Home • Search • Translate
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Justa Punk

Justa Punk ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
03 August 2010
Suspected sockpuppets



Evidence submitted by Bejinhan

I've been involved in an AfD about a wrestling competition. I noticed some strange editing patterns from 3 different users who requested delete. All 3 edit similar/same articles and all 3 are involved in Australian and wrestling-related articles. The additional suspicious thing is that 2 of them have conflicts with the same user(GaryColemanFan). Not only that, they seem to be very knowledgeable with Wikipedia and all 3 registered for an account in 2007. At such, I'm requesting a checkuser to verify this. It might be possible that they connect to different IPs. Bejinhan talks 02:25, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply

Per Fetchcomms comment, here is a list of articles edited by Justa Punk and Rick Doodle. I find it quite weird since all 3 accounts edit similar articles. Bejinhan talks 04:28, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply
Comments by accused parties   

See Defending yourself against claims.

  • Absolute nonsense. Matching interests do not make a case. Show me where Justa Punk has contributed to railways. Desperation effort here by the nominstor to rescue an article that has to go under Wikipedia rules of notability. RICK ME DOODLE YOU DOODLE 03:13, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply
They do not necessarily... but in this case, it might. Not every account used in a sockpuppetry case will be used to edit the same articles. Hence, if you edit the railways articles, it does not mean Justa does. This is not a desperate effort. I have done my homework by checking through all your contributions and it seems that all 3 of you edit almost similar articles. Furthermore, the article contributions seem to indicate a same locality. If it wasn't for your desperate effort to get the article deleted, my suspicious won't be raised. Bejinhan talks 03:20, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply
  • I'm striking Mal Case out, because he uses my computer as he does not have the Internet at home, and there are no computers where he works. We are two seperate people. A check user for us would be misleading because there would obviously be a match for the reasons I have given. I deny any connection with Rick Doodle, and I agree with him that the reporter is butthurt (my word of course, not Rick's) because we oppose the article at the bottom of this situation. Rick did go too far with the COI accusation IMHO just for the record. Also, I have no interest in the railways! They should be torn up in favour of better roads!! !! Justa Punk !! 07:43, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply
You have no right of striking Mal Case out. Since you are the accused, how can you do that? Doesn't make sense, IMO. And if both of you are using the same computer, why didn't you post that in your userpage or somewhere? You have to have transparency, something you're not having. Seeing that both of you are using the same computer, getting involved in the same articles is a wrong step. You should know that meatpuppetry is wrong.
I'm not butthurt about this. I've started AFDs before and people have opposed them. Did I go and start SPIs against them? No. In fact, this is my first SPI. I don't simply start one just because I'm offended or something. After all, why waste my time? I'm supposed to be on wikibreak due to very stressful issues here(see my talk page). I wouldn't be starting this SPI at this point of time if I don't have evidence or want a tit-for-tat. I have other better things to do. Bejinhan talks 10:38, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply
I have every right to strike that out. Did you even read what I said? Mal's use of my computer is not permanent (hopefully) so why should I put it on my user page? Meat puppetry is only valid if we are intentionally working as a team. I state that we are not. You ARE butthurt over this (IMO) because you simply didn't like me trying to do the right thing and dispose of an article that has already been deleted twice for the same reason (the title is not notable) and nothing you have done has changed that. The fact that you are persisting to edit here proves that you are not a person of your word (IMO). If you have better things to do, perhaps you should be doing them. !! Justa Punk !! 13:48, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply
Striking it out changes nothing. -- Deskana (talk) 16:08, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply
Comments by other users

I'm involved in the aforementioned AfD by Bejinhan, so I have a COI, but Mal Case edits irregularly but edits many AfDs, many of which are also edited by Justa Punk and Rick Doodle, who has similarly irregular patterns. I think there may be something worth investigating here. — fetch · comms 02:48, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply

  • I make no secret of not liking JustaPunk or RickDoodle, and MalCase's almost militant deletionist tendencies don't sit well with me (we may have had a direct conflict, but I can't remember offhand...if so, then I don't like him, either). With that said, I have never believed them to be the same editor. They're a cabal, certainly. They're definitely involved in a form of meatpuppetry (see Wikipedia:Tag team). While I find their "My way or I'll throw a fit" editing to be obnoxious and believe that the recent AfD was based on either spite or a simple "shoot first and don't bother with the questions" mentality, I'm not convinced that any rules have been broken. As far as I am concerned, they don't improve Wikipedia, but they hurt it within the acceptable guidelines. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 05:20, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 Clerk endorsed – MuZemike 13:52, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply

 Clerk note: All parties are reminded to please remain civil on this page, or nobody will be allowed to comment here. – MuZemike 13:52, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply

 Confirmed that the following accounts are related:

-- Deskana (talk) 19:26, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply

information Administrator note Socks indefinitely blocked and tagged, sockmaster blocked 1 month for sock puppetry. – MuZemike 22:51, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply


23 April 2011
Suspected sockpuppets


Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"

Justa Punk was blocked last year due to his use of several sockpuppet accounts. A few months later, the account Ultra X987 was created. The user's edits are very similar to the sockpuppeteer's edits: (1) they are focused on deleting articles on smaller Australian professional wrestling promotions, (2) they are focused on removing companies from the List of professional wrestling promotions article, and (3) the new user recently contacted an administrator regarding the re-creation of a deleted article. The new user was somehow familiar with the deletion history of the article (most users with a handful of edits don't have the experience to examine deletion histories) and was pushing to have it salted--this seems particularly suspicious, as Justa Punk was the user who initiated the initial AfD for the article. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 02:22, 23 April 2011 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

  • If this is really Justa Punk, I think this is getting way out of hand. Since the SPI last year, JP has created many sock accounts (some for the purpose of harassing) which has led to him being banned from editing. Is it possible to block the IP he edits from? If I remember correctly, he edits from a library IP so there was some hesitation when I suggested an IP block. Bejinhan talks 03:27, 23 April 2011 (UTC) reply
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
  • information Administrator note Per behavioral evidence, I've blocked and tagged Ultra. As a side note, we don't really have any actual proof (i.e. checkuser results) that show that this account is Justa Punk, so I don't really think we can justify an IP block at this time. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 12:38, 23 April 2011 (UTC) reply
16 April 2014
Suspected sockpuppets


Clear vendetta against Australian professional wrestling articles. This behaviour was noted at both [ [1]] and[ [2]]. The insistence upon pursuing the deletion of Australian professional wrestling articles through several AfDs makes this a clear case of WP:The duck test. Particularly important diffs would include [3] (the statement about how "it's literally impossible to be notable" as an Australian professional wrestler) and [4] ("This woman is not notable and I intend to prove it"). Both of these statements match up closely with the Sockpuppet investigation page details mentioned above. The second IP listed above is per 124.180.170.151's statement at [5] that they are the same person. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 05:44, 16 April 2014 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Wrong! Those IP's were not me. They were not socks. But they were MEAT PUPPETS! Yeah they were working for me and they'll continue to work for me (and do a few edits of their own - like the last ones did on the girls gridiron), until the proper notability lines are set for Aussie wrestling! You always were a dill, GCF! Signed !!Justa Punk!! 203.12.30.74 ( talk) 04:22, 23 April 2014 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
25 April 2014
Suspected sockpuppets

The IP is an admitted sock ( see here). This edit includes a statement from the banned user that more people are doing his bidding. Dragonfire X has suddenly returned from editing after not being active since 2010 and has immediately gravitated to deletion discussions about Australian professional wrestlers (Justa Punk's main focus). BerleT is a sporadic editor who has been editing heavily in Australian professional wrestling articles and has commented on all three of Justa Punk's new deletion discussions (not evidence per se, but worth looking into, especially given the meatpuppetry mentioned in Justa Punk's IP edit). GaryColemanFan ( talk) 00:42, 25 April 2014 (UTC) reply

