Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/WKS Śląsk Wrocław/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


WKS Śląsk Wrocław

WKS Śląsk Wrocław (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
10 September 2014[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

A fairly new account Globetrotter1918 (talk · contribs) began engaging the entire community of the Project Poland at English Wikipedia in repairing his damages and reverting his edits up to 18 times each day. He's been blocked 14 times in Polish Wikipedia already before indef,[1] as a puppet of yet another notorious flame-warrior.[2] [3] But a brief look at the difs from articles targetted by him show a disturbing pattern of abuse leading back to account WKS Śląsk Wrocław (talk · contribs). Please take a look, and thanks in advance:

  1. Revert-warring in article Poland with fringe, far-right political agenda forced through against several long-established users: [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12]. More subtle and overt racism, anti-Semitism, and homophobia includes removing famoust Polish Jews from the article (including a Nobelaurate),[13] replacing peace marches with football brawls and right-wing rallies,[14] deleting Pride Parade altogether as a "homosexual propagande" (sic),[15] or often without edit summaries.[16]
  2. Revert-warring in article Tourism in Poland using all three accounts mentioned above (bingo!): [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25].
  3. Revert-warring in article Wrocław (his homebase) using all three accounts mentioned above (bingo!): [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], and more.
  4. Revert-warring in article Kraków probably out of vengance (deleting reliable ext. sources, etc.): [32], [33], [34], [35], and more.
  5. See also: Talk:Eight-thousander#Reverts by User:Globetrotter1918 and his inability to communicate / have a sensible discussion.
  6. Manipulating data in article Krkonoše (homebase rec area) using two accounts mentioned above:[36], [37].
  7. EI Analyzer results #1: article on Poland as edited by both, WKS Śląsk Wrocław and Globetrotter1918.[38]
  8. EI Analyzer #2: article on Poland as edited by all three sockpuppets: Globetrotter1918, Germania Breslau, and Partycja90.[39]
  9. So on and so forth.[40] — Poeticbent talk 19:12, 10 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Newly added (1/2 November 2014)
  1. Globetrotter1918 (talk · contribs) returned as User:Retrone on 1 November 2014, with exactly the same fringe WP:POV as if there was no tomorrow, reverting in Poland and editing in the area of his pet subject, the Eight-thousander (see above). Looks like more serious behavioral issue to me. [41], [42], [43]
  2. At National Independence Day, Retrone went straight into editing exactly where Globetrotter1918 left off on 8 September 2014 before his block. [44] Same as here. [45]
  3. In these two edits: [46], [47], Retrone restored the same earlier revision fought for by Globetrotter1918. Bingo!
  4. Take a look also at this little blast from the past, to see how far he's willing to go for revenge.[48], [49], [50]
  5. Minute-by-minute blanket-reverts of every single improvement to article on Poland (including added refs), intentionally damaging content (no summaries): [51], [52], (no English), [53], [54]
    Pinged: Bbb23, EdJohnston, DeltaQuad. Thanks, Poeticbent talk 05:18, 2 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Interaction between Globetrotter1918 and Retrone per Bbb23 request
  1. 8 September 2014 Globetrotter1918 replaces a photo of a peace-march from Poland with a low quality photo of a street rally by the extreme-right National Radical Camp (ONR) waving a party flag with a number of individuals covering their faces. Note: ONR has been accused by the authorities of unauthorized rallies and making a Nazi salute at street marches.
  2. 8 September 2014 after being reverted, Globetrotter1918 reverts back to keep the extreme-right ONR photo.
  3. 9 September 2014 after being reverted again, Globetrotter1918 removes the peace-march and puts back the ONR rally.
  4. 9 September 2014 Globetrotter1918 removes the peace-march photo again and instead puts in football spectators from Wroclaw (his homebase)
  5. 9 September 2014 Globetrotter1918 removes the photo of Pride Parade with a summary: homosexual propagande (sic)
  6. 10 September 2014 after being reverted again, Globetrotter1918 removes the peace-march again and puts back the extreme-right ONR rally.
  7. It goes on and on until his block on 26 September 2014.
  8. 2 November 2014 Retrone makes the same exact edit as the Globetrotter1918 by removing a peace-march and replacing it with ONR extreme-right rally
  9. 2 November 2014 Retrone repeats exactly the Globetrotter1918 prolonged edit-war by reverting the peace-march and replacing it with ONR extreme-right rally for the second time. Thanks, Poeticbent talk 04:35, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Newly added (13 November 2014, for our monitoring)

