Home • Search • Translate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


NeuroSex

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

18 March 2019

Suspected sockpuppets

Same POV pushing on an already crap article at Fight The New Drug and the IP (obviously not asking for connection) is doing the same at the AFD and talk page, both master account and IP meatsock also seem to share an inability to sign their personal attacks. Praxidicae ( talk) 20:19, 18 March 2019 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

@ Sir Sputnik: I can't comment on this particular case, but both technical and behavioral evidence indicate that NewsYouCanUse is a sock of User:NeuroSex, so the cases should probably be merged. I've already issued a CU block to the NewsYouCanUse. Beeblebrox ( talk) 23:47, 19 March 2019 (UTC) reply

26 May 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

All of these accounts are truly single purpose with the respect to the notion of sex addition. The master made one edit back in feb 2017 and then came and added BLP violating content to the MDPI page (article about a journal publisher) about five (!) people involved in publishing an article they clearly don't like, on May 24: diff. That content was transferred to the talk page by an experienced editor who didn't realize it was a BLP violation; i subsequently removed it from there in this diff at 05:56, 25 May 2018.

At 21:32, 25 May Suuperon restored the talk page content
at 21:39, 25 May Defender1984 restored some of the BLP violation on the article page -- their only edit.

Before Suuperon showed at MDPI it was active at Sexual addiction and if you look at its history you can see that here NeuroSex removed some content with a dismissive edit note, and the next edit an hour later is by Suuperon, here. You can see how Suuperon's edit note style is the same as Neurosex.

Quack. Obvious MEAT at least. Jytdog ( talk) 01:09, 26 May 2018 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 Confirmed + OMer1970 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki).  Blocked and tagged. Closing.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 01:38, 26 May 2018 (UTC) reply

15 June 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

This is a strange small case, in which all three of these accounts have popped up on 14 June 2022 to argue about Gary Wilson (author). I don't think that there are three humans behind the accounts. I don't know if there are two humans or one. This may be some sort of good hand bad hand act, some sort of trolling. (We know that trolls sometimes use sockpuppets.) Two of these accounts have really bizarre mongo names. Robert McClenon ( talk) 01:48, 15 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • Moved to Carbonorgantennisowl, who created the Potatochipsegs-zs8-1judo account. Yesterday, someone popped up on IRC saying they'd been editing this article but had "lost access to an account", which I took to mean they had edited as both Carbonorgantennisowl and Potatochipsegs-zs8-1judo. But now that I realize they created the latter using the former, my AGF is stretched somewhat thinner. Either way, I agree with Robert that the sudden emergence of accounts taking opposite POV positions on this article is strange. It may be the result of some off-wiki coördination, but I think a check to look into the relationship between GAVERushaMiciNGSlANG and Carbon/Potato, as well as the possibility of GHBH, is in order.  Clerk endorsed -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she/they) 01:58, 15 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Already CU blocked. 1-4 are on one IP, 5-7 on another (an IPv6 range). Drmies ( talk) 03:33, 15 June 2022 (UTC) reply

  • Duplicate filings merged. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she/they) 04:12, 15 June 2022 (UTC) reply
  • @ Drmies: I don't suppose Factcheckerina came up in there? The timing of things seems awfully suspicious. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she/they) 04:15, 15 June 2022 (UTC) reply
    • Yeah, found nothing. Thanks, Drmies ( talk) 15:46, 15 June 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Oh look, another merge. This time to NeuroSex based on behavioral evidence plus geolocation (on an IP since OS'd). I have a guess of what's going on with Factcheckerina, namely that they're someone who's been hunting NeuroSex through an off-wiki site for some time. Guessing this probably isn't a first account, but I'm not aware of any evidence that previous accounts or IPs were blocked, so tentatively leaving that be for now. Closing. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she/they) 20:40, 15 June 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Also indeffed TBsjfQbEuaHRn ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki) as suspected, based on interests, timing, and username similarity. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she/they) 20:43, 15 June 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Oh, and tagged all of Drmies' blocks as confirmed to OwDOnimEDGENiORmyTErentea, proven to NeuroSex. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she/they) 20:53, 15 June 2022 (UTC) reply

16 June 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Hello, please excuse my inexperience with Wikipedia. Thank you for your important work in cleaning up some of the Neurosex sockpuppets on this page: /info/en/?search=Gary_Wilson_(author).

