The user page User:Valerius Tygart has an impressive list of articles created or edited by this editor. All accounts listed above that are marked "Self-confirmed" have confirmed themselves as puppet accounts of this editor by logging their editing efforts on this main user page. The edit history of this page reads like a who's who list of many of the accounts this editor uses to edit Wikipedia. The few remaining accounts listed above that are not marked "Self-confirmed" were added because they pick up the same talk-page conversations and edits where the confirmed socks leave off; they are in the same IP range, on the very same span of articles and use the identical edit summary notations. Many of these accounts are dynamic and/or have gone stale, but have been included for record-keeping and pattern establishment because they 100% pass the duck test. The list is from a brief first-pass review and is nowhere near all inclusive.
All of the above accounts can be confirmed as socks through either checkuser or behavior analysis, but is the puppetry abusive? At first glance, the following examples stand out:
Xenophrenic ( talk) 08:43, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Great work! Lots of digging has uncovered..... what exactly? Many edits as an anon over the years (OMG!). A half dozen dead user accounts abandoned 3 to 4 years ago. A couple of active alternate user accounts (legitimate per Wikipedia:Sock puppetry for security [internet cafes] & privacy [workplace], etc). Also: that I have edited Wikipedia from .... Turkey (huh?). What was NOT uncovered: (1) deceptive or misleading use of multiple accounts; (2) use to avoid scrutiny; (3) use to mislead or deceive other editors; (4) use to edit project discussions; (5) use to disrupt edits with one account and normal edits with another; (6) use to distort consensus; (7) use to stir up controversy; (8) use to circumvent sanctions or policy. Also not found: (9) use to pose as more than one person (no, not even the one purported example is accurate). In other words: no sockpuppetry, as defined in policy. The so-called "who's who" edit list of my contributions as Valerius Tygart (which easily reveals alternate accounts) is good evidence that I have tried to hide nothing... Now, why not move on to more productive (& less predatory) work ... and leave a legitimate Wikipedia editor be? Valerius Tygart ( talk) 14:49, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Comment: I'd like to second this checkuser request. I was the admin who had blocked 96.231.137.242 ( talk · contribs) for edit-warring at Bill Maher and found the subsequent appearance of User:DyadTriad to be suspicious (though not conclusive, by itself). The fact that the main account Valerius Tygart ( talk · contribs) too recently edited the article and all the evidence compiled above makes socking even more likely. Note that though the IPs listed above geolocate to different US states and some to Turkey, that does not rule out socking in this case, if one looks at the User:Valerius Tygart's editing history and article interest. Abecedare ( talk) 16:07, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Checkuser required to determine extent of apparent sock-farm and to verify the abusive uses of socks outlined above.
SlateGrey (
talk ·
contribs),
HamStation (
talk ·
contribs),
ParkerDrive (
talk ·
contribs),
JohnKillbuckSr (
talk ·
contribs), and
Mwithers (
talk ·
contribs) are Stale.
Valerius Tygart (
talk
+ ·
tag ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
logs ·
filter log ·
block user ·
spi block ·
block log ·
CA ·
CheckUser(
log) ·
investigate ·
cuwiki) is Confirmed as being related to
DyadTriad (
talk
+ ·
tag ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
logs ·
filter log ·
block user ·
spi block ·
block log ·
CA ·
CheckUser(
log) ·
investigate ·
cuwiki) and
Dogwood123 (
talk
+ ·
tag ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
logs ·
filter log ·
block user ·
spi block ·
block log ·
CA ·
CheckUser(
log) ·
investigate ·
cuwiki). 140... and 96... are him. The others, I'm not sure.
J.delanoy
gabs
adds
18:11, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Administrator note Confirmed socks indeffed. Main account blocked for 31 hours. Stale accounts and IPS not blocked, since they are inactive currently.