Added three more IPs, who keep trying to have this investigation shut down. リボン・サルミネン (Ribbon Salminen) ( talk) 12:34, 25 April 2014 (UTC) reply
Definitely suspicious and similar behaviour to Justa Punk. starship.paint "YES !" 06:20, 26 April 2014 (UTC) reply
101.172.85.68 has been added after returning from over a year of inactivity to add a notability tag to an article that Justa Punk's other socks have been trying to redirect because of perceived notability issues. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 01:50, 27 April 2014 (UTC) reply
203.17.215.22 -> on-and-off IP which just targeted the Australian wrestlers' AfDs. Restored this edit to Justa Punk's talk page. starship.paint "YES !" 03:57, 30 April 2014 (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
  • information Administrator note Blocked the 203.* IPs for 1 month each, as they are public library terminals in Australia, and the disruption was worth the cost IMO. Blocked the 1.124.* IPs and the 101.* IP for 2 weeks each, as they are all part of Telstra and may or may not be dynamic. The evidence on the two registered users is too thin for me to block esp. since they are not actively editing at this time. Leaving case open in case anyone has additional comments or wants to investigate further. — Darkwind ( talk) 02:53, 14 May 2014 (UTC) reply
06 October 2014
Suspected sockpuppets


The IP history is beyond the duck test for this banned user. Request to complete Afd is the same wording as his multiple requests this April (as 203.12.30.74). He is an Australian user who edits (and removes information from) professional wrestling articles and uses IP addresses to initiate AfDs of Australian topics.

Please also note that IP 124.180.170.151 was blocked earlier this year as a Justa Punk sock puppet. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 01:31, 6 October 2014 (UTC) reply

He has now requested an AfD on an Australian professional wrestler under the IP 203.17.215.26. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 01:54, 9 October 2014 (UTC) I have added 203.17.215.22, as he has used multiple IPs arguing at Thunder (luchador). GaryColemanFan ( talk) 02:11, 9 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Absolutely denied. Tedious report that should be ignored. 124.180.144.121 ( talk) 01:43, 6 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Additional note. I have looked at the history of this user and this is about professional wrestling. I made a couple of edits to help a friend who just happens to work there in WWE, but that was all. I have no real interest in professional wrestling. The reporting user appears to have some other agenda here designed to protect Vern Hughes. I had no idea to COI issues identified previously on Vern's article were this deep. 124.180.144.121 ( talk) 01:54, 6 October 2014 (UTC) reply

He's been dealt with
I know this guy in IRL although until today I didn't know he was editing as Justa Punk here. I won't give his real name for obvious reasons, but he's a known troublemaker in Australian wrestling. I caught him fighting with Gary over the Amy Action article and I reported him to security after going to another computer to see what he was doing and making the connection. He was told he was banned from the building (SLV) and it looked like he was going to argue until he saw me - and he did a pretty good impression of the Road Runner when I said "Bye Bye Justa!". Now that he knows I'm onto him on here I don't think you'll see him for quite some time at best. Curse of Fenric ( talk) 03:10, 9 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 Clerk note: Not enough evidence presented to block 124.180.144.121. The wording of the two requests to complete AfDs (I only looked at one by the other IP) are not identical (diffs next time should be provided). I can see that the IP is disruptive and even obnoxious, but that's a different issue from sock puppetry. IP hasn't edited since October 13, either. The other IPs are, of course, already blocked for one year.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 15:37, 19 October 2014 (UTC) reply

24 June 2015
Suspected sockpuppets


IP address almost identical to several of Justa Punk's other sockpuppets. He has promised to create more sockpuppets. This article is one of his most frequent targets, as he has made it clear he wants it gone (removing information about professional wrestling in Australia is his modus operandi). The IP that virtually matches his other sockpuppets prodded this article today ( [6]). GaryColemanFan ( talk) 04:52, 24 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Other IP came out of nowhere to replicate the edit I deleted from the first sockpuppet. This is in keeping with his promise that he has an army of sock/meatpuppets who will continue his crusade. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 17:35, 26 June 2015 (UTC) reply
Comments by other users