I’ve been a silent observer for some time, and it has been disturbing to witness the many sockpuppet accounts editing porn-related pages with single-minded attention. The same party appears to be behind most (all?) of the 73 suspect accounts listed above. This campaign is long-standing and deeply concerning, involving dozens of fake Wikipedia accounts. Could you please investigate them all and take any appropriate action?

CheckUser on NeuroSex's 70-some suspected Wikipedia aliases is recommended because these aliases are part of a long-standing and extensive Wikipedia sockpuppetry campaign. CheckUser may help confirm the geolocation and other details that could determine whether the same individual runs the accounts.

I also hope you will remove all of the edits by any of these sockpuppets you ban, or have banned in the past. They appear to have been made in bad faith or for self-serving or malicious ends. Can anything be done to prevent future edits by this puppeteer? I did not include "diff" links in this report due to how extensive the situation is and the fact that every single one of the edits made by each of the 70+ sockpuppet accounts merits examination.

It’s especially disturbing that Wikipedia user Tgeorgescu consistently protects, aids and appears to collaborate with Neurosex’s many sockpuppet accounts. This is a long-standing pattern used to maintain control of multiple pages related to pornography. Tgeorgescu ensures that the sockpuppet edits are incorporated while removing good-faith edits by the public. Can he be prevented from doing this? As he too appears to be acting in bad faith, can his edits and protections made in tandem with any of these sockpuppets be reversed? This tag-team campaign has been operating for years and skewing the public’s understanding of porn-related topics.

As you know, Neurosex appears to have created a number of sockpuppet accounts to edit the page concerning Gary Wilson (Author). Tgeorgescu took no action against Neurosex’s sockpuppet accounts. Instead, he incorporated all suggested edits and collaborated with the accounts on the Talk page, going so far as to improve the formatting of the edits of a sockpuppet account. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Gary_Wilson_(author)&diff=1093106044&oldid=1093105879) This is but one of many such examples of his activities in support of Neurosex's sockpuppetry.

There’s no reason to think the above list of probable Neurosex-related sockpuppet accounts is complete, but it shows a disturbing pattern - and abuse of Wikipedia’s rules. Note: A handful of users in the list above were banned by Wikipedia some time ago (and others more recently), but most have yet to be investigated.

Thank you for considering this request and please excuse my limited Wikipedia skills. Keyhound ( talk) 02:32, 16 June 2022 (UTC) Keyhound ( talk) 02:32, 16 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • Moving to NeuroSex. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she/they) 03:01, 16 June 2022 (UTC) reply
  •  Clerk declined. With two exceptions, all accounts and IPs listed above are either already blocked or long-dormant.
    The first exception is 2603:8001:6701:1882:193F:3771:BD09:E675; no point in blocking the IP more than 24 hours after its one edit, but consider this a finding of fact that that was NeuroSex.
    The other exception is Tgeorgescu. I'm quite confident he's not a NeuroSex sockpuppet, and I don't see evidence that he's been deliberately abetting NeuroSex. I've read some of the late Mr. Wilson's complaints about Tgeorgescu's editing, and don't find the charge of "protecting" NeuroSex to be accurate. That said, if you do have longer-term behavioral concerns about Tgeorgescu, the venue to bring those in would be Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents or Wikipedia:Arbitration enforcement (under the gender and sexuality or pseudoscience regimes). That's not me saying that Tgeorgescu has necessarily done anything actionable. Just that, if they had, those would be the correct venues.
    As to reversion of material added by NeuroSex sox, @ Keyhound, under our policy WP:BANREVERT, any material added by a NeuroSex sock since the main account was blocked may be reverted summarily. That applies to any sock that has been blocked; for the ones that haven't been blocked but are long-dormant, if there's specific content added by one that you want to remove, let me know and I can give a proper assessment of whether that account is NeuroSex... I'll say that, spot-checking the not-blocked ones reported above, they range from "Obviously NeuroSex" to "More likely NeuroSex than not", so you're generally on the right track.
    Finally, Keyhound, welcome to Wikipedia. Like I said, I see that your comments here echo those by Wilson on his blog. If you do have a conflict of interest with Wilson, his estate, This Is Your Brain on Porn, or any related entity, please see Wikipedia:Conflicts of interest. Furthermore, if you know User:Factcheckerina in any way, please be aware of our policy Wikipedia:Meatpuppetry. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she/they) 03:44, 16 June 2022 (UTC) reply

