User talk:ToBeFree

Please click here to add a new message!

Please note that you are currently not logged in.

This is not a general problem – you can leave a message anyway, but your IP address might change during the discussion, and I might end up talking to a wall. Creating an account does not require an e-mail address; all you need is a password and a name. You are not required to do this, but please consider creating an account before starting long-term interactions with other users. Thank you very much in advance.

Archives [megabytes]

1, 2, 3, 4, 5

I don't know what's going on with this KnoweldgeSeeker but it's certainly not appropriate.   –Skywatcher68 (talk) 18:17, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Skywatcher68, thanks for reverting – that kind of silly promotion is something I'd rather expect from a student than a paid editor, though. Technically a "promotion-only account", practically not worth blocking unless they continue. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:13, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hey ToBefree.

How are you? Hope you have been well.

Here we go again, one year after you solve the problem of sockpuppetry on Baruch Spinoza article, it seems the problem is affecting th article again. Here’s my full report:

Nico Gombert https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Nico_Gombert

Account created on May 16, 2024 at 23:59.

He is currently edit warring to change a stable version of Baruch Spinoza page, making a point to describe him as a “Dutch philosopher”, a matter that disrupted this wikipedia page many times in the past because he was born in Holland as a refugee, his family had to leave Portugal due inquisition. Amsterdam hosted many Jews at the time, when they were persecuted everywhere else in Europe. But they were refugees, not citizens. So, since this is a matter with no consensus, Spinoza description on Wikipedia was made without claiming any nationality just to avoid unnecessary potential disruptions.

1 year ago though, a Dutch user Awater01 started disrupting the article, edit warring, saying it was unacceptable that the article was not claiming his nationality. Other editors explained this was unnecessary because there is no consensus about it and not claiming any nationality was the most impartial way to go. He carried on edit warring and due to 3 reversion rule he created other accounts, all of them doing the same edition. It turned out he had 4 accounts/sock puppets (see here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Cornelis_Dopper)

Now we have new sock puppets with same behavior doing the very same edition/reversion for the first time since those other sock puppets were banned:

Nico Gombert https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Nico_Gombert

created his account on May 16, 2024 at 23:59.

He is certainly a sock puppet of GoneWithThePuffery.

GoneWithThePuffery (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:GoneWithThePuffery): Joint February 18, 2024‎, and was banned on May 15, 2024 for persistently making disruptive editions. His final edit warring was in Baruch Spinoza article, doing the same thing Nico Gombert is doing: trying to claim his nationality, even though there is an waring in article text saying “Not put Dutch here”.

Interesting point is that this user, who is now banned had already been denounced as a sock puppet, but it seems there was no clear evidence at that time, so he was allowed to carry on editing. (here is the discussionhttps://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&oldid=1223997015#GoneWithThePuffery).

So it seems both Nico Gombert and GoneWithThePuffery are the same person. However, given that GoneWithThePuffery account was created recently and his behaviour was really similar to a sock puppet, I decided to do by myself further investigations that took some weeks. After a deep analysis on GoneWithThePuffery former edits, I found out a Dutch nationalist/patriot who basically dedicates his editions almost entirely to Dutch subjects on Wikipedia. The user is DavidDijkgraaf, he has an account fairly old, was created in 2020.

On May 15, 2024‎ DavidDijkgraaf was the first one to start the disruption on the page, by claiming a Dutch nationality for Spinoza. A couple of hours later GoneWithThePuffery keeps making another string of other disruptions and edit warring. This ended up leading GoneWithThePuffery to be banned.

So I decided to wait to see a further evidence that DavidDijkgraaf was in fact the head account operating those sock puppets. A further evidence came up few days later, when DavidDijkgraaf started searching for information on how a sock puppet can be caught. (see here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Eastfarthingan&oldid=1227571489#Sockpuppets).

