- Before deleting, or suggesting the deletion, of this page for any reason, please see this deletion discussion.
| Original name(s) | Uncertain: EBlack, D.Right, and probably Agiantman and 24.147.97.230 |
|---|---|
| Wikilifespan | 1st half 2005 - 2012 |
| ISP | Various |
| Known IPs | Any (uses IPs around the world) |
| Known hostmasks | See intel |
| Physical location | Past Hong Kong, possibly UK, or Netherlands |
| Requests for comment | Probably same as Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Agiantman and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/24.147.97.230. |
| Sockpuppet investigations | HeadleyDown |
| Requests for arbitration | Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Neuro-linguistic programming (list of blocks in that article) and probably same as: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Regarding Ted Kennedy |
| Instructions | Block on sight Block on behavior (variable country IP) |
| Status | Archived |
 | Please report all ongoing incidents of abuse to AIV or ANI |
HeadleyDown (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is the best known alias of a community-banned Wikipedia vandal and habitual reincarnator who specializes in massive sneaky pov vandalism with multiple sock/meatpuppets (around 50 - 80 over some 3 years, often 3 - 10 at a time on multiple articles), devastating articles by long term damage, and driving away bona fide editors. It is not always clear which editors are socks, and which are meats run by his associates.
His preferred technique is to engage severe POV slanting/hostile editing, often via gradually introduced socks.
HeadleyDown initially acts as the "sweet voice of a reasonable editor", claiming to have a scientific or neutral interest, seeking minor improvements, POV fixes, balance, or a legitimate "scientific/neutral" viewpoint in an otherwise not-bad article. However in practice long-term he is[citation needed] a virulent and destructive subtle POV warrior who ignores bona fide research (sometimes calling it "promotion") and gradually over time using multiple socks forces a massive POV slant until articles end up attacking their own subjects, or twisted to a very one-sided POV, rather than explaining them. This is claimed to be "more concise", "more scientific", "cited", "skeptical", "keeping pov out", or "more neutral", a stance undermined by at least one incarnation where he pov warred on the opposing side instead. At times, he has forged cites and credentials, invented material, and deleted bona fide information, to do this. He is quite tenacious and persistent and tries to come back if blocked. He favors "the best defense is a strong offense" and accuses others of multiple bad actions when criticized, to muddy the waters.
It is worth noting that Wikipedians lacking prior experience usually mistake HeadleyDown's socks as being good-faith editors, perhaps who don't quite understand 'personal attack', and treat his disputes as run-of-the-mill content/civility/3RR/NPOV issues. As a result his socks are very often given much good faith even by experienced editors, and only slightly chastised by Arbcom, which he uses to continue degrading the article and deterring genuine editorship for months on end.
The most obvious visible symptom is a combination of
- An editor (or clique of editors) who says they are being helpful or neutral and following Wiki-process (adding valid cites and genuine info and removing unsupported statements etc), while the article somehow keeps getting more and more virulently extreme or unbalanced, and eventually a feeling of despair that it's "just not going to get better".
- Eventual vicious personal attacks on more neutral editors, especially alleging bias or pro-<subject>.
- Suspicion of sock/meatpuppetry. There are many ways to confirm a HeadleyDown presence if suspected but these are not obvious to unfamiliar editors.
HeadleyDown has been classed as "block on behavior" by David Gerard, repeatedly confirmed by Mackensen. Because of his modus operandi the significant damage he does is not easy to unravel.