20 June 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Pro forma report (filed purely for the record). See below. Mz7 ( talk) 19:09, 20 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  •  Confirmed to the accounts identified in the 15 June 2022 archive.  Blocked and tagged, closing. Mz7 ( talk) 19:09, 20 June 2022 (UTC) reply

09 July 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Pro forma. A new user promoting material critical of Gary Wilson is, from the get-go, much more likely NeuroSex than not. There's a notable writing-style tell that I'm happy to share with any inquiring admin/clerk. Their first talkpage comment seamlessly continues a comment by an OS'd IP (something that's come up with NS in the past), and that and subsequent ones all call for reinsertion of material that was in NS' version of the article. If this isn't NS, it has to be someone working with them—but I think it's them. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she|they|xe) 02:03, 9 July 2022 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

This may well not matter, since NS often abandons their accounts, but it's recent enough I feel it's worth blocking.  Blocked and tagged. Closing. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she|they|xe) 02:03, 9 July 2022 (UTC) reply

09 August 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Reported by Keyhound on my user talk page. New user, competent at sourcing, beeline straight to NoFap (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), clear POV, sometimes poorly-sourced edits, broadly on-brand username. Seems likely to me. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she|they|xe) 21:19, 9 August 2022 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

19 October 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

First edit is to request addition of a study by Nicole Prause at Talk:NoFap, which is about as classic NeuroSex behavior as you'll get. Still, not quite distinctive enough to warrant a duckblock. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she|they|xe) 17:25, 19 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

27 November 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

New account whose first edits are to defend Nicole Prause in the context of NoFap. On the other hand, writing style isn't quite what we've seen with the past few (but not so different as to be dispositive in the other direction). Hoping CU evidence will shed some light. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she|they|xe) 07:00, 27 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • Self-endorsed by clerk for checkuser attention. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she|they|xe) 07:00, 27 November 2022 (UTC) reply
  • I can't give you anything more than  Possible, I'm sorry. The range is different and from a quick check of the CU log, it seem to be a new one, compared to the other recent socks. However, both accounts appear to be based in the same US State and the UA is pretty much the same, the only difference being the version of the web browser. Salvio 08:47, 27 November 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Thanks, Salvio. Not quite confident enough to block on a "Possible", so I'll keep an eye on them. NeuroSex often abandons their sox after one or two edits, so might not matter in the end. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she|they|xe) 09:03, 27 November 2022 (UTC) reply

09 March 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Reported on my talk a week and a half ago by Keyhound, but I'm only just able to get to this. Username, page, and modus operandi all seem right, but I'd like to hear from CU before deciding on whether to block. (Even if this is a throwaway, worth figuring out for WP:BANREVERT reasons.) -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she|they|xe) 16:22, 9 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

10 April 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Reported on my talkpage by Keyhound. Similar behavior to past sox, jumping in to Talk:NoFap with new studies. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she|they|xe) 20:06, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

24 August 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Noticed that this user had been reported on Tamzin’s talk page, but not yet had an update/any action taken. I’m not personally familiar with the sockmaster, but a brief check of the user’s contribs and the NeuroSex SPI archive page show similarities. Also, previous reports from Keyhound on Tamzin’s talk have been confirmed, so I thought it was worth bringing here for extra eyes if nothing else.