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

  • Okay this is ridiculous now. There is no proof even under WP:DUCK that either of these are Justa Punk. Both have unrelated edits and limited numbers. Gary's paranoia over this is way over the top and I already suggested to him that he back off because of it. His reaction was very close to a WP:CIVIL violation. There needs to be a far better case presented than this. Don't get me wrong, if it is Punk and that can be absolutely proven then I'm all for the block. He's a menace. But let's get it right before acting arbitrarily and assume good faith until it's conclusively proven otherwise. I consider this an abuse of WP:DUCK at this point due to the lack of proof. Curse of Fenric ( talk) 01:06, 27 June 2015 (UTC) reply
  • Oh I forgot - it's not a replica. The first IP only invoked WP:NOT. The second invoked WP:GNG and WP:ADV as well. And for the record I think the claimed fail in at least two are wrong and the third is borderline (WP:NOT). Curse of Fenric ( talk) 01:08, 27 June 2015 (UTC) reply
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
  • Checkuser comment: No reasonable basis for this SPI; in fact, I'd go so far as to suggest its deletion if not for the past history. No checks done. Closing. Risker ( talk) 01:02, 8 July 2015 (UTC) reply
I've been asked to explain further, as it's not immediately apparent why I closed this indicating that there was no reasonable basis. There have been no direct links to the original account since 2010, only blocks to some IPs for disruption. Wrestling is historically a contentious subject and, in the case of Australian wrestling articles, it's most likely to be Australians who do the arguing. The IP addresses are dynamic and are from different ISPs. The edits are only similar in that they're both PRODs. I'm not sure I really see the point in linking dynamic IPs to any sockpuppetry case where the evidence is so sporadic and spread over such a long period. Risker ( talk) 03:50, 8 July 2015 (UTC) reply


Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Justa_Punk/Archive&oldid=1136433668"
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Justa Punk

Justa Punk ( talk + · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser( log) · investigate · cuwiki)
03 August 2010
Suspected sockpuppets



Evidence submitted by Bejinhan

I've been involved in an AfD about a wrestling competition. I noticed some strange editing patterns from 3 different users who requested delete. All 3 edit similar/same articles and all 3 are involved in Australian and wrestling-related articles. The additional suspicious thing is that 2 of them have conflicts with the same user(GaryColemanFan). Not only that, they seem to be very knowledgeable with Wikipedia and all 3 registered for an account in 2007. At such, I'm requesting a checkuser to verify this. It might be possible that they connect to different IPs. Bejinhan talks 02:25, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply

Per Fetchcomms comment, here is a list of articles edited by Justa Punk and Rick Doodle. I find it quite weird since all 3 accounts edit similar articles. Bejinhan talks 04:28, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply
Comments by accused parties   

See Defending yourself against claims.