So I decided to make a trap to see if he would make the same edition on the Baruch Spinoza page if I reverted the article for the stable version. So I deleted “Dutch” (see Baruch Spinoza history - 13:52, 8 June 2024). Then the new user Nico Gombert came up and reverted it. (see 13:21, 12 June 2024). I was wondering what should I do, then I remembered that one of the main reasons why sock puppets are used is to avoid breaking the 3 reversions rules and to give the impression that there are more editors who agree with a certain edition. So I decided to revert Nico Gombert edit (see at 17:04, 12 June 2024‎) and then it happened what I was expecting: on the same day few minutes latter DavidDijkgraaf pops up and makes the same reversion Nico Gombert did few hours earlier ( see 18:17, 12 June 2024‎). To confirm what I had discovered I undid it again (see 01:32, 13 June 2024‎), logically if it follows the typical behavior of a sock puppet the next one to revert my edition should be Nico Gombert, and this exactly what happened (see 16:39, 13 June 2024‎). Then I friendly even tried to warn him not to carry on that behaviour, it didn’t work he acted the same way as when he was using GoneWithThePuffery account. So once I already caught him, I did not to revert his latest reversion. I think the better way is reporting what I found out and let you guys solve this issue. It is possible that DavidDijkgraaf have more sock puppets but you probably have better tools than I have to confirm this. PepGuardi (talk) 08:23, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Having a look soon ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:26, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I did have a look and blocked a couple accounts, all confirmed to Puffery. I cannot confirm that they are the same as the sockmaster who was mentioned. Drmies (talk) 22:21, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, Drmies and PepGuardi! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 05:25, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much guys. Could you take a closer look at DavidDijkgraaf? I spent some weeks observing his behavior on Wikipedia after GoneWithThePuffery be block. I was sure that GoneWithThePuffery was just a sock puppet of someone else because he had a pretty new account. I start suspecting that DavidDijkgraaf was the sockmaster because he has a pretty old account and was basically doing the same thing as GoneWithThePuffery (disrupting the article by adding “Dutch’ everywhere in the article. Besides, a further evidence is that his edits have coincidentally been coordinated with both sock puppets now blocked (GoneWithThePuffery and DavidDijkgraaf). On Baruch Spinoza history you can see he not only making the very same edition those two sock puppets made (see DavidDijkgraaf insisting in this edition https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Baruch_Spinoza&diff=next&oldid=1228703705 and here again https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Baruch_Spinoza&diff=prev&oldid=1223954128) now comparing it with sock puppet Nico edit war we can see both were making the very same edition (se Nico edits here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Baruch_Spinoza&diff=next&oldid=1228864378 and here as well https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Baruch_Spinoza&diff=next&oldid=1228933958).

Here a further evidence: DavidDijkgraaf edits comes always before those two sock puppet start a edit war with someone. He edits on 15 May 2024‎ then GoneWithThePuffery start an edit war at on 15 May 2024‎ GoneWithThePuffery followed by another edit on 15 May 2024‎. Now see day and time David insist in the same edition Nico did (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Baruch_Spinoza&diff=next&oldid=1228703705) then I revert it and soon later Nico goes back David edition starting a edit war (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Baruch_Spinoza&diff=next&oldid=1228703705 and here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Baruch_Spinoza&diff=next&oldid=1228933958). So we can see a pretty clear coordination between DavidDijkgraaf edits and GoneWithThePuffery and Nico edits not only in terms of which edits they make but also when they do. PepGuardi (talk) 07:40, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but I see no evidence that makes me suspect Dijkgraaf of socking. Adding "Dutch" (and removing it) is apparently a thing to do in this article. In the checks I ran nothing suspicious pertaining to that editor appeared. Drmies (talk) 16:20, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the reply Drmies :)

Surely only the same edit would not be enough, but don’t you think it’s too much coincidence that Dijkgraaf edits happen around the same time as the two other sock puppets.

For example, see day and time Dijkgraaf insists in the same edition Nico did (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Baruch_Spinoza&diff=next&oldid=1228703705) then I revert it and soon later Nico puts it back to Dijkgraaf edition starting an edit war (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Baruch_Spinoza&diff=next&oldid=1228703705 and here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Baruch_Spinoza&diff=next&oldid=1228933958).

Now compare that to another Dijkgraaf edit once again right before one of sock puppets start an edit war: he edits here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Baruch_Spinoza&oldid=1223955646 right before GoneWithThePuffery starts an edit war here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Baruch_Spinoza&oldid=1223977533 and here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Baruch_Spinoza&oldid=1223998508, few hours later GoneWithThePuffery was blocked.

So he’s making the very same edits as those two sock puppets. Could be coincidence? Of course. But then we can see that his edits happen always around the time those two sock puppets start an edit war/dispute with other editors. The same edits and around the same time as sock puppets edits. Ok… but these “coincidences” do not stop, here another evidence: right in between the time that Nico and GoneWithThePuffery sock puppet accounts are banned, we can see Dijkgraaf searching for “How can you know that you are dealing with a sockpuppet?” on Eastfarthingan talk page (see here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Eastfarthingan&oldid=1227630502). He of course gives whatever explanation on why he’s searching for that.

Of course, if isolated, each of those three facts would not be enough for suspecting of sock puppetry. However, the point is that we have all those three evidences - together - appointing to Dijkgraaf: 1) he makes the very same edits as those editors already blocked for sock puppetry. 2) those same edits happened around the time (same day) as those suck puppets edits. 3) Right in between time time that those two suck puppets were blocked, Dijkgraaf was searching for “How can you know that you are dealing with a sockpuppet?”. I mean, doesn’t it look too much of coincidences? PepGuardi (talk) 18:14, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

	König
	Thank u for improving the wiki. Lionel Cristiano? 00:07, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The barnstar colors must be soccer-related. Thank you very much, Lionel Cristiano! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 05:27, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yessir and happy father's day. 🥰 Lionel Cristiano^? 06:05, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, today is international Father's Day! Interesting. To you too! In Germany, it's usually celebrated on Ascension Day though! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:06, 16 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]