Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Trust Is All You Need/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Trust Is All You Need

22 May 2019

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


User:Trust Is All You Need ran into serious problems in May 2018, when they were blocked.A major issue was abusive behaviour and insisting that they are right. At the time they threatened to resort to sockpuppetry here, which was highlighted by an admin here. They also repeteadly evaded their block, see here. In the last week User:Politikk has been contributing to Talk:Council of People's Commissars of the Soviet Union. This has shown a similarity to the edits of User:Trust Is All You Need:

  • An obsession with redirecting pages concerned with various People's Commissariats to Ministries of the Soviet Union:
See this June 2010, this September 2010 or this also September 2010 This person also commented on my user page here for example.

Back in 2010 I was involved in a discussion here (I was using the User name Harry Potter at the time)

  • Repeated assertions that they are right and other people are wrong
See here for example
  • Swearing and using capital letters for emphasis.
See here
See for use of capitals

Compare with this recent edit Leutha (talk) 16:36, 22 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

21 January 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

This is a new sockmaster for me so I apologize if I go on too long. A few days ago I was looking at the history of Chinese Communist Party and I noticed that more than half of the current text was authored by a banned account, Trust Is All You Need. From reviewing the discussion on their talk page I gathered that they had vowed "I TIAYN, will be forced to revert the vandalism until you unblock me. If that doesn't work, I'll have to sockpuppet until you revert the unfair block on me. You have given me no other choice. This vandalism has to stop. Per WP:No original research, WP:OBVIOUS and WP:UNDUE.”[1]. Having vowed to never stop socking unless unblocked and never having been unblocked I became suspicious that Trust Is All You Need was still editing Chinese Communist Party (that page is the crown jewel of their wikipedia career after all). I then spent a while looking at the talk page for Chinese Communist Party focusing on the period after they had been blocked. Comparing argument style and POV pushed BunnyyHop stood out like a sore thumb. Looking at an interaction history between BunnyyHop and Trust Is All You Need revealed a staggering amount of crossover (especially as >400 of BunnyyHop’s ~1000 edits have been to just four pages).

From BunnyyHop’s history I noticed that they were engaged in long running ANI case (a page on which Trust Is All You Need was also a frequent flyer), reading the first part of that discussion I was struck by how similar the wall of texts produced by BunnyyHop and Trust Is All You Need are. I made an addendum to that discussion asking if BunnyyHop had ever been checked against Trust Is All You Need (I had not yet found this page). There @TimothyBlue: informed me that they had already suspected AxderWraith Crimson of being a connected sock [2]. I received no pushback from the two admins connected to Trust Is All You Need’s blocking and early sock busting but both declined to dive into the book length discussion on that page (a stance I share with them, walls of text against walls of text become inscrutable). Even BunnyyHop said go for it! Learning that my concerns were shared by others and that no check had yet been made I searched for and found this page. The most obvious thing that ties the three accounts together is the very small group of pages edited and the walls of text produced by them. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 20:51, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

All three also make very liberal use of user talk page decorations, although thats a less clear link than discussed above. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 21:00, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

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

  • With regards to BunnyyHop account (Portuguese) and AxderWraith they have nearly identical infoboxs the user also suddenly upon creation knew about BunnyyHop. AxderWraith is extremely clearly a sock, or at least has prior extensive knowledge on Wikipedia. Des Vallee (talk) 00:28, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Trust Is All You Need and BunnyHop share overlaps on 15 articles, [3] but because they are all in the realm of Communist countries and closely related subjects (such as Totalitarianism), and there is no unusual outlier overlap to tie them together, the Editor Interaction Analyzer report is not very helpful in determining if there is a socking relationship between the two.
    AxderWraith Crimson only has 9 mainspace edits in total, none of which overlap with the other two editors in this SPI report, so, again, the EIA report is not helpful in determining if there is a relationship between them.
    I'm afraid that behavioral analysis will be required to settle this issue. Beyond My Ken (talk) 01:15, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Felt it was reasonable to let BunnyyHop know about this SPI by posting a notice and a fair chance to counter with evidence. Vikram Vincent 07:40, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I think all accounts who actively edit from the pro-communist positions in this subject area should checked as potential socks of User:Jacob Peters, but that would probably be a tall order, and I do not have time to check who might be a sock of whom... My very best wishes (talk) 16:13, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I hope I'm doing this right to respond to this accusation against me, but what Des Vallee brings up against me (which seem to be the main weight here of the accusation, correct me if I am wrong) is more or less, incorrect. I will admit though, that I am a heavy user of Wikipedia (I read it most every week) and it's why I decided around now to create an account, because I figured I ought to know my way around the website and all. I knew about Bunnyyhop mainly because I read a lot of talk pages on articles and like clickin the little links that lead to the person, so I can see what else they do here and there and what they think. Then I found the whole controversy on the individual in question, and as such, sent my condolences to them, as I felt they were being a bit unfairly blasted there. I hope this clears it all up, at least on my POV on this all and such. AxderWraith Crimson (talk) 16:23, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Request CheckUser. At minimum, the two currently running accounts can be checked against each other. The previous accounts are older, but maybe the CU results for those are archived and can be compared (not sure). Crossroads -talk- 18:53, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I don't see any evidence provided that TIAYN and Bunnyyhop are the same editors. TIAYN claimed to be a member of the Norwegian Labour Party[4] and identified as a social democrat on their user page. Bunnyyhop contributed to the Portuguese Wikipedia and has pictures of Marx and Lenin on their user page. TIAYN's discussion posts also are shorter and bear no similarity in style. The fact that Horse Eye's Back and My very best wishes disagreed with both editors is very weak evidence. It's not as if someone must be either a committed anti-Communist or a committed supporter of the Communist Party of China. There's a whole range of views in between which is where most scholarship lies. TFD (talk) 17:13, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@The Four Deuces: please correct your comment, I have never interacted with Trust Is All You Need. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:25, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry if I implied that. You have extensively argued on the Taiwan talk page that Taiwan is a sovereign state rather than a part of China. So it seems that your views on the Communist Party of China differ sharply from those of Bunnyyhop. Am I correct in that assumption? TFD (talk) 17:42, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have argued that WP:RS and other countries treat Taiwan as its own thing and not a part of China. I don’t believe I have ever specifically argued "that Taiwan is a sovereign state rather than a part of China.” nor do I believe I have ever revealed my personal opinion on the issue. Once again please do not mischaracterize the actions of other editors. I appreciate the apology but your previous comment did a lot more than imply btw, it explicitly states that I have disagreed with Trust Is All You Need when we have no overlap as far as I can tell (they appear to have been banned before I began editing). Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:53, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You said that TIAYN and Bunnyyhop have a pushed a similar POV. Would it be fair to say you do not share that POV? TFD (talk) 18:03, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for refining the question, it would be fair to say that. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 18:09, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

22 February 2024

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Editing same obscure articles. All realted to Communist states. Same series of articles for nominations [5] vs [6]. Doing same type of change to info box data [7] vs [8]...same here [9] vs [10]Moxy- 15:02, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

04 June 2024

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Similar name to another sock, TheUzbek. In terms of smaller edits, TIAYN and TheUzbek were focused on descriptors of communist states and parties. While only one edit fitting this criteria has been made by TheTajik, the similarity in name and editing timeframe corresponding to when other socks of TIAYN were banned is just too coincidental to not be a duck.

Notably, TheTajik added a descriptor to the article Chinese Communist Party while ignoring the editors' note, which was added in a debate on the matter that TheUzbek participated in (see Talk:Chinese Communist Party/Archive 8#Position: Far-Left). Yue🌙 00:15, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
  • The account name is suspicious but the behavioral evidence doesn't quite match up. Also, the timing of The Tajik being created weeks before TheUzbek was discovered as a sockpuppet, and sleeper accounts don't seem to fit the pattern either. Overall I'm going to err on the side of not blocking, for now. The WordsmithTalk to me 21:04, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Trust_Is_All_You_Need/Archive&oldid=1234198130"