Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lightbreather

Lightbreather

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

For archived investigations, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lightbreather/Archive.

25 February 2015

– This SPI case is closed and will be archived shortly by an SPI clerk or checkuser.

Suspected sockpuppets

• 172.56.6.142 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 172.56.8.117 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 172.56.8.170 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 172.56.9.123 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 172.56.15.36 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 172.56.15.217 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 172.56.16.85 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))

• User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
• Editor interaction utility

1. Prior history = user has history of one block for socking and one block for block evasion see block log.
2. User Lightbreather said the IP's actions should "get an award". Please see DIFF.
3. A lot going on here at 172.56.0.0/18.
4. Possible trolling, IP user 172.56.9.123 (talk · contribs) had prior activity at sock investigation of this user DIFF.
5. IP user 172.56.8.170 (talk · contribs) is first to show up to deletion discussion created by user, possible dup voting DIFF.
6. Current search of ANI page reveals multiple places this IP user seems to be showing up, see admission of block evasion at "I am evading a block but not a sock for which I was blocked Self Reported".
7. Here at ANI page at link "IP violating WP:CANVASS and the spirit of WP:SPA", we have multiple editors raising sock concerns, including: Lugnuts, CombatWombat42, Baseball Bugs, and GoodDay.

Requesting Checkuser investigation into above IPs, and range 172.56.0.0/18, and any associated accounts to get to the bottom of what's going on here. Thank you. — Cirt (talk) 20:29, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Okay, Salvidrim!, no worries about the decline, thanks for looking into it. And Mike V, thanks for the rangeblock on 172.56.0.0/18 for a week, that helps things, at least a little bit here. — Cirt (talk) 23:56, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Comments by other users

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

It would make sense this is Lightbreather however I will raise one more sock possibility, it could be Neotarf. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 22:07, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

There is nothing sensible about this SPI. I can't speak for whether or not the IP was canvassing, but if the editors listed above think that notifying one project[1] about a discussion is canvassing, they need to read WP:CANVASS. Lightbreather (talk) 22:19, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

If the IPs are an editor attempting to avoid scrutiny or attempting to evade its block/ban? Then we must find out. GoodDay (talk) 22:27, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

User:Mike V it just reminded me of this [[2]], it's flimsy but it does fit. Also point of fact Cirt opened this SPI. ON a related side note I understand what you are asking with why it could indeed be Lightbreather and I'm not entirely convinced the ip is, I think it is some sort of coordination with respect to it and it could be to enhance the victim complex we've seen and or good hand bad hand editing. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 22:30, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

The IP is not Lightbreather. That it is someone editing while logged out or perhaps even banned seems very likely, and off-wiki organising is pretty obviously going on in this general topic area, but the rangeblock addresses the current issue to the extent that is reasonable. I don't think there is much mileage to be gained by trying to link to Neotarf at this stage, although if the stuff returns then the situation may change. - Sitush (talk) 00:15, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

• This has nothing to do with Lightbreather or Neotarf. The IP editor is someone with a strong interest in Cultural Marxism from a rightwing point of view. I see a very clear candidate for who this may be; not a banned editor, but one who is currently actively editing the topic area. Iselilja (talk) 01:32, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Actually, the IP range belongs to a guy with many names such as The Marciano spammer and previously in the past as George Reeves Person (page deleted by god himself), his real name is Jan Lubek, a person obsessed with boxing..--Stemoc 01:42, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

What caused this to be connected to Lightbreather? It's obvious from the AN/I thread that it's someone involved in the Cultural Marxism dispute. Sarah (SV) ^(talk) 01:46, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

There's a 7 point list why Cirt requested it above. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 01:48, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

To add to this in case you aren't involved with spis often...I've seen people create socks to pass their articles tyo FA status, to make them look like a victim, vote stack or many other reasons. It is odd that LB is telling an IP they deserve a reward when they started not one but 2 spi on LB in the past. it's little things like that which certainly can be gamed but they paint a picture and seldom are they truly creative. I suspect Lightbreathers past history of socking and resulting denials etc also makes her more susceptible. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 01:50, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

I am puzzled about why one (not two, but one) of the IP addresses above is an address that started an SPI against me. Is this part of some elaborate joe job? Lightbreather (talk) 02:38, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Honestly if it is a joe job why on god's green earth would you take the bait? In the banning policy arb case I told Tarc that he was being used like a dog that was being set on a path...seriously if you have no involvement with it don't let another person (me included) control the path you take because if it is you are sacrificing a lot of control. Modify the message so that others can't distort it or use it for their own purposes. Hell in a Bucket (talk) 02:51, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

•  Clerk declined - Checkuser doesn't publicly comment on the relationships between registered accounts and IP addresses. This will have to be investigated on the basis of behaviour only. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 21:35, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
•  Clerk note: I've blocked 172.56.0.0/18 for a week, as there's been much disruption from this IP range and not only from whomever is operating it as shown here. I doubt that it's Lightbreather, as there would need to be an explanation as to why she would open up a sockpuppet investigation on herself. 1 @Hell in a Bucket: If you think it is Neotarf, I'd like you to support that statement with some evidence, please. Mike V • Talk 22:21, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
• The range has been blocked and most commenters agree this is very unlikely to be Lightbreather, and while it does appear to probably be a banned editor, there is no solid evidence that it is Neotarf. I'm marking the case as closed. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 00:45, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

---