying to determine if you are the same person that used another account, and I have to say—I went in with an open mind, knowing nothing of the previous editor or his edits, and to me the evidence that you are the same person is looking pretty overwhelming right now! Good Ol’factory (talk) 22:18, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

9 My Talk page is [sic] vandalized by IP24.15.68.186. IP24.15.68.186 belongs to [Chicago, Illinois/USA] from here and here. I wonder IP's location of Dr.K. and Athenean. Woodgridge (talk) 21:01, 7 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I did not vandalize your talk page. Leaving a comment is not vandalism. There is overwhelming evidence supporting your sockpuppet accusations, which will be confirmed by a CheckUser shortly. 172.56.10.22 (talk) 00:40, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Who are you to call me out for "vandalizing" your talk page, when you yourself have been vandalizing Wikipedia for years! Looking at my contributions page shows a long history of reverting vandalism by you and similar editors! 24.15.68.186 (talk) 00:48, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Goodbye, sockpuppet! 24.15.68.186 (talk) 03:53, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Uninvolved editor here who monitors this page. I don't recall any prior interactions with the master or the alleged sockpuppet (although I could be mistaken). But from the evidence presented, this looks like an open-and-shut case: Woodgridge certainly appears to be a sock. (The "evidences" are overwhelming, you might say.) I would advise IP 24.15.68.186 to stop taunting Woodgridge, as I don't think that's particularly constructive. -Kudzu1 (talk) 17:58, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sure! 24.15.68.186 (talk) 18:41, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

10 Multiple-IP-account attack (24.15.68.186 and 172.56.10.22): See above to notice this:
Woodgridge: "My Talk page is vandalized by IP24.15.68.186";
IP172.56.10.22: "I did not vandalize your talk page".
IP24.15.68.186 belongs to [Chicago, Illinois/USA] from here and here.
IP172.56.10.22 belongs to [Michigan or Washington/USA] from here and here.
Hence, the location of the multiple-IP-account: [Chicago, Illinois; Michigan; Washington] of USA. Woodgridge (talk) 18:24, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

11 Concerted action by Dr.K. and Athenean:
Dr.K. and Athenean act concertedly to revert all of my edits in Wikipedia. They act in complete coordination. They even use the completely same edit summary while reverting:

Athenean (25 July 2016 18:02): "obvious sock is obvious"
Athenean (25 July 2016 19:01): "obvious sock is obvious"
Dr.K. (26 July 2016 15:52): "obvious sock is obvious"Woodgridge (talk) 18:24, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

Behavioral evidence is persuasive. Blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:32, 28 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Alexyflemming/Archive&oldid=1079532056"