Note: A CheckUser has been requested due to reasonable suspicion of additional sockpuppets editing in areas not on my watchlist yet possibly as disruptive as in all of the above. The same goes for sleeper accounts. Thanks, Poeticbent talk 19:38, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sample analysis
  • Interaction between Germania Breslau, Globetrotter1918, and Partycja90. Article: Festival of Good Beer created 18:19, 15 December 2013 by Globetrotter1918 via machine translation. 16:40, 22 February 2014 wild claims about its popularity by Partycja90,[55] with ext. link to facebook.[56] 15:14, 4 March 2014 Partycja90 adds a photo of the Festiwal to article.[57] 21:14, 23 May 2014 Germania Breslau adds the same photo to Wrocław (homebase).[58] Edit warring by Germania Breslau in the Festival of Good Beer article with two established editors.[59] [60] 10:15, 19 April 2014 Globetrotter1918 adds the Festival of Good Beer to article Poland as one of Poland's main attractions.[61]
  • Interaction between Globetrotter1918, and Partycja90. Article: Tourism in Poland concerning only the city of Wrocław. 17:16, 3 March 2014 User:Partycja90 places Wrocław as the second most popular city in Poland (not true).[62] 09:12, 20 April 2014 Globetrotter1918 makes a touchup to it in bad English.[63] 07:58, 21 April 2014 Globetrotter1918 reverts the grammatical correction to keep the bad English...[64] and adds 3 more bullets with Wrocław attractions (2 of them going nowhere).[65]
Comments by other users[edit]

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

  • I'm not fully familiar with sockpuppetry investigations on enwiki, so I hope I'm not making a mistake by commenting here - on Polish Wiki Op is considered as the main account of said editor, hence all usage of all other accounts mentioned above is considered sockpuppetry and blocked promptly. I'd need to consult one of the CU on Polish Wiki to double check, but I'm pretty sure all blocked account relate to Op (talk · contribs). Lukasz Lukomski (talk) 07:12, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
See: Global contributions of User:Op — Poeticbent talk 13:36, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reviewing the contributions of Globetrotter1918 (talk · contribs) at Poland during September I see more than a dozen reverts and only one comment on the talk page. Something to consider is a multi-week block for disruptive editing even if this case doesn't reach a sock finding. Regarding Germania Breslau (talk · contribs), the thing for which Vituzzu was considering a global block was the charge made by Germania at Talk:Simone Moro#slander? about lying by Moro in claiming to reach a summit. It seems he inserted this claim in Wikipedia's voice against Simone Moro in multiple Wikipedias. EdJohnston (talk) 05:22, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Some days before warning I eventually locked GermaniaBreslau as a crosswiki abuse of multiple accounts (basically he reacts to any local block/revert on a certain wiki by creating a new account on a different wiki). I'm considering leaving the masterpuppet the possibility to edit under the sole username "Op" which will likely be blocked on many different wikis. --Vituzzu (talk) 22:24, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yep Ed, Germania Breslau is Op for sure, I've personally checked it on some wiki without local checkusers (honestly I should glance though many logs to find which one) plus I've left a note at pl.wiki's AN and (I think) they ran a local check too. If the relationship between Germania Breslau and WKS' puppets is confirmed I'll lock them too. --Vituzzu (talk) 17:06, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's very first time for me to discuss here so - hi! Because I was mentioned I hope it's good place to defend myself, sorry if i'm wrong. While it's true I added some big amount of material to the article about Poland's Independence Day, I'm pretty sure it was objective enough, as I tried hard to cover both controversial perspective from neutral point of view. I'm like a accused one here, so I'd like to point out, that I didn't delete any data nor changed any photo from the article. Also, because I'm new at editing, it would've appeared for someone that I changed what I'd put there several times - also sorry for that. However, if something is not right there, feel free correct it. In my opinion there was (the first time I looked at the article), problem of not enough data, which was place for some trolls to change little things in favor of their point of view, so I just wanted to contribute. Thanks, and sorry for my English. --Rybdar (talk) 18:59, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Read the writing on the wall, Rybdar. This is an investigation of a massive fraud across several projects. – If one wants to secretly return to editing without telling anyone about one's own gruesome past, one does not go back to the same articles ever, or he will be caught and sanctioned again. Accounts listed herein have shown a flagrant disregard for Wikipedia aims and community. The investigation is still open and the findings are not to be taken lightly. Poeticbent talk 19:22, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • So to make it clear - I declare that "rybdar" it's my first account and I don't associate with any of the culprits and frauds mentioned. Again, if anyone feels there's something wrong about my edits I would appreciate him to correct or message me, since I'm a new here. Thanks, --Rybdar (talk) 20:09, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • PS Maybe for make it a bit easier for the person checking my edits for the investigation: I'm happy to say that none of my edits were deleted by anyone this far, no warning given. Also, the controversial radical association was mentioned properly as only initiators and organizers, which is true by any source, and the fact that the association by no means constitutes any majority is also featured - otherwise it would be evidently false and in favor of the movement. "Incidents" header was created, where it's also clear, I believe, that there were minor incidents and the culprits was only a group, so it included a bit critical part, but also I tried to be objective, as those people are not related to the peaceful rest of the participants. It was updated and organized later to not make confusion of covering only the one event, which my contribution lacked and I agree with that, and again that correction was made by myself before the accusation of mine here. Any way, I understand the situation, it is indeed serious, and it's only for make it fair and square as I would love to make Wikipedia a good reference for everybody. Thanks for comments, --Rybdar (talk) 22:18, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

 Clerk note: Poeticbent, I reviewed all the diffs in #1, but when I got to #2 and #3, you provided links, not diffs. Please change all those links to diffs before I proceed. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:39, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Clerk endorsed but just barely. Despite the massive number of diffs, there are many problems seeing connections. Too many diffs of Globetrotter. Too few diffs of the master. The EI reports are fairly useless as one would expect to see a lot of activity on the Poland article by editors who are Polish. Very few diffs establishing connections between the accounts, but I saw just enough to endorse, coupled with some deference to Poeticbent, who is Polish and may draw inferences that I cannot. For example, #1 shows a particular bent by Globetrotter. I then expected in #2 and #3 to see similar bents by the others, but instead they mostly concentrated on disruption, which didn't help much (disruptive editors, unfortunately, exist in significant numbers, but that doesn't make them socks of each other unless their reverts show commonalities). I didn't look at the IPs, and neither will the CU if they do a check.--Bbb23 (talk) 20:01, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Bbb23: Two of the four accounts above are  Stale. Please reevaluate your endorsement based on the accounts with current edits. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 14:32, 22 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not going to have the time/energy to do this until probably Thursday, September 25. In the interim, Poeticbent, can you focus on the two non-stale accounts, which are Globetrotter and Germania Breslau, and provide diffs for each, side by side with diffs of the master + an explanation of why they are similar? In other words, this puppet (name the puppet) diff is similar to this master diff because... Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:02, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Poeticbent, I hate to keep criticizing because I see how much effort you've gone to, but you didn't do what I asked, so I haven't even looked at the diffs in your latest post. Most important: you must compare the two puppets I mentioned before to the master, not to each other. Less important, any diffs by Partycja90 are immaterial as he isn't one of the two non-stale accounts. If you are unable to do that, I will withdraw the endorse and probably decline the case. The only alternative that I can see is to connect the non-stale accounts to each other and then block them with a different master (whichever of the two is older). I have one more day (Friday) of limited time to look at this as I'm leaving Saturday on vacation and won't be editing here during the time I'm away. If you have any questions, please let me know. Thanks.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:54, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • EdJohnston, thanks for the infomation, some of which, as you recognize, I already knew. At the moment, the main thing I'm holding things up for is to address DoRD's request about the two non-stale accounts. At best, a CU would show whether there's a technical relationship between those two accounts. To connect them to the master would have to be based on behavior. I don't think I remember the business about Globetrotter being created while the master was blocked for edit warring (it might be up there somewhere). That plus the other connection between the master and Globetrotter might be enough. I'm still impressed that you remember an edit warring report from almost a year ago. Anyway, I'll wait to see whether Vituzzu has something to say and whether Poeticbent has anything to add. Again, I'm going to be out of the loop shortly, so it may have to wait until I get back, although any admin can block and close if they feel it's warranted. I intentionally pinged DoRD in case he wishes to go ahead with the CU before we're done. You never know.--Bbb23 (talk) 04:59, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Germania Breslau & Globetrotter1918 are  Likely. There also seem to be several other possible accounts. I can't particuairly name them due to unknown involvement. I'll continue looking, but if someone is going through articles and has names, I will compare them with the potential sock list on the CU side. They are actually all zero-edit except one. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 19:43, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've indeffed Globetrotter without tags. Germania is already globally blocked. I'm not sure administratively what we're going to do, i.e., leave this report as is or create another report with Globetrotter as a master, or at least the only master that we are aware of on the English wikipedia. I'm not closing this case until that's ironed out.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:22, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Vituzzu: could you throw the info at CU-l so we can check it here too and compare? -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 04:18, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Clerk note: As a courtesy, I have emailed this user notifying him of the open question.
       — Berean Hunter (talk) 17:31, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • @DeltaQuad: Apparently, there hasn't been a response from Vituzzu since October 24, when Berean Hunter e-mailed him. Meanwhile, there's been quite a bit of activity by Poeticbent, which I haven't actually looked at yet. What do you suggest we do at this point? And as long as I'm at it, what is CU-1?--Bbb23 (talk) 00:06, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrone (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Retrone has started revert warring with Poeticbent. He is past 3RR already on Poland and he shares the mountain climbing interests of the other WKS Slask Wroclaw socks. Unless other admins disagree, I'm considering an indefinite block of User:Retrone per WP:DUCK. EdJohnston (talk) 01:23, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Tired as I am, you forced me to look at Poeticbent's evidence against Retrone, and it wasn't fun. It suffers the same problems his lists have in the past. He's trying to connect the new account to Globetrotter and yet every relevant diff (some are links and some I don't even understand the relevance) is of the new account and none of them is of Globetrotter. "Retone restored the same material as Globetrotter" - I expect to see a diff of each, and I don't. That said, I see the intersection of article interests. I see the egregious edit war. If you (Ed) want to indef the account, fine. The funny thing is I complain repeatedly of Poeticbent's evidence, but his conclusions generally turn out to be correct. Is there a reason why a CU couldn't be done of Retrone and Globetrotter? The CU data should be current unless there are other issues.--Bbb23 (talk) 02:12, 3 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • While we're waiting, I've indeffed Bacchiglione with no tag. Bacchiglione has no edits, but was created before Retrone.--Bbb23 (talk) 01:00, 5 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • DeltaQuad, it's been some time — did the plwiki CU's ever offer any input here? — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 07:19, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've pinged the Polish CUs again. Hope this helps. Trijnsteltalk 22:04, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • DeltaQuad, one of them posted a reply on checkuser-l; you might wish to take a look. Trijnsteltalk 23:06, 18 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Bbb23 and Richwales: I've read the mail, there is no additional information. We'll have to use my comments and Trijnstel's. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 18:20, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The following comment on this investigation was left on my talk page:
Hello Richwales, POLISH Oleola might also be his sockpuppetry. Or Thehoboclown. He is from Romania using multiple account, on Romania, Serbia, Croatia, Hungary, Poland and even Russia. Look, for the Thehoboclown somebody previously opened a sockpuppet investigation but somehow he got away with. Because the last reported potential new user, KIENGIR was abandoned. Before, the previous reported case involving Thehoboclown, the same. Anarcham abandoned. Both were abandoned and Thehoboclown got away with. Another POLISH user is MattiR. Both KIENGIR and MattiR are linked via MATT. He might use fake ips though. I wanted to send this to DeltaQuad actually but he is not allowing me to post. I also sent this to Bbb23. Bye 88.198.80.92 (talk) 19:33, 29 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
— Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 05:03, 30 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think we should take the IP's complaints about User:Thehoboclown seriously. That editor has been here since 2010 and often works on sports articles. He has a SUL account and has worked on commons and the Hungarian wiki. He has been effective at reporting Iaaasi socks at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Iaaasi/Archive since July 2014. Notice how many of Thehoboclown's reports have checkuser confirmations. User:Oleola is a mainstream football editor who has been here since 2009 and doesn't do ethnic warring. Anarcham (talk · contribs) looks to be a sensible editor even on disputed topics. Based on my spot checks I doubt the credibility of any of the IP's charges. EdJohnston (talk) 05:17, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Bbb23, Richwales, and EdJohnston: Were at 3 months, a week and a day for this case. If were taking no further action, lets close this out please. -- DQ (ʞlɐʇ) 17:22, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • I agree, and I'm going to close it now. If new, convincing evidence comes up, people are certainly free to raise it in a new SPI; otherwise, what has already been done is enough. — Richwales (no relation to Jimbo) 17:31, 25 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
06 April 2015[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


