Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Fredrick day

User:Fredrick day

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.
Suspected sockpuppeteer

Fredrick day (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Report submission by

Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 04:47, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence

These anons have been harassing me for the past couple of days, vandalizing pages in my userspace ([4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10]) and maliciously changing comments I have made in AfDs and on AN/I ([11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16]) and making abusive responses to some of my comments in the AN/I thread on Obuibo Mbstbo ([17]). Looking through the contributions, you will see a whole host of other abusive edits as well.

I believe these are linked to Fredrick day for the following reasons:

For obvious reasons, the individual is undoubtedly someone who has been involved in the Obuibo Mbstbo thread on AN/I.
The individual has a good understanding of the inner workings of Wikipedia. According to [18], Fredrick day has nearly 6000 edits in 14 months of editing, including over 1400 in the project and project talk namespaces; additionally, his very first edit makes it clear that he was already then very familiar with how Wikipedia works ([19]), with references to "original research" and "third party verifiable sources". Yes, this is true of just about everyone else who has been involved in the OM ordeal, but there's more to narrow it down:
The individual tends to be more disposed to deleting articles that don't meet certain standards than I do. Fredrick day's user page is essentially a shrine to Wikipedia's deletion process, and as mentioned above the anon editor targeted many of my comments in AfD discussions.
As of this writing Fredrick day's user account has been inactive since Thursday evening, March 20th, and the anons have been active ever since.
The individual has made a couple of suspicious posts regarding Fredrick day, or has specifically targeted his vandalism towards comments of mine that referenced Fredrick day ([20], [21], [22], [23])
The individual has a specific bone to pick against me, as his efforts have been targeted at me alone. I have had serious disagreements with many others in this case, including Equazcion (talk · contribs), Blueboy96 (talk · contribs), Friday (talk · contribs), Rodhullandemu (talk · contribs), and Black Kite (talk · contribs). We have been able to keep these disagreements non-personal, though, and I think everyone realizes that we all have the same goal in mind; we just differ in how to approach it. Black Kite and Rodhullandemu have been extremely helpful in dealing with this spate of vandalism, Friday has defended me in the past and I've seen enough of him to know that he's flat-out above this. The other two I will explain later. However, I did chastise Fredrick day for his approach to removing obvious constructive edits made by OM's socks while they were blocked; the initial attacks began shortly after one of those posts.
The IP addresses used by the anon all belong to Europe's IP address allocation agency, and Blueboy96 and Equazcion both are in the United States. Thus, the only user I have had a serious disagreement with in this matter who is unaccounted for is Fredrick day. Though he has not (to my knowledge) ever stated his location explicitly, a couple of days before these attacks began he mentioned on my talk page that he had been raised in a totalitarian state ([24])--perhaps this was a Warsaw Pact nation, which were all indeed located in Europe.

Comments

Guilty as charged and I'd like another 82 offences to be taken into consideration. However as a minor point, it's not that I was sockpuppeting - I've abandoned the Fredrick day account as I can best do what I do using an IP address, I've only logged in to make this statement. --Fredrick day 13:09, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great call, Weber. The user identified himself, apparently by accident, at [25], where he used a cryptic "Section 31" but forgot he was still logged in, then noticed his error. Yes, ironic indeed. One making charges of sock puppetry and meat puppetry made against serial accounts which never overlapped because the user had spiked the accounts (perhaps intending not to come back or for other reasons), who then created new accounts when he did come back, so they weren't sock puppets in the original meaning of the term, and then making charges against me as a sock or meat puppet, which is the opposite of the case, I'm obviously independent as can be seen clearly from edit histories; turns out to be a true puppet master, using IP edits to conceal his identity. Given that he lied extensively in the posts under IP, I don't believe for a moment that he intended to abandon the Fredrick day account. Note the comment about "I can best do what I do using an IP address." This user intends to continue disruption. I may raise an AN/I report about what he did -- among other things, the current flap over User:Larry E. Jordan was instigated by him as an IP editor, and I suspect he was feeding information privately to some administrators as well. Or not. I think, at the moment, I am abandoning efforts to reform Wikipedia structure. They are premature, as is shown by how vulnerable we were to this disruption. Someone wants us to hate each other, as much as he hates us, and too many, currently, listen, and drop WP:AGF, policy, as if it were a hot potato. I've heard of this one before. --Abd (talk) 14:46, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So you are dropping your OM socks? good stuff. section31 --87.114.141.40 (talk) 14:50, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think IPs really count, as long as the original account wasn't blocked and the user isn't trying to influence votes or anything. I haven't seen any actual abusive socking here. Equazcion •✗/C • 16:05, 23 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Did you not look at the diffs I provided? He vandalized my user page and maliciously edited comments I had made in various venues on WP not just once but several times. How is that not abusive? Kurt Weber (Go Colts!) 18:10, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If Equazcion doesn't see any abusive socking here.... I will leave the conclusion as an exercise for the reader. AFAIK, Equazcion cooperated with Fredrick day in a few things. I was checkusered for less. --Abd (talk) 17:15, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No I do, sort of. I hadn't looked at the diffs before. I'm not sure if this falls under abusive sockpuppeteering per se, but it certainly is inappropriate behavior, including blatant vandalism. When I think of abusive socking I think of unduly influencing discussions and consensus, posting multiple votes, circumventing 3RR and such. This is really just inappropriate behavior, from the sample I've looked at. The socking doesn't have much to do with it, IMO. Equazcion •✗/C • 19:12, 23 Mar 2008 (UTC)

He is now also evading a block. Again, Equazcion considered prior history for Larry E. Jordan to be abusive "sock puppetry," when Jordan, in fact, did none of what he described, I won't bother with diffs unless it becomes important. See, now, the threats from this puppet master on Talk for TenOfAllTrades, shown above with IPs, the latest one being: [26]. He claims to be "war driving," but there is little or no sign of that actually being the case. I won't describe what he's doing, just in case some unsophisticated vandal reads this. Range block should actually be effective, if, unfortunately, sloppy. Makes it inconvenient for him, and low probability of collateral damage.--Abd (talk) 19:25, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So, now, he does get off his duff and go out and drive around. What's the weather like? New IP added above, indeed different ISP. --Abd (talk) 19:42, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I consider evading a block to be abusive sock puppetry, even though I neglected to mention it in my last comment. I'm not sure how Fred is evading a block, but if he is then sure, block the IPs. I'm not sure what you're complaining about, Abd, as I already agreed that the behavior is inappropriate. I'm just not sure it can be considered abusive sockpuppetry. That's just semantics though. The behavior is inappropriate no matter what the technical "violation". Block 'em all as far as I'm concerned. Equazcion •✗/C • 19:59, 23 Mar 2008 (UTC)

Conclusions

User:Fredrick day blocked indefinitely by TenOfAllTrades for harassment. Equazcion •✗/C • 15:52, 25 Mar 2008 (UTC)