  • Absolute nonsense. Matching interests do not make a case. Show me where Justa Punk has contributed to railways. Desperation effort here by the nominstor to rescue an article that has to go under Wikipedia rules of notability. RICK ME DOODLE YOU DOODLE 03:13, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply
They do not necessarily... but in this case, it might. Not every account used in a sockpuppetry case will be used to edit the same articles. Hence, if you edit the railways articles, it does not mean Justa does. This is not a desperate effort. I have done my homework by checking through all your contributions and it seems that all 3 of you edit almost similar articles. Furthermore, the article contributions seem to indicate a same locality. If it wasn't for your desperate effort to get the article deleted, my suspicious won't be raised. Bejinhan talks 03:20, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply
  • I'm striking Mal Case out, because he uses my computer as he does not have the Internet at home, and there are no computers where he works. We are two seperate people. A check user for us would be misleading because there would obviously be a match for the reasons I have given. I deny any connection with Rick Doodle, and I agree with him that the reporter is butthurt (my word of course, not Rick's) because we oppose the article at the bottom of this situation. Rick did go too far with the COI accusation IMHO just for the record. Also, I have no interest in the railways! They should be torn up in favour of better roads!! !! Justa Punk !! 07:43, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply
You have no right of striking Mal Case out. Since you are the accused, how can you do that? Doesn't make sense, IMO. And if both of you are using the same computer, why didn't you post that in your userpage or somewhere? You have to have transparency, something you're not having. Seeing that both of you are using the same computer, getting involved in the same articles is a wrong step. You should know that meatpuppetry is wrong.
I'm not butthurt about this. I've started AFDs before and people have opposed them. Did I go and start SPIs against them? No. In fact, this is my first SPI. I don't simply start one just because I'm offended or something. After all, why waste my time? I'm supposed to be on wikibreak due to very stressful issues here(see my talk page). I wouldn't be starting this SPI at this point of time if I don't have evidence or want a tit-for-tat. I have other better things to do. Bejinhan talks 10:38, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply
I have every right to strike that out. Did you even read what I said? Mal's use of my computer is not permanent (hopefully) so why should I put it on my user page? Meat puppetry is only valid if we are intentionally working as a team. I state that we are not. You ARE butthurt over this (IMO) because you simply didn't like me trying to do the right thing and dispose of an article that has already been deleted twice for the same reason (the title is not notable) and nothing you have done has changed that. The fact that you are persisting to edit here proves that you are not a person of your word (IMO). If you have better things to do, perhaps you should be doing them. !! Justa Punk !! 13:48, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply
Striking it out changes nothing. -- Deskana (talk) 16:08, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply
Comments by other users

I'm involved in the aforementioned AfD by Bejinhan, so I have a COI, but Mal Case edits irregularly but edits many AfDs, many of which are also edited by Justa Punk and Rick Doodle, who has similarly irregular patterns. I think there may be something worth investigating here. — fetch · comms 02:48, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply

  • I make no secret of not liking JustaPunk or RickDoodle, and MalCase's almost militant deletionist tendencies don't sit well with me (we may have had a direct conflict, but I can't remember offhand...if so, then I don't like him, either). With that said, I have never believed them to be the same editor. They're a cabal, certainly. They're definitely involved in a form of meatpuppetry (see Wikipedia:Tag team). While I find their "My way or I'll throw a fit" editing to be obnoxious and believe that the recent AfD was based on either spite or a simple "shoot first and don't bother with the questions" mentality, I'm not convinced that any rules have been broken. As far as I am concerned, they don't improve Wikipedia, but they hurt it within the acceptable guidelines. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 05:20, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 Clerk endorsed – MuZemike 13:52, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply

 Clerk note: All parties are reminded to please remain civil on this page, or nobody will be allowed to comment here. – MuZemike 13:52, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply

 Confirmed that the following accounts are related:

-- Deskana (talk) 19:26, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply

information Administrator note Socks indefinitely blocked and tagged, sockmaster blocked 1 month for sock puppetry. – MuZemike 22:51, 3 August 2010 (UTC) reply


23 April 2011
Suspected sockpuppets


Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"

Justa Punk was blocked last year due to his use of several sockpuppet accounts. A few months later, the account Ultra X987 was created. The user's edits are very similar to the sockpuppeteer's edits: (1) they are focused on deleting articles on smaller Australian professional wrestling promotions, (2) they are focused on removing companies from the List of professional wrestling promotions article, and (3) the new user recently contacted an administrator regarding the re-creation of a deleted article. The new user was somehow familiar with the deletion history of the article (most users with a handful of edits don't have the experience to examine deletion histories) and was pushing to have it salted--this seems particularly suspicious, as Justa Punk was the user who initiated the initial AfD for the article. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 02:22, 23 April 2011 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

  • If this is really Justa Punk, I think this is getting way out of hand. Since the SPI last year, JP has created many sock accounts (some for the purpose of harassing) which has led to him being banned from editing. Is it possible to block the IP he edits from? If I remember correctly, he edits from a library IP so there was some hesitation when I suggested an IP block. Bejinhan talks 03:27, 23 April 2011 (UTC) reply
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
  • information Administrator note Per behavioral evidence, I've blocked and tagged Ultra. As a side note, we don't really have any actual proof (i.e. checkuser results) that show that this account is Justa Punk, so I don't really think we can justify an IP block at this time. — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 12:38, 23 April 2011 (UTC) reply
16 April 2014
Suspected sockpuppets


