Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kolossoni/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Kolossoni

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

24 March 2024[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

As a result of this filing, I looked into the editing history at both the relevant talkpage and of the overall history of Kolossoni. Turtle Historian was created in October 2023, and EIA shows that out of their total 69 edits, 46 are pages Kolossoni has edited; their fourth edit on WP at Lady Saso was to remove material[1] about Chinese ancestry that Kolossoni had previously downplayed.[2] Their eighth edit to WP was classic sock/master interplay of giving Kolossoni a barnstar.[3]

Their most recent edit was related to the AN filing, where they appeared at Talk:Korean influence on Japanese culture, an article they have never edited, specifically to support Kolossoni's argument,[4] where they described the other editor as "nationalistic Japanese", the same group that Kolossoni states on their userpage that they "detest". Again, Turtle Historian uses an edit summary here[5] that echoes the same language on Kolossoni's userpage about replacing sources/text: "beware of them being replaced at any time once a suitable alternative is found i.e. direct quotes."

Both accounts have similar ES styles:

The smoking gun is this edit summary about readability and "reduced biased nuance":[18][19] Grandpallama (talk) 17:25, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since this SPI was opened, Kolossoni has stated they also have a long editing history under yet another account.[20] Grandpallama (talk) 13:03, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Additional likely sock (not counting the years-old account Kolossoni has acknowledged in their last edit) uncovered that shows almost identical behavior to Kolossoni and Turtle Historian. When adding this name to the EIA, the overlap between the three becomes pretty clear. Like Turtle Historian, 素敵なカタチ gave a barnstar[21] to the Kolossoni account. Like Turtle Historian, 素敵なカタチ also used an edit summary[22] that quotes text from Kolossoni's userpage: "DIRECT QUOTES TRUMP PARAPHRASES AND PARAPHRASES TRUMP CONJECTURES". 素敵なカタチ shares Kolossoni's interest in "the Wang publication".[23][24][25] Both accounts are interested in the same specific etymology details at the same page.[26][27] Kolossoni and 素敵なカタチ both dropped warnings on the same user's page.[28][29] 素敵なカタチ shares all the ES characteristics of the other two accounts, including the use of the + symbol, grammar/spelling fix, improved readability, added context, etc.[30][31][32][33][34]

I only noticed this sock because Kolossoni pointedly removed mention of both Turtle Historian and 素敵なカタチ from the barnstars on their userpage[35] shortly after they filed the AN notice that initiated this scrutiny. Even if there was some sympathy toward Kolossoni's WP:BRO argument, it strains credulity that a third account would match the behavior of the other two and yet somehow be a different user. Grandpallama (talk) 01:03, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

Turtle Historian is a housemate (a Korean-Australian) of mine who started Wikipedia after learning from me on how to use it. The similarity in editing comments is due to them learning from my personal reasoning (simple and concise). It is not a sock puppet of my account, but an individual of similar (but mostly different) interests.

The account solely provides information on Korean-related articles while I am specialized in Japanese (hence why I provide translations of Japanese articles and such). The opinions made by Turtle Historian is theirs alone and do not coincide with my own interests in trying to improve articles in regards to Japan and its history. It may be true that the individual white knighted me for personal reasons, but the opinion made was neither malicious nor ill-intended as the person was sharing their opinion when it came to Korean matters.