I don’t have experience with SPI, so apologies if I have made any mistakes here. A smart kitten ( talk) 11:49, 24 August 2023 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • Tamzin - you seem familiar with this case, do you any thoughts? If it's NeuroSex, they have started using a proxy service, or they have moved continents. Girth Summit (blether) 13:58, 24 August 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Girth Summit: I'd looked at this but haven't had the chance to follow up with a German speaker. I'll drop a ping here to @ Blablubbs and @ ToBeFree. I'd say if the German looks machine-translated, block. Otherwise, I'd let it ride, although the citation to Prause is a pretty big red flag and I'd only need a bit more to be confident blocking. -- Tamzin[ cetacean needed (she|they|xe) 03:17, 26 August 2023 (UTC) reply
    Hi Tamzin, Girth Summit, A smart kitten – Machine translations rarely fail to properly capitalize words. There was manual work involved in making the text look like this, either lazy typing or manual modification of a machine translation. ~ ToBeFree ( talk) 03:30, 26 August 2023 (UTC) reply
    (German speakers, though, are highly unlikely to actively capitalize in the way English would be capitalized, either. I guess we're dealing with someone whose native language is English and whose German is of an interestingly mixed quality.) ~ ToBeFree ( talk) 03:34, 26 August 2023 (UTC) reply
  • With just two edits, there's not enough behavioural evidence. no Closing without action. MarioGom ( talk) 18:56, 29 September 2023 (UTC) reply
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/NeuroSex/Archive&oldid=1178438472"
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


NeuroSex

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

18 March 2019

Suspected sockpuppets

Same POV pushing on an already crap article at Fight The New Drug and the IP (obviously not asking for connection) is doing the same at the AFD and talk page, both master account and IP meatsock also seem to share an inability to sign their personal attacks. Praxidicae ( talk) 20:19, 18 March 2019 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

@ Sir Sputnik: I can't comment on this particular case, but both technical and behavioral evidence indicate that NewsYouCanUse is a sock of User:NeuroSex, so the cases should probably be merged. I've already issued a CU block to the NewsYouCanUse. Beeblebrox ( talk) 23:47, 19 March 2019 (UTC) reply

26 May 2018

Suspected sockpuppets

All of these accounts are truly single purpose with the respect to the notion of sex addition. The master made one edit back in feb 2017 and then came and added BLP violating content to the MDPI page (article about a journal publisher) about five (!) people involved in publishing an article they clearly don't like, on May 24: diff. That content was transferred to the talk page by an experienced editor who didn't realize it was a BLP violation; i subsequently removed it from there in this diff at 05:56, 25 May 2018.

At 21:32, 25 May Suuperon restored the talk page content
at 21:39, 25 May Defender1984 restored some of the BLP violation on the article page -- their only edit.

Before Suuperon showed at MDPI it was active at Sexual addiction and if you look at its history you can see that here NeuroSex removed some content with a dismissive edit note, and the next edit an hour later is by Suuperon, here. You can see how Suuperon's edit note style is the same as Neurosex.

