Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/R-41/Archive

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.


R-41

R-41 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
30 June 2012
Suspected sockpuppets


Simultaneous edits on Montenegrin-based articles. Navyworth (talk) 20:36, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
  • You will need to provide more information and evidence for this case to be processed. Please supply us with diffs that show the connection and point us to where the abuse is taking place. Thanks, Tiptoety talk 03:51, 1 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • This seems rather obviously frivolous. The only connection between R-41 and the alleged sock is that they both disagreed with the reporting editor on one article, Montenegrins. Later, R-41 actually reported both Navyworth and 23 editor for disruption at ANI. I think I can safely say that R-41 and 23 editor are unrelated. Suggest closure. Fut.Perf. ☼ 05:58, 5 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • In concurrence with Tiptoety and FPaS, closing. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:39, 6 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]
31 May 2013
Suspected sockpuppets


R-41 and 184.145.67.28 were blocked two weeks on 31 March following a discussion thread begun by 184.145.67.28 on ANI.[1] Here is a link to the discussion on R-41's talk page.

Since his block ended, R-41 has edited under his own account, this IP and another static IP. Based on R-41's comments at User talk:N-HH#N-HH, please read this, he appears to concede this. He has edited on at least 14 days under one or the other of these addresses, although he also edited under R-41 during all but two of those days.

It is not clear why R-41 is using three accounts. His suggestion that he forgot to sign in is disingenuous, based on the number of times he has done this. I suspect the reason is to conceal his authorship of edits to fascism-related articles under the belief that they will attract increased scrutiny from N-HH, myself and other editors. Or perhaps he is just showing his disagreement with his recent block. I am notifying R-41 of this thread in the hope that he will clarify this. TFD (talk) 20:44, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

I did forget to sign in, what I said is honest, and not disingenuous. I tried coming back here to edit, but unfortunately N-HH and TFD hate my guts and have grudges because they want me gone from Wikipedia, which looks like inevitably is going to happen, I can't stand the grudges here, and I'm tired of being here, I take a break, think things will cool down and then they explode.
I am being honest that I forgot to sign in and if you look at such edits where I forget, I later sign in immediately after doing those edits, because I have realized this. Unfortunately you naturally assume that I am a liar. But before I leave Wikipedia for good, I just wanted to tell you TFD, that you are smug obnoxious asshole whom I hope gets banned for all the newcomers you have treated like crap.
I don't care, I'm going to intentionally get myself banned in an edit war because I want my content that I added gone from Nazism and Fascism. Fuck you TFD, fuck you N-HH.
— Preceding unsigned comment added by R-41 (talk • contribs) 21:08, 31 May 2013
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
12 January 2014
Suspected sockpuppets


This IP, which began editing 23 December 2013 has obvious experience in editing. His first edit was editing the sidebar for Social Democracy, followed by 6 content edits, a revert of another edit and reverts of page moves. His edit summaries show familiarity with Wikipedia processes ("Removing POV", "Restoring material to what it was before major changes").

His IP (70.26.113.85) is a static IP from Bell in London, Canada, while R-41 socked under 70.26.121.62, which is also a static IP from Bell in London, Canada.

Both editors show an interest in socialism, far right politics (such as nazism and fascism) and South Eastern Europe, particularly Yugoslavia and the Eastern front in World War II. Both also have the habit of making an edit to an article or discussion page, then following it up shortly afterwards with one or more minor edits. TFD (talk) 05:10, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Mark Arsten, please see User talk:R-41#Indef blocked, talk page access removed. While R-41 requested to be blocked, there were other circumstances, according to the blocking administrator. See ANI[2] and R-41's postings before he was blocked, including at SPI.[3] Also, the blocking administrator said that R-41 should request to be unblocked no sooner than 6 months after his block expired, if he wished to return. And "any IP used by this editor should be blocked as a sock." TFD (talk) 23:02, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users