That is all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kolossoni (talk • contribs) 17:44, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the "mostly different" interests are why there is more than two-thirds editing overlap. WP:BRO Grandpallama (talk) 17:55, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is not completely unreasonable for two housemates who are WP users not to share information and opinions when it comes to common interests. Especially when I am the one who introduced the individual to WP. Kolossoni (talk) 18:00, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Allow me to demonstrate. Here are the articles that "overlap" with Turtle Historian out of numerous of ones that do not.
Wani (scholar) - for Kolossoni - Has to do with Japanese clans such as Kawachinofumi clan, Yamatonoaya clan and Hata clan. - for Turtle Historian - a Korean individual in Korean history. Hence why my edits are more than the latter's and the reason behind the lack of contributions from Turtle Historian in regards to other similar individuals such as Yuzuki no Kimi and Achi no omi where I have made MULTIPLE edits. [7 to 3]
Genetic history of East Asians - for Kolossoni - Mostly edited genealogy about the Japanese, not Koreans. - for Turtle Historian - Mostly edited genealogy about the Koreans and not the Japanese as seen in [36]. However, I am more interested in Japanese geneaology than Turtle, hence why my edits are more than the latter's. [31 to 5]
Genetic and anthropometric studies on Japanese people - Same reasoning as above, but my edits outnumber Turtle Historian's as it has nothing to do with Koreans. [22 to 1]
Talk:Korean influence on Japanese culture - The talk page where Turtle Historian came to defend my position, hence why it was their first time posting on the article. [4 to 1]
Byeonhan confederacy - An article that has to do with Korea, but also Japan as it is related to the Jinhan confederacy (Silla) which has ties to Hata clan and the clans mentioned above. Hence why my edits are much less than Turtle Historian's. [2 to 5]
Jinhan confederacy - Same reasoning as above, but again, my edits are more about Japan than Korea unlike Turtle's. [6 to 11]
Heo Hwang-ok - An individual who is believed to be of East Asian descent being misrepresented as South Asian. As an EAST ASIAN history, language and genealogy editor (see my talk page) it is a common interest to evaluate the individual as the correct ethnicity and stop the spread of false information. However, I lost interest in the topic (last edited 77 days ago, similar to Lady Saso with the last edit being 70 days ago) and Turtle Historian seems to have kept it going as the the latest major activity occurred merely a few days ago as seen in [37]. [24 to 14]
Therefore, you cannot claim Turtle Historian and I to be the same individual. There are overlaps for sure, however, the actions taken and intentions are VASTLY different with one having more passion/interest in certain topics more than the other. Kolossoni (talk) 18:24, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And to those who are suspicious as to my contributions to Korean history: see User talk:Eyesacker for an interaction that took place a month ago which explains my interest in certain topics in regards to Korea (mainly the confederacies listed above). This should illustrate again how much I am more knowledgeable on the history of Japan than Korea. Kolossoni (talk) 18:34, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The takeaway here seems to be acknowledgment that a CU is going to confirm both accounts are being operated by the same IP address. Add in the behavioral evidence (editing in support of one another, using identical language, expressing similar attitudes about "nationalistic" editors), and everything else posted here is more I swear it's all a coincidence noise. The doubling down is concerning. Grandpallama (talk) 20:06, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It would be folly to think that housemates will not share IP addresses with one another, residing in the same place, hence why it is called "housemates" but that is not the issue here.
It is whether Turtle Historian is a sockpuppet account of mine which is clearly not. Also, you are over-generalizing when it comes to your accusations.
using identical language - using "+" as an edit reasoning, or writing "improving readability" or "grammar fix" should not dictate if it is the same individual. Those are minuscule, not to mention a VERY commonly used way of commenting on edits.
editing in support of one another - this has happened ONCE during our time here on WP which is the issue at hand.
expressing similar attitudes about "nationalistic" editors - again, you are putting words into our mouths. My comment was directed at User:SLIMHANNYA who used a derogatory term in regards to an entire race which was also declared reasonable by an admin. Turtle Historian was directing his "nationalistic" comment to possible nationalistic Japanese readers. The two are not interchangeable.
everything else posted here is more I swear it's all a coincidence noise - then you have read and understood nothing of the points I have made above, seems much like a witch hunt. Kolossoni (talk) 20:21, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If sharing an IP address without acknowledging it beforehand becomes an issue, I (and Turtle Historian too) will take full responsibility.
