Langbahn Team – Weltmeisterschaft

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tetra quark/Archive


Tetra quark

Tetra quark (talk ·  · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

13 July 2015

Suspected sockpuppets


Tetra quark was blocked indefinitely in March 2015 for edit warring and uncivil comments directed at other editors. At 13:29, 9 July 2015 (UTC), Tetra quark said, after the umpteenth failed request to be unblocked, "Fuck it then, I'll just go edit articles in my gf's house." Buckbill10's first edit was at 20:58, 11 July 2015 (UTC). Buckbill10's editing pattern is similar to Tetra quark's, including edit warring over placement of images (light year: [1], [2], [3]; dark energy: five edits beginning with this one, including at least one that was identical to one by Tetra quark).[reply]

I also asked Buckbill10 directly if he is Tetra quark. Though the editor has since responded to several other comments on User talk:Buckbill10, the editor has not chosen to reply to my comment. Associating silence with guilt is questionable (and clearly insufficient on its own), but I would expect an innocent editor to reply in confusion. —Alex (Ashill | talk | contribs) 19:54, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by ScrapIronIV

While I am no expert, I would support the conclusion based on style, behavior, subject matter being edited, images, and hypersensitivity to challenges. This is all WP:DUCK evidence, without diffs, but I strongly support Ashill's contention here. Scr★pIronIV 20:11, 13 July 2015 (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

15 September 2015

Suspected sockpuppets

Tetra quark is indefinitely blocked and has used sock puppets to evade the block in the past (see the archived investigation for the history). He appears to have used this account and this IP to make further edits while blocked.

Tetra quark has a history of block evasion, including stating explicitly that he is editing Universe Sandbox ². —Alex (Ashill | talk | contribs) 16:55, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

The whole article appears to be just promotional anyway. Of the 12 references listed, only the Tech Radar article would count as an RS: the others either link to the company's own website, are dead links, or to an article about DLP televisions which isn't connected to the software. Richard3120 (talk) 17:29, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

22 September 2015

Suspected sockpuppets

[4] by anon. Same article that TQ has been known to have a COI with. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:07, 22 September 2015 (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

04 November 2015

Suspected sockpuppets

1. Tetra quark (TQ) has a long record of sock puppetry: [5].

2. As far as I know, the last confirmed TQ puppet was G-dac, who was blocked on 19:34, 27 October 2015: [6]. On the same day, and less than two hours after G-dac was blocked, Outedexits made his first registered account edit, 21:20, 27 October 2015: [7].

3. Outedexits edited the Withdrawal of low-denomination coins article on 28 October 2015: [8], [9]. TQ sock Huritisho edited the same article: [10], [11].

4. Outedexits edited the Dark matter article on 1 November 2015: [12]. TQ often edited the same article: [13], [14], [15], as has the TQ sock Huritisho: [16].

5. Outedexits edited the Rosetta (spacecraft) article on 2 November 2015: [17]. TQ sock G-dac edited the same article: [18] and the TQ sock Huritisho: [19], [20].

6. Outedexits edited the Solar System article on 2 November 2015: [21], [22]. TQ often edited the same article: [23], [24], as has the TQ sock Huritisho: [25].

7. Outedexits edited the Moons of Pluto article on 2 November 2015: [26]. TQ sock Huritisho edited the same article: [27], [28].

8. Outedexits edited the List of exoplanets article on 3 November 2015: [29]. TQ sock G-dac edited the same article: [30], as did the TQ sock Huritisho: [31].

9. Outedexits edited the List of potentially habitable exoplanets article on 3 November 2015: [32]. TQ edited the same article: [33], [34].

10. Outedexits edited the List of planets article on 3 November 2015: [35]. TQ sock Huritisho edited the same article: [36], [37].

11. Outedexits shows keen interest in lead images: [38], [39], [40], [41], an interest also of TQ: [42], [43], [44].

12. Outedexits edited to "remove excessive images": [45], and the TQ sock Huritisho edited to "remove excessive amount of images": [46].