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

This edit, coming very soon after TFD filed this SPI request, may be an admission or perhaps just a very inappropriate edit. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 05:52, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't remember, but why was User:R-41 blocked in the first place? --TIAYN (talk) 16:17, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
  • R-41 is under a self-requested block, so editing via IP is not inherently forbidden for him. The IP claimed to be him, but I guess we can't rule out the possibility of a joe job. The IP's comments deserved a block and were given one, which has now expired. The IP hasn't edited since, but if you think the block was too short, I suggest discussing it with the blocking admin. Closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:42, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@The Four Deuces: Thanks for telling me that, I've extended the IP block a bit. Mark Arsten (talk) 23:12, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
28 January 2014
Suspected sockpuppets


This IP began editing 23 January 2014, nine days after 70.26.113.85 was blocked as a sock of R-41. Similarities include a static IP from Bell in London, Canada, interest in fascism, the habit of making an edit to an article or discussion page, then following it up shortly afterwards with one or more minor edits, and conflict with other editors. R-41 also argued on the East Germany article about whether it should be called a satellite state in the info-box. The details are in the talk page archives. TFD (talk) 19:17, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Articles that both R-41 and 184.145.64.67 edited include Italian irredentism, Federal State of Austria. Italian nationalism, Albanian Republic. Italian Fascism, Fourth Shore, Second Czechoslovak Republic, Albanian Kingdom, Kingdom of Romania and East Germany. The IP has made only 98 edits to article pages. TFD (talk) 20:45, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Callanecc, here both editors post on Talk:East Germany in opposition to including "satellite state" in the info-box. Notice that both make consecutive minor edits to their original posting.

R-41 referred to the disputed infobox field as the ""status text" box", while the IP calls it a "status box." No other editor uses the word "status" to describe the box. TFD (talk) 22:51, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is no need for a checkuser and it probably would not work because it is a new IP. But the evidence is conclusive: aame writing style, same POV, edits ten of the same articles as R-41 (some of which are obscure), warned for personal attacks, and starts editing 11 days after R-41's previous IP sock was blocked. And IPs trace to the same provider in the same town. TFD (talk) 09:48, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Despite the less amount of evidence, it is worth mentioning that the IP is relatively new, making large edit. WP:NOTBORNYESTERDAY. [15] seems to be relevant of all, same attitude. I still dont think that it would be enough for a CU because IP usually violates the privacy of other users. But other restrictions can be imposed such as Page ban. If user is not willing to contribute, but only disturb. Noteswork (talk) 03:56, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
  • @The Four Deuces: In order for us to investigate further, please give two or more diffs meeting the following criteria:
  1. At least one diff is from the sockmaster (or an account or IP already blocked as a sockpuppet of the sockmaster), showing the behaviour characteristic of the sockmaster.
  2. At least one diff for the suspected IP, showing similar behaviour of the sockmaster given in the first diff.
  3. In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided. Around one sentence is enough for this. Thank you, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 12:37, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • information Administrator note Blocked and tagged following the diffs supplied by The Four Deuces. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 10:45, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
21 April 2014
Suspected sockpuppets


R-41 has continued to edit under a number of IPs (184.145.67.28, 70.26.121.62, 70.26.113.85, and 184.145.64.67). This latest one is a clear sock. It is a static IP from Bell Canada in London Ontario, similar to the last IP socks. Similarities include an interest in socialism and fascism. Also both accounts will make a lengthy posting to a talk page, then follow it up with numerous minor edits to the original posting.

This most recent discussion thread ("This article has too much POV based on Marxist scientific socialist perspectives") has a similar title expressing a similar viewpoint to R-41's discussion thread from 30 May 2012 "This article has a POV slanted towards a Marxist interpretation of socialism". The new thread begins, "The following sentence is an example of what I've said above", implying that the editor has previously posted to the talk page, although it is the first posting from that IP account. TFD (talk) 05:51, 21 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

30 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets


CanadianWriter5000 says that he is a returning editor who left because of mental health problems.[27] R-41 is a Canadian editor who was indefinitely blocked and claimed to have health mental health problems.[28] He also attempted to return using sockpuppets.

Similarities include nationality (Canadian), interest in fascism and Yugoslav and Balkans related articles and editing style. In particular, both accounts make repeated minor edits to articles. for example, an edit made 00:47, 29 April 2016 was followed up with 8 minor edits to the same section in 1 1/4 hours.[29] An edit made by R-41 to the same article 23:28, 28 May 2013‎ was followed by 18 edits in the 2 hours or so.[30] TFD (talk) 00:02, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@L235:, here is an example:

  • "The Nazis recognized the German nation as being composed of five Aryan racial subtypes: Nordic, Alpine, East Baltic, Mediterranean, and Dinaric, viewing Nordics as being at the top of the racial hierarchy.[Anne Maxwell. Picture Imperfect: Photography and Eugenics, 1870-1940. Eastbourne, England: UK; Portland, Oregon, USA: SUSSEX ACADEMIC PRESS, 2008, 2010. P. 150. These were the findings of the study Rassenkunde des deutschen Volkes (1922) by Nazi member Hans F. K. Günther. Adolf Hitler was highly impressed by the study and made it the basis of his eugenics policy. The book had gone through six editions by 1926, and by 1945, more than half a million copies had been sold in Germany.]"[31] R-41 17:31, 26 December 2012 (Adding more info on the Aryan race concept.)
  • "It recognized the Aryan race as the master race. Nazism regarded Germans to have heritage from several Aryan subtype races, especially with strong heritage from the Nordic race that the Nazis regarded as highest in racial hierarchy of the Aryan subtype races."[Bruce David Baum. The Rise and Fall of the Caucasian Race: A Political History of Racial Identity. New York, New York, USA; London, England, UK: New York University Press, 2006. P. 156.] CanadianWriter5000 03:23, 8 April 2016 (clarified material on Nazism in relation to its view on Nordic heritage amongst Germans.)

In both cases R-41 edits to show that Nordics were a subtype of Aryan. There is a current discussion on the talk page set up by CanadianWriter5000 called "Which did the Nazis support? an Aryan master race or a Nordic master race?":

  • "Both terms [Aryan and Nordic] appear to have been used, usually to refer to much the same thing in this context, hence "or" is fine.... The book by Baum says that Hans Gunther divided Europeans into five races, not "Aryans" into five "subtypes". It then says that the Nazis made the "minor alteration" of replacing Gunther's "Nordic race" with an "Aryan race myth"." N-HH 09:55, 10 April 2016[32]
  • "From what I've heard and seen, the Nazis use of the term "Aryan race" is roughly the same as what is today identified as white people whereas Nordic is a section within it." CanadianWriter5000 02:26, 12 April 2016[33]

I would also like to point out that the Editor Interaction Anylyzer shows CanadianWriter5000 has edited 46 articles previously edited by R-41, although his edit count is only 334. I count 232 edits CanadianWriter5000 has made to articles previously edited by R-41.[34] That would not be a possible similarity between two unconnected accounts.

TFD (talk) 16:08, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  •  Additional information needed - @The Four Deuces: Although the diffs you cite are persuasive, would it be possible to cite one more example? Given that Nazism, for example, has had 9392 edits to it, the edit strings might be attributed to coincidence; since you're already familiar with the suspected sock, it'd be great if you could supply a few more diffs. (If you can't, I'll do this in a week or so, unless another clerk beats me.) Thanks for your help. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 01:37, 3 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Admin action needed - A block of CanadianWriter5000 will be appreciated; the diffs provided are persuasive. CheckUser is  Stale. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 20:47, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Blocked and tagged per request. Closing. Bbb23 (talk) 20:55, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

30 July 2016

Suspected sockpuppets

User:FinalApologyAccount admits to being R-41 on their userpage. Sro23 (talk) 00:24, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Added 69.159.44.245, made this edit. Sro23 (talk) 00:49, 30 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/R-41/Archive&oldid=1076212752"