Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/John Foxe/Archive

John Foxe (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Suspected sockpuppets

• Hi540 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

• User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Primary evidence is the overlap on obscure articles related to Christian fundamentalism and historical sites: [1]. Fully one-third of all articles that Hi540 has edited have also been edited by John Foxe (http://toolserver.org/~soxred93/topedits/index.php?name=Hi540&namespace=0). Most recent overlap was at Bob Jones, Jr. which both accounts edited within the past 60 days. Neither account has disclosed or acknowledged a connection; I have inquired of John Foxe but received an evasive answer.

If there is sockpuppetry occurring, it is fairly mild at present. The User:Hi540 account is not particularly active and actually makes positive contributions overall. But it doesn't seem to fall under the exceptions given in WP:SOCK#LEGIT, and (potentially) violates a few of the illegitimate uses of alternate accounts: contributing to the same page or discussion, avoiding scrutiny, and acting as "good hand"/"bad hand" accounts. More seriously, in the past (2-3 years ago) it participated in support of User:John Foxe in arguments about Mormonism—if it is a sock, this was a clear abuse that has never been acknowledged and thus might be repeated in the future. (See e.g. [2], [3], [4].)

Another concern is that User:Hi540 might be a role account, since it is the catalog name of a history class taught at Bob Jones University. User:John Foxe has publicly disclosed to a newspaper reporter that he is a professor of history at BJU ([5]). There is further evidence connecting both User:Hi540 and User:John Foxe to the same real-life individual but I do not wish to make that public out of respect for his privacy; I can disclose it to a checkuser if requested.

If these are found to be connected accounts, I do not recommend a block of the User:John Foxe account. He should be trouted and asked to renounce his abusive use of the sock account in the past, and that account should be blocked indefinitely. alanyst 23:46, 17 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

• I think it's likely. Both accounts are old, though, and John Foxe has over 10,000 edits. I'd rather not block without concrete evidence, so I'm endorsing. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 02:10, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

•  Confirmed. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:22, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• DQ blocked and tagged, so.. I guess we're good. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 02:47, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• (edit conflict) Sock blocked/Tagged. Gave the master some time for socking and evading the community. -- DQ (t) (e) 02:50, 19 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]