13. Although Outedexits is a relatively new editor, he already uses twinkle (TW): [47], [48]. As far as I know, this is something that tends to be used by relatively advanced editors (I don't know how to use it). TQ also often used twinkle [49], as did the TQ sock Huritisho: [50], [51].

14. Outedexits occasionally makes an unusual edit, changing reference lists from 1 column to 2 columns: [52] or from 1 to 3 column: [53]. TQ sock Huritisho often made a similar change of reference columns: [54], [55].

15. Outedexits often uses VisualEditor: [56], [57]. TQ often used Visual Editor: [58], [59] as did TQ sock Huritisho: [60], [61].

16. Outedexits edits on both the English language and Portuguese language wikipedia sites: [62]. TQ edited on both the English language and Portuguese language wikipedia sites [63].

Over all, there is some substantial similarity between the articles that Outedexits chooses to edit, and that those that TQ and his socks chose to edit; there is also similarity in interests within those articles (formatting, image placement). It is possibly worth recognizing that TQ and his socks have been blocked for multiple reasons, including edit warring, derogatory comments towards other editors, edits that might be described as vandalism, and introducing pornography to the Wiki project (though this goes back some time, and seemed to be related to his anger over being blocked).

I suggest that a sock-puppet investigation be made of Outedexits, who appears to me to be a sock of Tetra quark. Thank you, Isambard Kingdom (talk) 14:54, 4 November 2015 (UTC) Isambard Kingdom (talk) 14:54, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

Textbook case of the duck test. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:57, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is ok that you think I am someone else. I am not going to take this in a personal way. So, I've checked the contributions of Tetra quark and it appears that the vast majority of articles he/she edits is related to astronomy/astrophysics/spaceflight/etc. I personally do have a keen interest in astronomy, having studied it extensively in my high school years. However, my major contributions have all been related to other totally unrelated topics, as you can see in my userpage. And by the way, Twinkle is not an advaced tool. Just go to your preferences and activate it. That's it, I don't know what else I can say. Outedexits (talk) 16:21, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Isambard Kingdom's comment that Tetra quark was known to edit war and to use "derogatory comments towards other editors" would also fit with Outedexits' recent behaviour over at the Muammar Gaddafi page, where over the past 24 hours they have been repeatedly uncivil and engaged in edit warring. Midnightblueowl (talk) 17:11, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I did not. You can not just change the lead image like that, without a discussion. The image you added was from 1973. Outedexits (talk) 17:21, 4 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Any user can check the Muammar Gaddafi article's revision history and see for themselves that what I said is true (and accordingly, that Outedexits' professions of innocence must be untrue). Outedexits was bold and replaced the lede image with their preferred choice. I reverted that edit, and they then 'undid' my edit, initiating an edit war. I reverted again, pointing them to the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle, and explaining that they should have opened a Talk Page discussion rather than edit warring. Rather than accepting this, they bizarrely insisted that I had in fact been the bold one (which is untrue), at which they changed the lede image back to their preferred choice. Although they had yet to breach the 3 Revert Rule, this was a clear case of edit warring, and throughout they posted derogatory and rude comments toward other editors in their edit summaries, for instance "Who was the idiot that thought it'd be a good idea to add a black and white picture of gadaffi taken in 1973?". Although perhaps none of this is directly relevant to the sock puppet investigation, it should be noted that it perfectly illustrates how Outedexits' attitude is very similar to that taken by Tetra quark, who used such language as "Go fuck yourself" and "stubborn pieces of shit like Isambard Kingdom, arianewiki1 and you...". Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:17, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agree I'm fully convinced that Outedexits is a sock-puppet of Tetra quark. Let me give you more hints from the Portuguese Wikipedia: Both are proficient Portuguese speakers but poor English speakers. Tetra quark has been blocked three times, twice for bad-words; today Outedexits has just been warned for the very same reason (the summary is deleted but, according to this evidence, he created a topic in Village Pump starting with "Hey you faggots..."). Tetra quark complains about the Wikipedian community in a generic manner; so does Outedexits . Curiously, Outedexits claims to be Brazilian (a south-American people), but he sounds to me like an European Portuguese speaker. Finally, Outedexits′ reckless behavior shows no fear of being banned at all, a clear sign of habitual puppetry. Looking for more hints... --Usien6 msg • his 17:38, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What? I never claimed to be Brazillian! I do in fact enjoy editing Wikipedia in other languages as well. Is there a problem with that? Outedexits (talk) 18:05, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Dear @Outedexits: Are you aware the authentication system of every Wikimedia project is the very same, i.e., same username in different Wikipedias means the very same person? Are you aware that I have already provided a link (let me repeat it) to an edition where you do claim to be Brazilian? Or should we ask one of the 1,429 native speakers here if you actually meant something else? Are you aware that been caught lying so badly doesn't help you getting through this investigation, at all? --Usien6 msg • his 18:36, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I know the names are the same. As I said, I do in fact edit Wikipedias in other languages and have confirmed my name is the same. Cheers. Outedexits (talk) 19:47, 5 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the odd interests of the suspects noted by Isambard, let me bring some more editions: on lead images (§11) one by ptwiki:Outedexits[64] (summary: "the image stays atop"), and one by enwiki:Tetra quark[Δ648216096] (sum.: "put that shit on top"); on image removal (§12) one by enwiki:G-dac[Δ687587878]; and on reference list column count (§14) one by ptwiki:Outedexits[65], four by enwiki:Outedexits[Δ687811186][Δ687820954][Δ687820914][Δ688724934], two by enwiki:Huritisho[Δ687059902][Δ686882905], and more than eleven by enwiki:G-dac(abcdefghijk). --Usien6 msg • his 15:29, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Agree I too am fully convinced that Outedexits is a sock-puppet of Tetra quark, based on the investigating sources already stated above. The articles being attacked are all historically the same as TQ and his earlier disclosed sock-puppets. Others edits are seemingly associated with the Visual Editor, which this User in Universe almost immediately attempted to change and correct images there. This is not something a new editor would normally do. Outedexits has already shown the normal set of the traits in immediately breaking WP:3RR rules without any adequate compromise or discussion with other Users. (This same User has already broken these rules several times in just two days.) There seems real evidence that they/he is deliberately trying to wear us down until we all get bored with it all, and getting further away from the abuse of other Users for which he was prevent from editing in the first place. If again proven he is yet another TQ sockpuppet, I'd suggest a more drastic and permanent ban editing articles like Universe, New Horizons, etc.

Frankly, his confirmed sock puppet Huritisho says "Honestly, I'm tired of being treated like trash."[66] The degree of deception by TQ and his sockpuppets kept pushing the envelope. I.e. [67], getting a sockpuppet of his, saying "" then getting the puppet to delete it when caught out. [68] - deliberately avoid scrutiny. Another is quickly removing text from a User page he does not like. [69] Now we see Outedexits and his utter denying his possible link with TQ, as he knows full well admitting guilt will again deny him access.

By his own words and action in only a few days, especially targeting the same articles that TQ and his sock puppets have edited, and combined with motive not to be discovered, means this is likely Outedexits is a sock-puppet.

(Note: If this is not a TQ sockpuppet, based solely on the WP:3RR multiple violations, this User should perhaps not be able edit astronomical or cosmological pages for a while. If this is TQ, his on-going behaviour will soon disclose the actual truth.) Arianewiki1 (talk) 18:57, 6 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 Blocked and tagged. -- Euryalus (talk) 08:40, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

02 January 2016

Suspected sockpuppets


Tetra quark has a long history of sock puppetry, edit warring, and uncivil behavior: [70]


The concern is that user:Incendiary Iconoclasm is a sock of Tetra quark. Here I will sometimes refer to these sock aliases for Tetra quark: Outedexits and Huritisho. A partial list of Tetra quark aliases can be found at:[71]


Slightly more than one day after Outedexits was blocked and tagged as a sock of Tetra quark on 08:40, 7 November 2015 [72], Incendiary Iconoclasm establishes an account and makes his first edit on 11:59, 8 November 2015 :[73]


Incendiary Iconoclasm edits on the Portuguese language wikipedia: [74], [75], [76].

Outedexits edits on the Portuguese language wikipedia: [77].

Tetra quark edits on the Portuguese language wikipedia: [78]


Incendiary Iconoclasm edits Child pornography: [79] [80]

Outedexits edits Pornography: [81]

Huritisho mentions pornography in his edit of Anal Cunt: [82]

Tetra quark introduces pornography to the Wiki project (though this goes back some time, and seemed to be related to his anger over being blocked):[83]


Incendiary Iconoclasm inserts lead image of galaxies at Universe: [84]

Outedexits inserts lead image of galaxies at Universe: [85]

Tetra quark inserts lead image of galaxies at Universe:[86]


Incendiary Iconoclasm inserts lead image at Muammar Gaddafi: [87]

Outedexits inserts lead image at Muammar Gaddafi: [88], [89]


Incendiary Iconoclasm edits Somnolence: [90]

Outedexits edits Somnolence: [91], [92]


Incendiary Iconoclasm edits the children section of Rich Homie Quan: [93]

Outedexits edits the children section of Rich Homie Quan: [94], [95]


Incendiary Iconoclasm edits Edwin Hubble: [96]

Tetra quark edits Edwin Hubble: [97]


Incendiary Iconoclasm edits Vladimir Putin: [98], [99]

Outedexits edits Vladimir Putin: [100], [101]


Incendiary Iconoclasm refers to content as "bullshit": [102], and on a talk page says "You are all pathetic. For god's sake, quit your bullshit.":[103], refers to editors as "morons" and/or "idiots": [104], [105].

Outedexits refers to content as "bullshit": [106], [107], [108], and refers to editors as "idiots": [109].

Hurritisho, in describing an edit, says "fuck this shit": [110]

Tetra quark refers to content as "bullshit": [111], and on his talk page says "All of this is absolutely pathetic.": [112], and tells editor user:John to "go fuck" himself, calls user:Isambard Kingdom and User:Arianewiki1 "stubborn pieces of shit": [113]


Incendiary Iconoclasm puts reference material into 2 columns: [114]

Outedexits puts reference content into 3 columns: [115], [116]

Outedexits puts reference content into 2 columns: [117]

Thank you, Isambard Kingdom (talk) 17:42, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Amazing. So, TheJewsDid9Eleven is also a sock of Tetra quark? I've noticed that Tetra quark (or one of his socks) occasionally edits articles on Jewish topics. I had thought about tracking those edits down, but wasn't sure about some of the patterns. I do recall that Tetra quark identified himself as a racist (using a badge) on his home page, which has since been deleted. I would like to ask if some-sort of IP range block can be put in place. Is that too restrictive? Isambard Kingdom (talk) 00:08, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Comments by other users

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

  • Tetra quark has gone on-record as being a developer. It's not clear whether the editor is a high-quality coder or a hobbyist, but it's clear that the editor has many resources and the ability to jump around. If we're blocking IPs, it could potentially cause problems for the editor with employers. Just a cautionary tale, not a warning. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:08, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Understood. I accept this. Thank you. Isambard Kingdom (talk) 00:35, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Er, I don't know how to defend myself here, nor can I explain the similarity in our edits. I can only promise that that person's edits just so happened to be on similar pages as mine. You can see that I mass-edited a bunch of articles, trying to establish a universal capitalization for "Universe". I honestly doubted that anyone had tried that before or cared about it as much as I did (this is a petpeeve of mine). I'm definitely not a racist, I literally was doing research for a school assignment at the time and I noticed that typo (my luck, exactly). I don't know if there's any way you guys can check IPs, but I'll swear that his and mine aren't the same. I'll just have to hope that someone can find any evidence that I'm unrelated to him. --Are you freaking kidding me (talk) 02:24, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dear enwiki admins: I am sorry to be informing you so late, but Incendiary Iconoclasm was already under investigation in ptwiki. You can find a bunch of suspicious diffs collected into this draft. I am 100% sure his guilty, so I must be formally asking for a ban in ptwiki, eswiki, and commons today --Usien6 msg • his 16:57, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

14 April 2016

Suspected sockpuppets


1. Tetra quark has a long history of sock puppetry, edit warring, and uncivil behavior (some of it, very concerning): [120]. Previously identified socks of Tetra quark of relevance here are: Outedexits, Huritisho, and Incendiary Iconoclasm. Tetra quark has other identified socks. The new possible socks are User:Not a creative person and User:187.107.0.247.

2. As far as I know, the last confirmed Tetra quark puppet was user:Incendiary Iconoclasm, who was blocked on 4 January 2016. One month later, User:Not a creative person made his/her first registered account edit on 2 February 2016: [121].

3. User:Not a creative person edits for Portuguese language detail: [122]. Tetra quark edited Portuguese language wikipedia sites: [123], as did Outedexits (a sock of Tetra quark): [124].

4. User:Not a creative person edits for a detail regarding Brazil: [125]. Outedexits (a sock of Tetra quark) is Brazilian: [126]

5. User:Not a creative person edits the article on Indonesia: [127]. Huritisho (a sock of Tetra quark) edited the article on Java, an island in Indonesia: [128], [129].

6. User:Not a creative person and User:187.107.0.247 edit the article on Dark matter: [130], [131], as did Tetra quark: [132], [133], [134], as did Outedexits (a sock of Tetra quark): [135], as did Huritisho (a sock of Tetra quark): [136].

Thank you, Isambard Kingdom (talk) 17:06, 14 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

This has been on my watchlist for a while. Before being banned for sockpuppetry, Outedexits asked about the vertical order of placement of tags at the tops of articles [137]. Now a large portion of Not Creative's edits involve moving tags around at the top of the page [138], [139], [140], [141], [142].

Outedexits splits columns [143], [144], [145]; Iconoclasm splits columns [146]; Tetra quark splits columns [147], [148], [149]; Not Creative splits columns [150]. Tetra quark removes/consolidates CN tags [151], [152]; Outedexits removes CN tags [153]; Not Creative removes CN tags [154]. Overall Not Creative is mostly concerned with images, placement of tags, and splitting columns, preoccupations of the other socks already documented. I would note that Not Creative's behavior seems to be an improvement, with only this image addition [155] challenging good faith. I hadn't noticed this one, but would probably have left it on the vine to ripen a bit or see if it makes a clean start. Geogene (talk) 01:07, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]


  • I have some open doubts that this is another sockpuppet, mostly because all but the recent edits until the Dark matter ones are inconsequential. However, as Geogene points out, the kinds of edits are familiar behaviours. My ultimate concern is that accusations of sockpuppetry are serious matters, and much caution needs to be applied else it begins to look like a witch hunt, 'outing' and persecution. Tetra quark's previous actions have been caught out by his inability to cooperate and the compulsion to engage in edit warring. So far that trait has not been really exercised, so it is hard to know if this is another 'test' of the resolve to continue the ban or just an accidental coincidence. To catch a sockpuppet you have to give them enough rope so that the evidence in watertight, not enough, and we risk scrutiny ourselves.

For me, only the truly obvious act is again deliberately avoiding scrutiny. It concerns me, where on this User's Talk page he wrote when challenged[156], then just promptly deleted it all.[157] (Tetra quark and some of the socks have done exactly this in the past.) Honesty when editing requires to be up front, and not doing so avoids WP:GF. I.e. User:Not a creative person is already deliberately avoiding the accusation of sockpuppetry, which is questionable. Arianewiki1 (talk) 12:04, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have no doubt he is another suck puppet. See WP:DUCK. Enforcing a ban on a known user with multiple accounts and an extremely long history of disruption is not "persecution", but cleanup. BatteryIncluded (talk) 02:13, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fine. My own comment was only that with WP:SPI, "You must provide this evidence in a clear way. Vaguely worded submissions will not be investigated. You need to actually show why your suspicion that the accounts are connected is reasonable." Any assumptions are invalid without actual proof. Let's find out the IP address first. (but this too can be easily circumvented by just changing it through an ISP.) What if we are wrong? That's the point. Arianewiki1 (talk) 13:48, 18 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

Quelle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Tetra_quark/Archive