Quack. Obvious MEAT at least. Jytdog ( talk) 01:09, 26 May 2018 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 Confirmed + OMer1970 ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki).  Blocked and tagged. Closing.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 01:38, 26 May 2018 (UTC) reply

15 June 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

This is a strange small case, in which all three of these accounts have popped up on 14 June 2022 to argue about Gary Wilson (author). I don't think that there are three humans behind the accounts. I don't know if there are two humans or one. This may be some sort of good hand bad hand act, some sort of trolling. (We know that trolls sometimes use sockpuppets.) Two of these accounts have really bizarre mongo names. Robert McClenon ( talk) 01:48, 15 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • Moved to Carbonorgantennisowl, who created the Potatochipsegs-zs8-1judo account. Yesterday, someone popped up on IRC saying they'd been editing this article but had "lost access to an account", which I took to mean they had edited as both Carbonorgantennisowl and Potatochipsegs-zs8-1judo. But now that I realize they created the latter using the former, my AGF is stretched somewhat thinner. Either way, I agree with Robert that the sudden emergence of accounts taking opposite POV positions on this article is strange. It may be the result of some off-wiki coördination, but I think a check to look into the relationship between GAVERushaMiciNGSlANG and Carbon/Potato, as well as the possibility of GHBH, is in order.  Clerk endorsed -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she/they) 01:58, 15 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Already CU blocked. 1-4 are on one IP, 5-7 on another (an IPv6 range). Drmies ( talk) 03:33, 15 June 2022 (UTC) reply

  • Duplicate filings merged. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she/they) 04:12, 15 June 2022 (UTC) reply
  • @ Drmies: I don't suppose Factcheckerina came up in there? The timing of things seems awfully suspicious. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she/they) 04:15, 15 June 2022 (UTC) reply
    • Yeah, found nothing. Thanks, Drmies ( talk) 15:46, 15 June 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Oh look, another merge. This time to NeuroSex based on behavioral evidence plus geolocation (on an IP since OS'd). I have a guess of what's going on with Factcheckerina, namely that they're someone who's been hunting NeuroSex through an off-wiki site for some time. Guessing this probably isn't a first account, but I'm not aware of any evidence that previous accounts or IPs were blocked, so tentatively leaving that be for now. Closing. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she/they) 20:40, 15 June 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Also indeffed TBsjfQbEuaHRn ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki) as suspected, based on interests, timing, and username similarity. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she/they) 20:43, 15 June 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Oh, and tagged all of Drmies' blocks as confirmed to OwDOnimEDGENiORmyTErentea, proven to NeuroSex. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she/they) 20:53, 15 June 2022 (UTC) reply

16 June 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Hello, please excuse my inexperience with Wikipedia. Thank you for your important work in cleaning up some of the Neurosex sockpuppets on this page: /info/en/?search=Gary_Wilson_(author).

I’ve been a silent observer for some time, and it has been disturbing to witness the many sockpuppet accounts editing porn-related pages with single-minded attention. The same party appears to be behind most (all?) of the 73 suspect accounts listed above. This campaign is long-standing and deeply concerning, involving dozens of fake Wikipedia accounts. Could you please investigate them all and take any appropriate action?

CheckUser on NeuroSex's 70-some suspected Wikipedia aliases is recommended because these aliases are part of a long-standing and extensive Wikipedia sockpuppetry campaign. CheckUser may help confirm the geolocation and other details that could determine whether the same individual runs the accounts.

I also hope you will remove all of the edits by any of these sockpuppets you ban, or have banned in the past. They appear to have been made in bad faith or for self-serving or malicious ends. Can anything be done to prevent future edits by this puppeteer? I did not include "diff" links in this report due to how extensive the situation is and the fact that every single one of the edits made by each of the 70+ sockpuppet accounts merits examination.

It’s especially disturbing that Wikipedia user Tgeorgescu consistently protects, aids and appears to collaborate with Neurosex’s many sockpuppet accounts. This is a long-standing pattern used to maintain control of multiple pages related to pornography. Tgeorgescu ensures that the sockpuppet edits are incorporated while removing good-faith edits by the public. Can he be prevented from doing this? As he too appears to be acting in bad faith, can his edits and protections made in tandem with any of these sockpuppets be reversed? This tag-team campaign has been operating for years and skewing the public’s understanding of porn-related topics.