Abecedare (
talk)
03:17, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically. |
WP:DUCK edits to The Shining (film) and Fenugreek. Reasonable suspicion of stalking on the latter. Both editors show a resistance to engaging in discussion at article Talk pages despite repeated requests to do so and edit-warring notices. DonIago ( talk) 13:57, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
Well, I can give a full & complete account of myself: I am user Valerius Tygart. Unlogged-in, I appear as 143.85.18.18. I have not used any other "alias". No sockpuppetry here. Also no edit warring (more than one revert within 24 hours) by me. I am not Usernameistoosimilar. I have recently edited at The Shining (film), but not at Fenugreek. Valerius Tygart ( talk) 14:36, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
I have not edit warred. Instance #1 was 24 August, a first edit. An editor (you, Doniago) reverted my edit & so I restored it with #2 (24 August), my first revert. #3 is 25 August, after Doniago again reverted my edit. #4 is 26 August, ditto in response to Doniago's behavior. #5 is today after another editor's revert of my original edit. Who is edit warring again?
Why was I editing not logged in? This userbox has been posted on my userpage for many years...
Anon | A majority of this user's edits have been (& continue to be) anonymous. |
Problem with that?
Valerius Tygart (
talk)
14:59, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk%3AValerius_Tygart&diff=655208815&oldid=654800327 Steve Lux, Jr. ( talk) 19:52, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
Also, http://tools.wmflabs.org/sigma/editorinteract.py?users=Valerius+Tygart&users=143.85.18.26&users=&startdate=01%2F01%2F2015&enddate=&ns= Steve Lux, Jr. ( talk) 20:05, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
admins have the option of either administrative action or case input. Per WP:SPI/AI, admins may change the case status to "close" if they think everything is done. Also, every user may issue warnings to other users if those warnings are appropriate. So, you are perfectly allowed to issue a warning and close the case. Vanjagenije (talk) 09:06, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
At Tygart Dam, this editor appears to edit war using both Valerius Tygart and the IP:
This seems contrary to the spirit of WP:LOGOUT, and this editor has been cautioned about this at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Valerius Tygart/Archive#Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments. I cautioned Valerius Tygart here about editing while logged out. Valerius Tygart responded by noting that there is a template on their user page stating that "A majority of this user's edits have been (& continue to be) anonymous." As well, "I never intentionally make the same series of edits on the same article both logged in & logged out". This does not appear to be true. Thank you. Magnolia677 ( talk) 00:59, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
The user page User:Valerius Tygart has an impressive list of articles created or edited by this editor. All accounts listed above that are marked "Self-confirmed" have confirmed themselves as puppet accounts of this editor by logging their editing efforts on this main user page. The edit history of this page reads like a who's who list of many of the accounts this editor uses to edit Wikipedia. The few remaining accounts listed above that are not marked "Self-confirmed" were added because they pick up the same talk-page conversations and edits where the confirmed socks leave off; they are in the same IP range, on the very same span of articles and use the identical edit summary notations. Many of these accounts are dynamic and/or have gone stale, but have been included for record-keeping and pattern establishment because they 100% pass the duck test. The list is from a brief first-pass review and is nowhere near all inclusive.
All of the above accounts can be confirmed as socks through either checkuser or behavior analysis, but is the puppetry abusive? At first glance, the following examples stand out:
Xenophrenic ( talk) 08:43, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Great work! Lots of digging has uncovered..... what exactly? Many edits as an anon over the years (OMG!). A half dozen dead user accounts abandoned 3 to 4 years ago. A couple of active alternate user accounts (legitimate per Wikipedia:Sock puppetry for security [internet cafes] & privacy [workplace], etc). Also: that I have edited Wikipedia from .... Turkey (huh?). What was NOT uncovered: (1) deceptive or misleading use of multiple accounts; (2) use to avoid scrutiny; (3) use to mislead or deceive other editors; (4) use to edit project discussions; (5) use to disrupt edits with one account and normal edits with another; (6) use to distort consensus; (7) use to stir up controversy; (8) use to circumvent sanctions or policy. Also not found: (9) use to pose as more than one person (no, not even the one purported example is accurate). In other words: no sockpuppetry, as defined in policy. The so-called "who's who" edit list of my contributions as Valerius Tygart (which easily reveals alternate accounts) is good evidence that I have tried to hide nothing... Now, why not move on to more productive (& less predatory) work ... and leave a legitimate Wikipedia editor be? Valerius Tygart ( talk) 14:49, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Comment: I'd like to second this checkuser request. I was the admin who had blocked 96.231.137.242 ( talk · contribs) for edit-warring at Bill Maher and found the subsequent appearance of User:DyadTriad to be suspicious (though not conclusive, by itself). The fact that the main account Valerius Tygart ( talk · contribs) too recently edited the article and all the evidence compiled above makes socking even more likely. Note that though the IPs listed above geolocate to different US states and some to Turkey, that does not rule out socking in this case, if one looks at the User:Valerius Tygart's editing history and article interest. Abecedare ( talk) 16:07, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Checkuser required to determine extent of apparent sock-farm and to verify the abusive uses of socks outlined above.
SlateGrey (
talk ·
contribs),
HamStation (
talk ·
contribs),
ParkerDrive (
talk ·
contribs),
JohnKillbuckSr (
talk ·
contribs), and
Mwithers (
talk ·
contribs) are Stale.
Valerius Tygart (
talk
+ ·
tag ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
logs ·
filter log ·
block user ·
spi block ·
block log ·
CA ·
CheckUser(
log) ·
investigate ·
cuwiki) is Confirmed as being related to
DyadTriad (
talk
+ ·
tag ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
logs ·
filter log ·
block user ·
spi block ·
block log ·
CA ·
CheckUser(
log) ·
investigate ·
cuwiki) and
Dogwood123 (
talk
+ ·
tag ·
contribs ·
deleted contribs ·
logs ·
filter log ·
block user ·
spi block ·
block log ·
CA ·
CheckUser(
log) ·
investigate ·
cuwiki). 140... and 96... are him. The others, I'm not sure.
J.delanoy
gabs
adds
18:11, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
Administrator note Confirmed socks indeffed. Main account blocked for 31 hours. Stale accounts and IPS not blocked, since they are inactive currently.
Abecedare (
talk)
03:17, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically. |
WP:DUCK edits to The Shining (film) and Fenugreek. Reasonable suspicion of stalking on the latter. Both editors show a resistance to engaging in discussion at article Talk pages despite repeated requests to do so and edit-warring notices. DonIago ( talk) 13:57, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
Well, I can give a full & complete account of myself: I am user Valerius Tygart. Unlogged-in, I appear as 143.85.18.18. I have not used any other "alias". No sockpuppetry here. Also no edit warring (more than one revert within 24 hours) by me. I am not Usernameistoosimilar. I have recently edited at The Shining (film), but not at Fenugreek. Valerius Tygart ( talk) 14:36, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
I have not edit warred. Instance #1 was 24 August, a first edit. An editor (you, Doniago) reverted my edit & so I restored it with #2 (24 August), my first revert. #3 is 25 August, after Doniago again reverted my edit. #4 is 26 August, ditto in response to Doniago's behavior. #5 is today after another editor's revert of my original edit. Who is edit warring again?
Why was I editing not logged in? This userbox has been posted on my userpage for many years...
Anon | A majority of this user's edits have been (& continue to be) anonymous. |
Problem with that?
Valerius Tygart (
talk)
14:59, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=User_talk%3AValerius_Tygart&diff=655208815&oldid=654800327 Steve Lux, Jr. ( talk) 19:52, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
Also, http://tools.wmflabs.org/sigma/editorinteract.py?users=Valerius+Tygart&users=143.85.18.26&users=&startdate=01%2F01%2F2015&enddate=&ns= Steve Lux, Jr. ( talk) 20:05, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
admins have the option of either administrative action or case input. Per WP:SPI/AI, admins may change the case status to "close" if they think everything is done. Also, every user may issue warnings to other users if those warnings are appropriate. So, you are perfectly allowed to issue a warning and close the case. Vanjagenije (talk) 09:06, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
At Tygart Dam, this editor appears to edit war using both Valerius Tygart and the IP:
This seems contrary to the spirit of WP:LOGOUT, and this editor has been cautioned about this at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Valerius Tygart/Archive#Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments. I cautioned Valerius Tygart here about editing while logged out. Valerius Tygart responded by noting that there is a template on their user page stating that "A majority of this user's edits have been (& continue to be) anonymous." As well, "I never intentionally make the same series of edits on the same article both logged in & logged out". This does not appear to be true. Thank you. Magnolia677 ( talk) 00:59, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.