However, in the case of being accused of sockpuppeting, it will never be acknowledged. Kolossoni (talk) 20:23, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The talk page where Turtle Historian came to defend my position - while I'm skeptical of your explanation, I have to ask, since you were oddly vague here. According to your explanation of what happened... did you ask Turtle Historian to come back you up? Did you discuss the article with them? If not, how on did they end up on a page they had never previously edited, deciding to make their first-ever article-talk comment backing you up? You say that they "came to defend your position", which gives the impression that you're saying they arrived at that article and talk page with the intent, from the start, of providing backup for you. --Aquillion (talk) 21:37, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It would be nonsensical to claim this was purely out of coincidence so I'm going to be honest. Yes, it was indeed conveyed through discord that such "reckless edit" was being permitted towards the article.
It was a heat of the discussion that got the best of both of us, especially after the inflammatory reasoning the editor made with Korean genes being "Kimchi juice" in the pool of Japanese geneaology, which quite reasonably baffled both of us.
However, I have not asked for any backup in any way shape or form. If I did, I would have replied to Turtle Historian's comment and pretend that I never knew the individual.
Turtle Historian has lack of complex knowledge when it comes to Japanese clans, therefore I believe they stopped at talking about the family tree being outright removed, whereas I went further discussing about the ins and outs of the Japanese claim over their ancestors/lineage and the contradictory logic behind the editor's reasoning. Whichever the case, I reiterate, the actions made by both of us are NOT mutual and are opinions made by our own distinct opinions on the matter, albeit I was the first one to present the notion to Turtle Historian off site. Again, I did NOT ask Turtle Historian to support my claim nor did I intend to gang up on the editor by pretending to not know them.
These are two separate responses that stems from a single rooted frustration/bafflement. Kolossoni (talk) 23:00, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And my two cents in regards to Turtle Historian's rather unorthodox response is because they are of Korean descent and being called "Kimchi juice" was deemed a personal attack on their ethnicity and their people. I am not certain of this however. It is only speculation, but knowing the individual's passion for Korean history (something he majored in as well), it is not surprising that they acted in a brash manner when felt attacked. Kolossoni (talk) 23:08, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also note that the one article talk page comment mentioned above, here, coupled with the barnstar given from one account to the other, are the only talk page comments that Turtle Historian has ever made. I'm similarly skeptical of Kolossoni's explanations above, but even if they were true the level of WP:MEATPUPPETRY here would clearly be a problem - it is not credible that their "roommate" could find that talk page and decide to comment there on their own. --Aquillion (talk) 21:37, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That is because I am the only known WP user Turtle Historian knows of and follows. It is not uncommon for an invited user to keep track of their "mentor (a term that I use lightly)". The barnstar was given as a semi-joke after witnessing how ardent I was when it comes to Wikipedia. As in case with any barnstars, it does not require any authorization from mods, etc and is entirely community driven.
    I understand that skepticism is to be expected from anonymous individuals, but you must also stop and think in the perspective of a new user who has never really used WP as an editor before. Kolossoni (talk) 22:48, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I suspect he was either working with a friend or using two accounts to get his edits through based on unreasonable claims. Kolossoni posted a genealogy[38] that misleadingly claimed that many Japanese clan figures, such as Tokugawa Ieyasu and Oda Nobunaga, were descended from King Muryeong of ancient Korea and were culturally influenced by ancient Korea, and Turtle Historian agreed with him. Kolossoni claims to have knowledge of Japanese history, but almost all people with a basic knowledge of Japanese history would disagree with the genealogy he posted. This is because these warlord clans are not the descendants of the ancient Korean royalty and have not been culturally influenced by the ancient Korean royalty at all. I have explained here how the genealogy he posted is wrong and misleading to people. Please see my post which is more recent post.[39] If he really has knowledge of Japanese history, I would like to know why he posted such a genealogy.----SLIMHANNYA (talk) 13:06, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not a content expert in this area, but Kolossoni has indisputably edit warred there to reinsert their homemade genealogical charts in defiance of WP:ONUS. That sort of socking (using the Turtle Historian account in a discussion to support the notion there is consensus for inclusion of disputed content) is especially problematic. Grandpallama (talk) 13:13, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