Clear vendetta against Australian professional wrestling articles. This behaviour was noted at both [ [1]] and[ [2]]. The insistence upon pursuing the deletion of Australian professional wrestling articles through several AfDs makes this a clear case of WP:The duck test. Particularly important diffs would include [3] (the statement about how "it's literally impossible to be notable" as an Australian professional wrestler) and [4] ("This woman is not notable and I intend to prove it"). Both of these statements match up closely with the Sockpuppet investigation page details mentioned above. The second IP listed above is per 124.180.170.151's statement at [5] that they are the same person. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 05:44, 16 April 2014 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Wrong! Those IP's were not me. They were not socks. But they were MEAT PUPPETS! Yeah they were working for me and they'll continue to work for me (and do a few edits of their own - like the last ones did on the girls gridiron), until the proper notability lines are set for Aussie wrestling! You always were a dill, GCF! Signed !!Justa Punk!! 203.12.30.74 ( talk) 04:22, 23 April 2014 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
25 April 2014
Suspected sockpuppets

The IP is an admitted sock ( see here). This edit includes a statement from the banned user that more people are doing his bidding. Dragonfire X has suddenly returned from editing after not being active since 2010 and has immediately gravitated to deletion discussions about Australian professional wrestlers (Justa Punk's main focus). BerleT is a sporadic editor who has been editing heavily in Australian professional wrestling articles and has commented on all three of Justa Punk's new deletion discussions (not evidence per se, but worth looking into, especially given the meatpuppetry mentioned in Justa Punk's IP edit). GaryColemanFan ( talk) 00:42, 25 April 2014 (UTC) reply

Added three more IPs, who keep trying to have this investigation shut down. リボン・サルミネン (Ribbon Salminen) ( talk) 12:34, 25 April 2014 (UTC) reply
Definitely suspicious and similar behaviour to Justa Punk. starship.paint "YES !" 06:20, 26 April 2014 (UTC) reply
101.172.85.68 has been added after returning from over a year of inactivity to add a notability tag to an article that Justa Punk's other socks have been trying to redirect because of perceived notability issues. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 01:50, 27 April 2014 (UTC) reply
203.17.215.22 -> on-and-off IP which just targeted the Australian wrestlers' AfDs. Restored this edit to Justa Punk's talk page. starship.paint "YES !" 03:57, 30 April 2014 (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
  • information Administrator note Blocked the 203.* IPs for 1 month each, as they are public library terminals in Australia, and the disruption was worth the cost IMO. Blocked the 1.124.* IPs and the 101.* IP for 2 weeks each, as they are all part of Telstra and may or may not be dynamic. The evidence on the two registered users is too thin for me to block esp. since they are not actively editing at this time. Leaving case open in case anyone has additional comments or wants to investigate further. — Darkwind ( talk) 02:53, 14 May 2014 (UTC) reply
06 October 2014
Suspected sockpuppets


The IP history is beyond the duck test for this banned user. Request to complete Afd is the same wording as his multiple requests this April (as 203.12.30.74). He is an Australian user who edits (and removes information from) professional wrestling articles and uses IP addresses to initiate AfDs of Australian topics.

Please also note that IP 124.180.170.151 was blocked earlier this year as a Justa Punk sock puppet. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 01:31, 6 October 2014 (UTC) reply

He has now requested an AfD on an Australian professional wrestler under the IP 203.17.215.26. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 01:54, 9 October 2014 (UTC) I have added 203.17.215.22, as he has used multiple IPs arguing at Thunder (luchador). GaryColemanFan ( talk) 02:11, 9 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Comments by other users