As you know, Neurosex appears to have created a number of sockpuppet accounts to edit the page concerning Gary Wilson (Author). Tgeorgescu took no action against Neurosex’s sockpuppet accounts. Instead, he incorporated all suggested edits and collaborated with the accounts on the Talk page, going so far as to improve the formatting of the edits of a sockpuppet account. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Talk:Gary_Wilson_(author)&diff=1093106044&oldid=1093105879) This is but one of many such examples of his activities in support of Neurosex's sockpuppetry.

There’s no reason to think the above list of probable Neurosex-related sockpuppet accounts is complete, but it shows a disturbing pattern - and abuse of Wikipedia’s rules. Note: A handful of users in the list above were banned by Wikipedia some time ago (and others more recently), but most have yet to be investigated.

Thank you for considering this request and please excuse my limited Wikipedia skills. Keyhound ( talk) 02:32, 16 June 2022 (UTC) Keyhound ( talk) 02:32, 16 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • Moving to NeuroSex. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she/they) 03:01, 16 June 2022 (UTC) reply
  •  Clerk declined. With two exceptions, all accounts and IPs listed above are either already blocked or long-dormant.
    The first exception is 2603:8001:6701:1882:193F:3771:BD09:E675; no point in blocking the IP more than 24 hours after its one edit, but consider this a finding of fact that that was NeuroSex.
    The other exception is Tgeorgescu. I'm quite confident he's not a NeuroSex sockpuppet, and I don't see evidence that he's been deliberately abetting NeuroSex. I've read some of the late Mr. Wilson's complaints about Tgeorgescu's editing, and don't find the charge of "protecting" NeuroSex to be accurate. That said, if you do have longer-term behavioral concerns about Tgeorgescu, the venue to bring those in would be Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents or Wikipedia:Arbitration enforcement (under the gender and sexuality or pseudoscience regimes). That's not me saying that Tgeorgescu has necessarily done anything actionable. Just that, if they had, those would be the correct venues.
    As to reversion of material added by NeuroSex sox, @ Keyhound, under our policy WP:BANREVERT, any material added by a NeuroSex sock since the main account was blocked may be reverted summarily. That applies to any sock that has been blocked; for the ones that haven't been blocked but are long-dormant, if there's specific content added by one that you want to remove, let me know and I can give a proper assessment of whether that account is NeuroSex... I'll say that, spot-checking the not-blocked ones reported above, they range from "Obviously NeuroSex" to "More likely NeuroSex than not", so you're generally on the right track.
    Finally, Keyhound, welcome to Wikipedia. Like I said, I see that your comments here echo those by Wilson on his blog. If you do have a conflict of interest with Wilson, his estate, This Is Your Brain on Porn, or any related entity, please see Wikipedia:Conflicts of interest. Furthermore, if you know User:Factcheckerina in any way, please be aware of our policy Wikipedia:Meatpuppetry. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she/they) 03:44, 16 June 2022 (UTC) reply

20 June 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Pro forma report (filed purely for the record). See below. Mz7 ( talk) 19:09, 20 June 2022 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  •  Confirmed to the accounts identified in the 15 June 2022 archive.  Blocked and tagged, closing. Mz7 ( talk) 19:09, 20 June 2022 (UTC) reply

09 July 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Pro forma. A new user promoting material critical of Gary Wilson is, from the get-go, much more likely NeuroSex than not. There's a notable writing-style tell that I'm happy to share with any inquiring admin/clerk. Their first talkpage comment seamlessly continues a comment by an OS'd IP (something that's come up with NS in the past), and that and subsequent ones all call for reinsertion of material that was in NS' version of the article. If this isn't NS, it has to be someone working with them—but I think it's them. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she|they|xe) 02:03, 9 July 2022 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

This may well not matter, since NS often abandons their accounts, but it's recent enough I feel it's worth blocking.  Blocked and tagged. Closing. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she|they|xe) 02:03, 9 July 2022 (UTC) reply