08 April 2024[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]

Kolossoni just got blocked a week ago. Their edits were reverted. A new account now emerges and their first edit is to restore one of Kolossoni's edits back in again. [40]

And from what I can glean from this edit they restored. It seems to be an aggressive Korean nationalist pov where they show a lot of disdain towards Chinese sources for dictating Korean history. And seeing they regard this opinionated edit as being worthy of restoring.[41] This at least shows they have the same political stance as Kolossoni.

Kolossoni also revealed to others he was Australian. I am guessing they didn't want to edit anonymously because it will reveal openly their IP address and geolocation, which probably is Australian. I suspect they probably created other new accounts to aim to restore their many edits that has been reverted. So given the strong case, I think it's justified to request check user to look into it. 49.179.64.8 (talk) 03:01, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

Obvious sock is obvious. However, the filer needs a check of their own, as that IP range has been engaging in some unusual editing of its own. See here where I opened a discussion at Girth Summit's talkpage. It's starting to look like there is potential crossfire between different sock accounts. Grandpallama (talk) 03:29, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not only is it irrelevant. There was never any real evidence to justify suspecting me in this matter, and I should not even be mentioned. And this is the problem for me. Like when you accuse someone of being a pedo, it doesn't matter if there is no evidence. At the absence of evidence, people are going to wonder on it. Suspicion will rise regardless. I know that check user will not show any connection with me to Kolossoni. But I come to realise it doesn't even matter when you are innocent, the more you talk about yourself not being Kolossoni. The more certain people are going to wonder if it's true and that is too insane. I am not Kolossoni and there never was any real evidence to suggest he is me. And should not have to put up with unfair allegations. So show real proof he is me before accusing me again. 49.179.64.8 (talk) 03:41, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also if you believed he was me. Why didn't you straight away file a report? It's because you knew you had no real evidence and just fishing. And since you brought this up and it's going to be addressed here anyways. I want to say this in my defence;
I want to express my extreme frustration with the perils of anonymous IP editing which reveals your geolocation to everyone. I know there's many of my Aussie countrymen out there on Wikipedia and that anonymous editing may make it difficult for others to confidently distinguish me from other known Australian editors.
But people should be aware of the accusations made against me. And their evidence is just crazy bad.
Their friend first accused me of being Kolossoni and their biggest reason for that was because I gave him the impression that I am some Korean nationalist. [42] and despite I barely mentioned Korea in an article, they used my edit here[43], as being their ultimate proof of me being a Korean nationalist. And I have really tried in vain to explain to them that edit doesn't justify making me a Korean nationalist.
They also had even tried to connect me to an anonymous IP user[44] who lives in Victoria, a different state to me but same country, and same big national phone network, but had last edited 2 years ago and on articles I never even edited before. Yet according to them and their "magical thinking" mentality, they written a post saying I am them [45] and despite how unhinged and baseless that logic is, this is what I have to deal with here. It's also how I became first aware of Kolossoni after people started falsely accusing me of being them with the above reasoning.
Initially, I had brushed off the accusations confidently, knowing they were too ludicrous. However, after reading the exaggerated fabrications about me and seeing the full support given from their friend, I am starting to feel uncomfortable despite my innocence. Which is insane as I know I am not them. I ultimately realized I don't need to always explain myself and make myself feel unfairly insecure. Unless you have compelling evidence that I am Kolossoni, and can show it here for everyone to see. Stop accusing me of being him as I am not him. And if you believe I am him, then file a report against me and say I am Kolossoni, and show your evidence and let others review its merit.49.179.64.8 (talk) 04:44, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is odd. .49.179.64.8 Files this and then goes on to write as though they are Kolossoni.-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 11:59, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Deepfriedokra, whether or not it is definitively the same person, the quacking is loud, with a lot of similar language. The IP changes regularly--you can see that from the bludgeoning on my talkpage. Is a small rangeblock feasible?
    I also think it might be time to revoke TPA for Kolossoni. Their edits there are increasingly disruptive (with the incessant pinging, like the IP) and aren't constructive (or particularly honest, since Girth Summit today blocked User:Knowledge Pudding, another sock created after Kolossoni was blocked). Grandpallama (talk) 13:55, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I left them a note. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 13:57, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    49.180.0.0/15 is a huge range. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:00, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah, that's what I figured. In looking at the range, I see some other edits by this user, but the vast majority of them clearly are not. Thank you for taking a look. Grandpallama (talk) 14:02, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Partial block of 49.180.0.0/16. I'll watch your talk. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:09, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll leave it for others to analyze and draw their own conclusions for the edits to Grandpallama's talk. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:10, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    for the edits to Grandpallama's talk For anyone who takes a look, in addition to what's still there are these edits I removed after the IP ignored my request to stop with the bludgeoning. The IP edited my talkpage ten times with these rants, not unlike what's on display in the archive for the initial Kolossoni investigation. Grandpallama (talk) 14:18, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ponyo, is that a straight duck/behavior block, or is there also CU/technical data that supports the block? Grandpallama (talk) 00:41, 20 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Ponyo. I had assumed that, but I don't think I'd seen it explicitly stated. Grandpallama (talk) 19:59, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

  • I've blocked User999055 as a  Likely Kolossoni sock. If anyone wants to investigate other accounts or IPs, please open a new report. Closing.-- Ponyobons mots 21:13, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Grandpallama:, the icons used by checkusers (such as  Possible,  Likely and  Confirmed) specifically denote checkuser findings.-- Ponyobons mots 19:21, 22 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Kolossoni/Archive&oldid=1221822265"