Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PlainAndSimpleTailor/Archive

• 82.33.24.203 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 92.40.173.117 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

• Edits immediately focused on the article where their actions had them blocked
• Geographic location (puppeteer location public as edited as IP and regularly slipped between IP and logged-in edits)
• [1] removal of exact same material that blocked user sought to remove repeatedly, and without mentioning removal in edit summary - frequent tactic of blocked user
• [2] – references to the article being messy (as here); labelling editors as nationalists/nationalist arguments (as here & here); need of an "overhaul" (as here)

[blocked user confirmed same as previous IP editor here] Cambial foliage❧ 13:44, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• (Second IP) Immediate focus on the exact some content; reference to "SNP press release" as here. Cambial foliage❧ 22:49, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Cambial Yellowing, What would be really helpful is if you could point out some diffs by PlainAndSimpleTailor to match up with the diffs you've provided for the IPs. -- RoySmith (talk) 13:52, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

Of particular interest also is this edit, where they passively aggressively demand thatI think perhaps one or more of the more passionate editors should take a break from the page. This is similar to this post on the same talk page by 79.66.34.195 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) where they sayI think perhaps this editor should consider taking a break from this article. PlainAndSimpleTailor used the similar 79.66.51.226 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), as they admitted here. FDW777 (talk) 07:06, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Yeah, it's likely these IPs are block evasion, but rather than play whack-a-mole, I've semi-protected United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 for a month. -- RoySmith (talk) 17:26, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• 78.149.2.89 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 185.104.136.29 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• 212.187.244.81 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))

• Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Numerous SPAs in the last few days all focussed on the removal of a factual sentence at United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020, see 212.187.244.81, 185.104.136.29 and 78.149.2.89. PlainAndSimpleTailor's entire focus was on the removal or amendement of that sentence, see for example this, this and this, and this by previous sockpuppet detailed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PlainAndSimpleTailor/Archive#21 April 2021. FDW777 (talk) 16:16, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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

• Page has already been semi-protected, so closing this. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:54, 17 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• 90.243.216.234 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))
• Tools: Editor interaction utility · Interaction Timeline · SPI Tools

The sockmaster earlier edited as IP 80.42.39.51, and later as others in the SPI archive. They confirmed their identity as 80.42.39.51 here. Some of the diffs below refer to this earlier account.

The sockmaster edited almost exclusively on the page United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 and some closely related pages. They repeatedly sought to change a statement about the purpose of the legislation to say "in the opinion of Michael Dougan" or "in the opinion of some academics".

• Examples: "Michael Dougan believed the bill as originally introduced could potentially restrict"

"Michael Dougan believed..." "Michael Dougan suggested that the bill as originally introduced could restrict.." "Several academics suggested that the bill as originally introduced could restrict.." "However, several academics have argued that while the powers remain" "several academics have argued during the introduction of the..."

• The IP's first edit was to this article. In it they once again introduce "however some academics when the bill was passing predicted it would..."

• Sockmaster uses the phrases "the most important one is ignore all the rules!" ; "the most important policy is Ignore All the Rules." ; "I know you love policies so remember the most important one is WP:IAR"
• This sock states "the most important rule of Wiki is there are no rules

• Sockmaster makes reference to "viewpoints of the likes of nationalists" ; "nationalist" editors", a later sock refers to "clear nationalist bias"
• This sock refers to "bias towards nationalists" in their second comment.

• Sockmaster uses the phrase "If you want to take a swing at writing..."
• This sock writes "If you want to take a swing at cleaning it up "

• Another telling feature is grammatical idiosyncracies. For example, the sockmaster often uses the adjective form instead of the adverb form: "only you and one or two other editors simple reverted their edits constantly" [presumably "simply"]; "placed in the reactions section just like the Mason Pincent view is complete acceptable" [presumably "completely"] ; "I think these criticism all more suitable sit there were they can be expanded" [presumably "suitably"] ; "non discrimination should be explained. Similar the UK's constitutional background should be set out" [presumably "Similarly"]
• This sock does the same twice in this edit: "I think any readership, would reasonable want to understand what a thing does" ; [same edit] "The sources etc are overwhelming from before the bill was an act, again on the film analogue this is akin to having all the reviews, critics comments etc be on the movie while its in production and not the finished product." [presumably "overwhelmingly"] Cambial — foliar❧ 22:55, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

• I think you're probably right that this is the same person. The IP hasn't edited in a month so I'm not going to bother with a block, but I will semi-protect United Kingdom Internal Market Act 2020 indefinitely (since it's already been protected twice before), which should hopefully reduce further disruption. Closing. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 02:03, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]