09 August 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

Reported by Keyhound on my user talk page. New user, competent at sourcing, beeline straight to NoFap (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), clear POV, sometimes poorly-sourced edits, broadly on-brand username. Seems likely to me. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she|they|xe) 21:19, 9 August 2022 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

19 October 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

First edit is to request addition of a study by Nicole Prause at Talk:NoFap, which is about as classic NeuroSex behavior as you'll get. Still, not quite distinctive enough to warrant a duckblock. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she|they|xe) 17:25, 19 October 2022 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

27 November 2022

Suspected sockpuppets

New account whose first edits are to defend Nicole Prause in the context of NoFap. On the other hand, writing style isn't quite what we've seen with the past few (but not so different as to be dispositive in the other direction). Hoping CU evidence will shed some light. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she|they|xe) 07:00, 27 November 2022 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • Self-endorsed by clerk for checkuser attention. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she|they|xe) 07:00, 27 November 2022 (UTC) reply
  • I can't give you anything more than  Possible, I'm sorry. The range is different and from a quick check of the CU log, it seem to be a new one, compared to the other recent socks. However, both accounts appear to be based in the same US State and the UA is pretty much the same, the only difference being the version of the web browser. Salvio 08:47, 27 November 2022 (UTC) reply
  • Thanks, Salvio. Not quite confident enough to block on a "Possible", so I'll keep an eye on them. NeuroSex often abandons their sox after one or two edits, so might not matter in the end. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she|they|xe) 09:03, 27 November 2022 (UTC) reply

09 March 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Reported on my talk a week and a half ago by Keyhound, but I'm only just able to get to this. Username, page, and modus operandi all seem right, but I'd like to hear from CU before deciding on whether to block. (Even if this is a throwaway, worth figuring out for WP:BANREVERT reasons.) -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she|they|xe) 16:22, 9 March 2023 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

10 April 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Reported on my talkpage by Keyhound. Similar behavior to past sox, jumping in to Talk:NoFap with new studies. -- Tamzin cetacean needed (she|they|xe) 20:06, 10 April 2023 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

24 August 2023

Suspected sockpuppets

Noticed that this user had been reported on Tamzin’s talk page, but not yet had an update/any action taken. I’m not personally familiar with the sockmaster, but a brief check of the user’s contribs and the NeuroSex SPI archive page show similarities. Also, previous reports from Keyhound on Tamzin’s talk have been confirmed, so I thought it was worth bringing here for extra eyes if nothing else.

I don’t have experience with SPI, so apologies if I have made any mistakes here. A smart kitten ( talk) 11:49, 24 August 2023 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

  • Tamzin - you seem familiar with this case, do you any thoughts? If it's NeuroSex, they have started using a proxy service, or they have moved continents. Girth Summit (blether) 13:58, 24 August 2023 (UTC) reply
    @ Girth Summit: I'd looked at this but haven't had the chance to follow up with a German speaker. I'll drop a ping here to @ Blablubbs and @ ToBeFree. I'd say if the German looks machine-translated, block. Otherwise, I'd let it ride, although the citation to Prause is a pretty big red flag and I'd only need a bit more to be confident blocking. -- Tamzin[ cetacean needed (she|they|xe) 03:17, 26 August 2023 (UTC) reply
    Hi Tamzin, Girth Summit, A smart kitten – Machine translations rarely fail to properly capitalize words. There was manual work involved in making the text look like this, either lazy typing or manual modification of a machine translation. ~ ToBeFree ( talk) 03:30, 26 August 2023 (UTC) reply
    (German speakers, though, are highly unlikely to actively capitalize in the way English would be capitalized, either. I guess we're dealing with someone whose native language is English and whose German is of an interestingly mixed quality.) ~ ToBeFree ( talk) 03:34, 26 August 2023 (UTC) reply
  • With just two edits, there's not enough behavioural evidence. no Closing without action. MarioGom ( talk) 18:56, 29 September 2023 (UTC) reply
Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/NeuroSex/Archive&oldid=1178438472"

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook




Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE