I B Wright (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Populated account categories: confirmed · suspected

10 October 2015

– This SPI case is open.

Suspected sockpuppets

• DieSwartzPunkt (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• LiveRail (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.
• Editor interaction utility

I encountered this group of users on the Blu-ray Talk page, claiming a consensus between them and demanding I leave the discussion. I suspect they are operated by the same person.

These three users have a large number of mutual edits, and their shared interests include: British railways (particularly the London underground), display technology, batteries, electrical transformers, light bulbs, European landmarks and British ships.

There have been multiple occasions where they have worked together to make four consecutive reverts, such as here: 1 2 3 4, here: 1 2 3 4, and here: 1 2 3 4.

I B Wright recently claimed to be Canadian (diff), but has claimed to be from the UK previously (diff). All three users' editing histories suggest they are UK based.

On the aforementioned Blu-ray Talk page, all have shown an unexplained and increasing hostility towards me, and all have followed the unusual pattern of writing 1-2 extremely long-winded replies, then abandoning the discussion completely, but pursuing me elsewhere on the site (eg. 1 2 3).

DieSwartzPunkt and LiveRail have both made separate complaints accusing me of being a sockpuppet of the same completely unconnected user (diff, diff). Amazingly, they claim to have come to this conclusion independently (diff) on consecutive days.

I also noticed that despite their apparently argumentative natures and their deeply intertwined editing histories, they appear never to have had a disagreement.

(Side-note: There is also an IP-editor displaying the same behaviour, but as they openly change IP address every few hours, I didn't think it worth adding them here. But I could if anyone thinks it would be helpful.) Uk55 (talk) 15:26, 10 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

It should, of course, be pointed out that this report is entirely in retaliation for this. --LiveRail 16:01, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Uk55 made enquiries about how to determine sockpuppetry before that investigation was launched, so that's not necessarily the case. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:04, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hard to know where one starts with this? This is a problem with a user who is wanting to get his own way and is not able to do so. Uk55 was using a white paper on Blu-ray to support his claim that a table was folowing some standard that he perceived was right. He had in fact synthesised the claim that by presenting information in a particular way, that that somehow the paper established the standard (which the paper had never claimed). Evidence has been posted on another SPI that this user is a sockpuppet of another user who displayed exactly the same characteristics. Both users are also showing the same characteristic of exagerating their claims or selectively editing.

I came somewhat late into the discussion at the end. Nowhere at Talk:Blu-ray did anyone demand that Uk55 leave the discussion (one exegeration). I merely suggested that he should WP:DROPTHESTICK.

DSP, IBW and myself are engineers. The normal editing histories puts us in different areas of a fairly similar field of interest which appears to be electrical engineering. Inevitably there are areas of mutual interest and hence an overlap of editing interest. We do encounter each other from time to time but no more than we encounter other editors who edit in the same area. I was going to provide some editor interaction data, but the editor interaction utility is not working again. I am willing to bet that the overlap is fairly typical for two editors with overlapping interests. How many times have allegations of sock puppetry been made where two or more editors must be sockpuppets because they agree with each other when in reality they are all disgreeing with the complainant.

Putting the same point across is not surprising when the point is valid. The above examples (if that is all there are) were eventually accepted by consensus.

Can't comment on I B Wright, but I admit that I am fairly certain that he is British.

Uk55 claims increasing hostility at Talk:Blu-ray. Re-reading the posts there, I see no hostiltiy, just matter of fact statements. The only person getting a bit heated is Uk55, but I would not say he was getting overly hostile either - at least at that discussion (two exagerations). People abandoned the discussion. At least some people were following the WP:DROPTHESTICK advice!

DSP and myself have come to the same conclusion of Uk55's remarkable similarity to Bhtpbank. I wonder why?

I see no evidence supporting Uk55's claim of 'argumentative nature' so I guess we can dismiss that (so: three exagerations) I has to be said that I do come across editors who just will not accept that they are wrong. (Famous example whom everone should know: Wtshymanski - no longer with us fortunately).

I'm sure if I dig deeply enough I will find where DSP and myself have disagreed - and I know that we have (damned Editor interaction utility not working though).

However, I have to thank Uk55. While going through the history behind this, I found another classic Bhtpbank characteristic. --LiveRail 17:18, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments