Prior SSP or RFCU cases may exist for this user:
I believe that User:Academiic is the latest User:Jessica Liao sockpuppet. The original case is at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Jessica Liao.
Jessica Liao is (was) a student with special needs in Great Neck, New York. She tends to edit articles related to her school experience, plus some pop culture/celebrity articles. Her syntax is characteristic, her grasp of special education is characteristically odd, and her user page always has what Bradeos Graphon called a "myspace-esque" look. Additionally, she has never quite grasped this "verifiability" thing, but that's true for a large number of inexperienced and/or ineffective editors. When she's reverted, she usually complains on your talk page instead of on the article's talk page. Unfortunately, it results in errors that would be funny if not so sad, like her repeated assertions that students with serious emotional disturbances are placed in special education classes solely because the schools don't want to pay for specialized ED programs (such programs certainly do exist), and that somehow, simultaneously, these students, despite being enrolled in special ed classes, are not special ed students because they have the "wrong" kind of disability.
I'm familiar with her work in education-related articles, so I'll focus on that. (User:Academiic has edited only about half a dozen non-education articles anyway.) These are the edu-related articles that User:Academiic has edited in ways that overlap very suspiciously with known socks:
User:Academiic's work | Known socks that have edited this article |
---|---|
Special education (6 edits) | Nitsirk, Tigereyes92, MSerje, Lanna9013, 69.117.20.128, 209.177.21.6, 209.133.37.66, Heliciation, RainingmySoul |
Regents Examinations (3 edits) | Typetrust, 209.177.21.6, 69.117.20.128, Xtremeruna21, Kyla |
Alternative school (8 edits) | Tigereyes92, Tnuocca, Nitsirk, Yasdnil, Risa1991, BelleJenna, 69.117.20.128, 209.177.21.6, Kyla |
William A. Shine Great Neck South High School (15 edits) | Tigereyes92, Ladii artiste, 209.133.37.66, Nitsirk, Etak, MSerje, Risa1991, BelleJenna, Denyought, 69.117.20.128, 209.177.21.6, RainingmySoul, Reggin, I'm so bored, Oahc |
Great Neck School District | Typetrust, Tigereyes92, Risa1991, 209.133.37.66, BelleJenna, Denyought, Morrie, 69.117.20.128, 207.156.197.1, RainingmySoul, 209.177.21.6, Oahc, Kyla |
Jericho High School | Typetrust, Ladii artiste |
Village School (Great Neck, New York) | Typetrust, Tigereyes92, CaNdy ANdY, Ladii artiste, Nitsirk, Risa1991, Denyought, 69.117.20.128, 209.177.21.6, RainingmySoul, Cutefuzziebear, Reggin, I'm so bored, Xtremeruna21, Enitsirhc, Evets, Oahc, |
E. M. Baker Elementary School | Nitsirk, Satactetc, 209.177.21.6, 69.117.20.128, RainingmySoul |
Great Neck South Middle School | Risa1991, BelleJenna, 209.133.37.66, 209.177.21.6, 69.117.20.128, RainingmySoul |
Great Neck North Middle School | Nitsirk, Satactetc, Risa1991, BelleJenna, 209.133.37.66, 69.117.20.128, 207.156.197.1, RainingmySoul |
Saddle Rock Elementary School | MSerje, Satactetc, Risa1991, BelleJenna, Denyought, 209.177.21.6, 69.117.20.128, RainingmySoul |
John F. Kennedy Elementary School | Nitsirk, Risa1991, Denyought, 69.117.20.128, 209.177.21.6, RainingmySoul |
Lakeville Elementary School | MSerje, Satactetc, Risa1991, 209.133.37.66, 209.177.21.6, 69.117.20.128, RainingmySoul |
Education in the United States | Tnuocca, G2ace, 167.206.128.33, Lanna9013, 69.117.20.128, 209.177.21.6, I'm so bored, Kyla |
New York Institute of Technology | Tigereyes92, Ladii artiste (I ignore 167.206.128.33, which is an on-campus IP) |
Here's the complete list of education-related articles edited by this user and that don't have a known (to me) history of Jessica Liao socking:
More than seventy percent of User:Academiic's education-themed articles have a strong association with Jessica Liao. A good number of these articles were created by a Jessica Liao sock; some of them (e.g., Saddle Rock Elementary School, John F. Kennedy Elementary School) have been edited essentially by no one except the Jessica Liao socks (and various admins reverting her).
Interestingly, one of her few non-article edits in the current accounts is Wikipedia:Picture peer review/Teddy bear, which involves User:Academiic proposing a photo uploaded by known sock User:I'm so bored as a featured image. WhatamIdoing (talk) 06:12, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
All of my edits have been great if you just give me a chance. I don't think that you should accuse inexperienced users. We will get better as time goes by. I don't intentionally vandalize articles. I try to make the article better for everyone. --Academiic (talk) 16:05, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Additional information needed: Please provide a code letter. SPCUClerkbot (talk) 06:12, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Clerk endorsed for CU attention. Nathan T (formerly Avruch) 14:04, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
Confirmed Academiic and Deskaheed match Typetrust/Liao. Dominic•t 05:23, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
User accounts blocked indefinitely. --Kanonkas : Talk 19:59, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically. |
It's basically the same behavior as all the previous cases. Kate432 has already been blocked, but Harionlad is active at the moment. I'd be happy to share specific red flags, but I think we're seeing a bit of "adaptation" based on previous SPI and RFCU explanations -- e.g., Jessica has abandoned a characteristic naming scheme after about a dozen accounts were identified and blocked that way -- so I'd rather not do that in public if it's not necessary.
I do hope that someday Jessica will quit evading the ban (which was imposed for socking, not for vandalism or incivility) and just ask for permission to have a single legitimate account. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:45, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
I sent an e-mail to someone at ArbCom and ask to appeal the ban for permission to have a single legitimate account. I find it ridiculous that I am banned for socking when I am not using two accounts for personal gain. In the beginning, I was socking because I didn't know. Now I know, so can you cut me some slack? Harionlad (talk) 20:30, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Those are the accounts.
Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Jessica_Liao
I had an appeal but it was about giving me a second chance. I realize that wasn't the case. Now I am asking for permission to have a single legitimate account as I don't make vandalism or incivility.
Harionlad (talk) 21:19, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
Can you help me? Any advice would be helpful. Harionlad (talk) 21:41, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically. |
Please see User:WhatamIdoing/Jessica Liao sock report, and evidence from previous investigations. Jessica is making deliberate (but insufficient) efforts to look different. Dekimasu and I have been watching the account for about ten days now, and I was hoping not to have to hassle with organizing the evidence -- but this string of AfDs is disruptive, and I no longer have any reasonable doubts about the editor's identity, so it's time to shut down this account. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:46, 10 July 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically. |
Esthertaffet is very probably the latest User:Jessica Liao. In addition to her persistent and remarkable failure to grasp the basics of WP:RS, her interest in dictionary definitions, and her slightly odd syntax, she is showing a keen interest in the same articles as all of the other socks. Here's a small sampling:
Additionally, Jessica is known to very quietly watch my edits, and a passing comment I made on a page she doesn't frequent, about needing to file another sock report before much longer, resulted, predictably, in her not editing for a few days, until she decided that the danger was past. I'd like a checkuser run primarily to see whether she created any other accounts during those couple of days (and also to keep the IP information fresh, since that's been a problem in previous investigations, and of course to make sure that it's not an innocent non-ban-evading user). WhatamIdoing (talk) 00:32, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Clerk endorsed. Jessica Liao is stale, but some evidence might exist from the July case. Looks pretty self-evident, but CheckUser has been useful in the past. PeterSymonds (talk) 14:14, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
Confirmed as:
![]() |
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically. |
--Kanonkas : Talk 14:24, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
You know that I usually let new accounts develop a more significant evidence base before reporting the, to minimize the risk of accusing an innocent user, but I'm going to be a little bolder this round. We just blocked a bunch of Jessica's socks yesterday, and it looks like yet another was immediately created.
The subject of all five edits by this new account is the "resource room" that the last major sock was getting wound up about shortly before she was blocked. Either this "new" user has the worst conceivable luck, or it's yet another Jessica Liao sock. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:13, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
The IP's (recent) edits are highly similar:
The IP and Jimsteele9999 are "talking to each other" on the talk page (the IP last week, Jimsteele9999 today), and all edits are about resource rooms. As the IP is controlled by Comcast (in the correct region of the US), I assume that the edits from previous years are irrelevant. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:27, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
See Defending yourself against claims.
![]() |
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically. |
See Defending yourself against claims.
![]() |
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically. |
I don't know that this account is Jessica, but my index of suspicion is rising. Leaving aside flags like linguistic style, 8 out of 11 (73%) Rovea's edits in the article namespace and 18 out of 21 (86%) edits in the article+talk namespace have been made to pages also edited by previous socks. In the mainspace and the associated talk pages, four out of the five pages edited by Rovea overlap with identified socks:
Nearly all of her other edits are either:
On the other hand, one edit removed a sentence that may have been added by a Jessica Liao sock (although I didn't check; it just seems like the kind of mistake she would have made), which argues against Rovea being Jessica. I am consequently uncomfortable asking an admin for a block without CU evidence. WhatamIdoing (talk) 03:26, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
See Defending yourself against claims.
This is just an attempt to block excellent contributions from being added. Sure I have different perspectives on how to edit an ideal encyclopedia. But that should be tolerated instead of accusing that behavior as well beyond WP:POINTy. I show plenty of competence in editing. Do I move on from my views? Yes. I am not an incompetent editor who never moves on. Editors who bring checkusers based on gut feelings often are accused of harassment. WhatamIdoing has made me feel uneasy during my time on Wikipedia like she was watching every edit I make. This sockpuppet investigation is just harassment, plain and simple.
Therefore, any resemblance between Jessica and I was purely coincidental. Rovea (talk) 15:05, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Clerk endorsed – Even though I hear quacking, CU has come back negative on one of the cases before. Hence, I think technical evidence would be useful here. MuZemike 08:22, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
The user edited from two IPs. One is the same university IP used by User:Jessica Liao, the other seems to be the home IP. -- Avi (talk) 03:35, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Both sets above used the same static IP, not just the college IP. -- Avi (talk) 03:35, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Administrator note Rovea and Smallkim126 indefinitely blocked and tagged. The possible socks don't match the editing patterns of Liao, so I don't think they're sock and hence will leave them unblocked. MuZemike 05:00, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically. |
New user immediately userpage, edits some school articles, proposes a notable school for AFD, then withdraws nomination and proposes it be moved into the school district article. These are, to AGF, bold moves for a new user, and reminiscent of the Jessica Liao socks. Additionally, the distance from Seaford NY to Great Neck NY (Jessica Liao's area of obsession) is apparently nearby, only about 20 miles (32 km) A CHU may be necessary to confirm this is a Liao sock. I'll leave that up to the clerk/admin. tedder (talk) 20:52, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
See Defending yourself against claims.
Checkuser is not for fishing, which this one seems to be. Tilliego (talk) 21:12, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
--Avi (talk) 23:15, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically. |
I'm sorry if I've jumping the gun, but "Ylrebmik" is "Kimberly" spelled backwards, which is an old pattern for this editor; the edits are to two articles almost entirely written by Jessica Liao's many socks, about schools in her hometown; and the only main-namespace edit defends information [3] added by a confirmed sock, User:Luv4thegame4848.
User:Panickyei, User:Tilliego, User:Rovea, User:Zeleb, User:Esthertaffet, User:Harionlad and User:Academiic are all relatively recent accounts. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:20, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
See Defending yourself against claims.
I have already declared the connection between Jessica and I on my user page. Ylrebmik (talk) 23:27, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically. |
I'm sorry if I've jumping the gun, but "Assilem" is "Melissa" spelled backwards, which is an old pattern for this editor. Why don't I just report myself instead of having WhatamIdoing do it? It saves us both a lot of time. Assilem (talk) 04:13, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
See Defending yourself against claims.
No CheckUser needed. I'm self-admitting.
Umm... okay then.
Confirmed Jessica Liao (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) = JPsCrackhead2 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) = Assilem (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki).
J.delanoygabsadds 04:34, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically. |
User talk:WhatamIdoing#FYI indicates a remarkable familiarity with personal information about Jessica, and every single article she's edited has been edited by multiple confirmed socks.
She admits elsewhere that Oyamasan is the same account as Elanaretaina. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:38, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
See Defending yourself against claims.
![]() |
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically. |
The only edits by Special:Contributions/Looklikeicare04 are eleven changes to the userpage, and -- now a newly minted autoconfirmed user -- a claim at a semi-protected page that Jessica isn't really banned. WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:00, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
See Defending yourself against claims.
![]() |
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically. |
Dahliarose pretends she has no idea of who Jessica is. She talks to her socks as if they are different users. See Talk:Village School (Great Neck, New York)#Top importance. Her previous sock Tilliego was completely unaware that Jessica was a banned user. I suspect Dahliarose as a sock of Jessica. All Wikipedia users should be aware of banned users. It is the responsibility of the Wikipedia community to be aware of this banned user, Jessica. WhatamIdoing is practically the only one who watches out for her latest socks. At least be on the lookout of any suspicion if you don't know all the banned users. Dahliarose acted like she had no idea. Everyone knew something was up when both editors seems to agree with each other.
In the first investigation, MrMacMan has deliberately reported Jessica just to get her into trouble. He has mentioned possibly private information about Jessica in his future admin report. This could probably be the reason for why he reported her. See User:MrMacMan/future admin report and Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Jessica Liao. I suspect that MrMacMan is Jessica or her sock. Otherwise how else does he know so much about her? Jessica's previous sock, Assilem which was recently reported herself which was strangely odd behavior since none of her previous socks ever did this.
Jane8888 has provided personal information about Jessica that her previous sock also did. See User talk:WhatamIdoing#FYI where Elanaretaina said personal information as well. For more private information about Jessica: See here: [4] and [5] The second link where Jane8888 filed the case said there was a ban. But during the Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Jessica Liao when asked to provide the diff of the community ban against Jessica, no one could answer. Jane8888 had provided personal information about Jessica that was irrelevant to the entire investigation. She could have just said all the multiple accounts were done by her all without the other private information. I suggest an oversight of her private information.
Jessica's user page before projected a provocative persona which I am shocked that no one in Wikipedia over sighted her personal information. (This is why I suspect MrMacMan and Jane8888 as either a sock or Jessica since she previously provided personal information.) After all, Wikipedia is not a social networking website, but a collaborative encyclopedia. She has displayed the name of her school and a list of her interests. She even stated her full name and her family. And also, Wikipedia should consider protecting children's privacy a bit better. This is completely unacceptable to have all of Jessica's private information for all to see. If a random person like me can see this, then you bet a pedophile can see it too. Thankfully she is still alive or is she? Jonathan Keith Gosselin (talk) 17:46, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
See Defending yourself against claims.
Clerk endorsed including on the filer. Something doesn't look right here. MuZemike 17:51, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically. |
WP:PLAXICO shenanigans. Finds WP:LOBU and a discussion on its talk page related to adding User:Jessica Liao to the list within an hour of the account's creation.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:33, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
See Defending yourself against claims.
Interesting edits from 'Girafe':
Clerk endorsed Tim Song (talk) 23:39, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically. |
Same kinds of edits, same types of articles, and an unusually good memory of conversations that happened last year. Of course, I could well be wrong (and I'd love to have a few more good editors on education-related articles), but... WhatamIdoing (talk) 23:15, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
See Defending yourself against claims.
Clerk endorsed, confirmation, sleeper check and IP block. Tim Song (talk) 05:41, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically. |
Bryan Fedner[[6]] seems to be one of another incarnations of Jessica Liao: See the report [7]
Similar editing patterns on obscure topics, very similar edit summary language and pedantic nitpicking all suggest she's back. Jim Steele (talk) 14:24, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
See Defending yourself against claims.
The Bryan Fedner account has only edited from one location, which geolocates close to known Jessica Liao socks. It's thus possible, from a technical point of view, but that's all I can say, the data I have shows no overlap.
FWIW, confirmed as Jessica Liao and not yet mentioned in the archive are
Both had been already blocked & tagged.
Amalthea 16:32, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically. |
The usual problems at the usual articles. Jessica is spreading misinformation and disrupting a series of articles because of her inability to read and understand sources.
Additionally, I'd like to suggest that you permanently semi-protect some of her favorite targets, including Special education, Inclusion (education), Tracking (education), and any school that she's attended. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:22, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
See Defending yourself against claims.
Clerk declined Well the IP registers to Nassau County Community College and has been used for the past four years. Based on recent IP activity, the user seems to be jumping around here and a block of maybe a week or two might discourage them on this one. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 00:24, 2 July 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically. |
This user contacted me today via IRC (and apparently some other editors and admins) about the WP:Standard Offer, asking if it would apply. It turns out, the users most recent sock was blocked today (well, technically yesterday, since the server uses GMT). The user has vowed to cease all sock puppetry, and is also willing to make amends for disruptive edits. I told the editor to contact me around the middle of December about the "Standard Offer", and we would look in to it more then, as it would be closer to a 6 month point. I also advised the user that they could feel free to read Wikipedia, but they could not edit Wikipedia without getting in trouble any further. I also advised her, that if she saw something that needed to be changed, and it would be a constructive edit, to contact an experienced editor so they could look in to it.
Early today, she contacted me again, in regards to her edits to Special education, in which she added a section that was blatant copyright violation, and also mis-cited (cited a book, instead of the website where she got the information). I've tagged the section, and added a comment to the talk page of the article.
The user appears to be trying to make amends for their actions, in an attempt to return in 6 months. I've noticed several blocks, and dozens of socks, but for now, I'm willing to assume good faith, for now. I'll keep tabs on this user, and all their contribs, to see if this continues. Hopefully, the user will continue to show good faith, by notifying us of disruptive edits we may have missed.
I will post anything else that comes up with this request.
NOTE: Sorry if this is the wrong location for this. If it needs to go elsewhere, feel free to move it, and let me know where! Thanks! --ANowlin: talk 05:26, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically. |
Look at the fourth edit, clearly a single purpose account of a likely banned user. Secret account 00:31, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
See Defending yourself against claims.
Without a doubt, this is her. Blocked and tagged. –MuZemike 00:38, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"
Possible sleeper account. Jessica has been trying now for months to get herself on the list of banned users on wikipedia, she even attempted to do so on ED. Now, this account which is years old, comes to this page that they've never, ever edited, and reverts Jessica's removal from the list. Seems rather odd, doesn't it? — Dædαlus+ Contribs 02:14, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
Unrelated – I'm sorry, but unless she fled the U.S., this is not her. –MuZemike 03:10, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"
The above mentioned accounts have been active on special education, an article that receives editing from a few regular bonafide editors and an infmaous sock and her various incarnations. Edit summaries are similar to those of Jessica, the information added and deleted also follows the trivial patterns of her editing habits and her sources are rudimentary at best, all of which Jessica was guilty of before. I am tempted to say WP:DUCK here but I will leave that in someone elses more capable hands. That should not be hard to find! Thanks. Jimsteele9999 (talk) 12:56, 11 January 2011 (UTC) Jimsteele9999 (talk) 12:56, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"
Newly created account Contribs as of January 16, making near-identical recently to edits by User:Xcueta, shown to be banned User:Random account 39949472. WP:DUCK case. oknazevad (talk) 04:18, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"
Duck-y SPAs for Jessica Liao's agenda for the "Methods of provision" section at Talk:Special education. Liao also joined the English Wikipedia channel on IRC and linked to the discussion. Logan Talk Contributions 22:27, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
Likely. IPs are different, but some share parent company, and other technical evidence is more similar than coincidence alone would imply. No obvious sleepers. -- Avi (talk) 02:25, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
This request by Oaldari is virtually identically to this request by Mredric, who was blocked and reverted by MuZemike for being a sockpuppet of Random account 39949472. Requesting CU for a sleeper check. Logan Talk Contributions 21:48, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
Each one of these accounts has made their only edits to Talk:Special education and seems to share the same focus as previous Liao socks. Pretty cut and dried really, but CU may be useful for checking for sleepers, and I'm not an expert in this particular LTA case. Beeblebrox (talk) 00:52, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
Every article edited by User:Theblumbox match the editing history of those discussed at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Random account 39949472/Archive (with the exception of the relatively new article Salmon Fishing in the Yemen and Helen Keller Middle School, which this user created, both of which are about related subjects). The notable focus on both the same exact particular schools and the subject of special education matches the master account's MO perfectly, and the master account has an extensive history of creating sockpuppets for this purpose. - SudoGhost 19:20, 16 April 2012 (UTC) SudoGhost 19:20, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.