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

Absolutely denied. Tedious report that should be ignored. 124.180.144.121 ( talk) 01:43, 6 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Additional note. I have looked at the history of this user and this is about professional wrestling. I made a couple of edits to help a friend who just happens to work there in WWE, but that was all. I have no real interest in professional wrestling. The reporting user appears to have some other agenda here designed to protect Vern Hughes. I had no idea to COI issues identified previously on Vern's article were this deep. 124.180.144.121 ( talk) 01:54, 6 October 2014 (UTC) reply

He's been dealt with
I know this guy in IRL although until today I didn't know he was editing as Justa Punk here. I won't give his real name for obvious reasons, but he's a known troublemaker in Australian wrestling. I caught him fighting with Gary over the Amy Action article and I reported him to security after going to another computer to see what he was doing and making the connection. He was told he was banned from the building (SLV) and it looked like he was going to argue until he saw me - and he did a pretty good impression of the Road Runner when I said "Bye Bye Justa!". Now that he knows I'm onto him on here I don't think you'll see him for quite some time at best. Curse of Fenric ( talk) 03:10, 9 October 2014 (UTC) reply

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 Clerk note: Not enough evidence presented to block 124.180.144.121. The wording of the two requests to complete AfDs (I only looked at one by the other IP) are not identical (diffs next time should be provided). I can see that the IP is disruptive and even obnoxious, but that's a different issue from sock puppetry. IP hasn't edited since October 13, either. The other IPs are, of course, already blocked for one year.-- Bbb23 ( talk) 15:37, 19 October 2014 (UTC) reply

24 June 2015
Suspected sockpuppets


IP address almost identical to several of Justa Punk's other sockpuppets. He has promised to create more sockpuppets. This article is one of his most frequent targets, as he has made it clear he wants it gone (removing information about professional wrestling in Australia is his modus operandi). The IP that virtually matches his other sockpuppets prodded this article today ( [6]). GaryColemanFan ( talk) 04:52, 24 June 2015 (UTC) reply

Other IP came out of nowhere to replicate the edit I deleted from the first sockpuppet. This is in keeping with his promise that he has an army of sock/meatpuppets who will continue his crusade. GaryColemanFan ( talk) 17:35, 26 June 2015 (UTC) reply
Comments by other users

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

  • Okay this is ridiculous now. There is no proof even under WP:DUCK that either of these are Justa Punk. Both have unrelated edits and limited numbers. Gary's paranoia over this is way over the top and I already suggested to him that he back off because of it. His reaction was very close to a WP:CIVIL violation. There needs to be a far better case presented than this. Don't get me wrong, if it is Punk and that can be absolutely proven then I'm all for the block. He's a menace. But let's get it right before acting arbitrarily and assume good faith until it's conclusively proven otherwise. I consider this an abuse of WP:DUCK at this point due to the lack of proof. Curse of Fenric ( talk) 01:06, 27 June 2015 (UTC) reply
  • Oh I forgot - it's not a replica. The first IP only invoked WP:NOT. The second invoked WP:GNG and WP:ADV as well. And for the record I think the claimed fail in at least two are wrong and the third is borderline (WP:NOT). Curse of Fenric ( talk) 01:08, 27 June 2015 (UTC) reply
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
  • Checkuser comment: No reasonable basis for this SPI; in fact, I'd go so far as to suggest its deletion if not for the past history. No checks done. Closing. Risker ( talk) 01:02, 8 July 2015 (UTC) reply
I've been asked to explain further, as it's not immediately apparent why I closed this indicating that there was no reasonable basis. There have been no direct links to the original account since 2010, only blocks to some IPs for disruption. Wrestling is historically a contentious subject and, in the case of Australian wrestling articles, it's most likely to be Australians who do the arguing. The IP addresses are dynamic and are from different ISPs. The edits are only similar in that they're both PRODs. I'm not sure I really see the point in linking dynamic IPs to any sockpuppetry case where the evidence is so sporadic and spread over such a long period. Risker ( talk) 03:50, 8 July 2015 (UTC) reply


Retrieved from " https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Justa_Punk/Archive&oldid=1136433668"

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook




Top Of Page

Home • Search • Translate

© CSE