The expected return of locked user Germania Breslau (talk · contribs · count) exactly where the sock master left off; promoting his hometown along with the same-old beer festival, and vandalizing his targeted articles like before:

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]
Good question. I had relied on my memory that the master had been globally locked out by a steward in which case it doesn't show as being blocked locally. After seeing your question, I found the diff of lock 1 and lock 2...or at least I'm taking that steward's word for it. :) I can see that the accounts haven't been used since they were supposed to have been locked. Locked global accounts look unblocked locally.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 17:29, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've blocked him locally now - indef. Good catch.
 — Berean Hunter (talk) 21:54, 18 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

19 December 2015[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets


Block evasion, and blatant sockpuppetry. Sudety (talk · contribs) doesn't mind that, actually, Śląsk as well as Wrocław are in Sudety (!) for everyone else to see, and think. – Plugging in the same-old crap into Poland (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) like there was no tomorrow. The particulars were already discussed and diffed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/WKS Śląsk Wrocław/Archive including the newly re-edited:

Thanks, Poeticbent talk 17:41, 19 December 2015 (UTC) Poeticbent talk 17:41, 19 December 2015 (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]

  • Sudety tagged and blocked indef per behavioral evidence. Closing case for now. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:02, 19 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

22 January 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets


Edit warring in Tourism in Poland – which was the sockmaster's all-time favourite, and a pet-peeve of all his socks including LOCKED User:Germania Breslau, and User:Globetrotter1918, and User:Lower Silesia among all others. Promoting his hometown of Wrocław (Breslau, in German) again with the same old crap. This time however, only by swapping IPs in the assumption of never being stopped this way.

Poeticbent talk 03:33, 22 January 2016 (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]

  • I blocked the most recently active IP, but there is nothing we can do here, he changes IPs. Vanjagenije (talk) 00:08, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

23 July 2016[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets[edit]


WKS Śląsk Wrocław won't give up farming that easily. He returned as Zugspitze2962 (talk · contribs) this time to promote his friggin hometown by edit warring with everybody, yet again:

  1. warned
  2. revert
  3. revert
  4. revert Poeticbent talk 20:53, 23 July 2016 (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]

  •  Additional information needed - @Poeticbent: In order to facilitate and expedite your request, please provide diffs to support your case. Please give two or more diffs meeting the following format:
  1. At least one diff is from the sockmaster (or an account already blocked as a confirmed sockpuppet of the sockmaster), showing the behaviour characteristic of the sockmaster.
  2. At least one diff per suspected sockpuppet, showing the suspected sockpuppet emulating the behaviour of the sockmaster given in the first diff.
  3. In situations where it is not immediately obvious from the diffs what the characteristic behaviour is, a short explanation must be provided. Around one sentence is enough for this. Vanjagenije (talk) 08:43, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • No response in 10 days. I can't find any conclusive evidence myself, so I'm closing this with no action. Vanjagenije (talk) 20:06, 3 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/WKS_Śląsk_Wrocław/Archive&oldid=1138681687"