The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Yaron1

Evidence

Yaron1 is in an ongoing edit dispute on Temporal Cold War with myself and a number of other editors. For most of the time, he has been using an anonymous IP and he has only recently (past few weeks) started using an account. The first edits for both his account ( contributions) and the suspected sock Gen99 ( contributions) were within a day of each other. They have both edited the same 2 articles and ONLY those articles. The articles edited are both relatively obscure and not really connected: the series Weird Science and Temporal Cold War, which is a storyline within the television series Star Trek: Enterprise. Both accounts have under 30 edits (Gen99 has only 6). Gen99, with no prior knowledge (unless he has been lurking extensively), no prior participation in the discussion, and no actual editing of the article itself, proffered his opinion on the long-ongoing discussion, one which was entirely in support of Yaron1. This was also made within 35 minutes of Yaron's posting. These are the strongest pieces of evidence, and I think they should be sufficient. Nonetheless, in the interest of completeness, Gen99 shows a habit of repeated very minor modifications to his postings, a habit I've noticed in Yaron's contributions (again, this one point could easily be me molding the evidence to fit my conclusion, so please feel free to ignore it, but I thought it worth raising).-- MikeJ9919 07:24, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• I've seen Yaron and Gen99 at work at Temporal Cold War. Both are pushing the same implausible original research, acting as if they're world authorities on stats while ignoring its very basics. Both insulted the same RfC respondent. Both disregard consensus as well as policy. I'm very close to reporting their behavior at ANI, regardless of the sock puppet suspicion. I agree the editing pattern is identical so even if it's not a meat/sock puppet any measures regarding the one will also apply to the other. My wikiradar tells me these guys are on a fast track to getting the bum's rush. AvB ÷  talk 23:51, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm... Opened a case at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Yaron1. Iola k ana| ^(talk) 15:42, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Case was denied. Iola k ana| ^T 15:13, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: Iola k ana| ^T 15:13, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Samvak

Evidence

Here is user:Samvak circumventing an existing, one week, ban for sockpuppetry that was enforced on 23rd June.

http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Narcissism_%28psychology%29&diff=61029409&oldid=61011277

User:62.162.212.172 IP resolves to mt.net.mk, same ISP he used to post to his mailing lists within 20 minutes before this edit. -- Zeraeph 16:56, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

comments

IP blocked. Iola k ana| ^T 18:08, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: Iola k ana| ^T 18:07, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Panem

Evidence

Panem created the page Tony Atwater which I (Brimba) then tagged with a POV tag. Panem had been actively editing under his user name. 71.253.57.234 then removed the tag noting: (no bias here -- what's needed is supporting facts), Panem then returned with edits marked (→Controversial Behavior), leaving the page untagged.

On the same day (today) Panem used 71.253.57.234 to removed a speedy deleate tage from a page he created called Ribbon cutting ceremony

A quick check of the contribution pages of both Panem and 71.253.57.234 will show that they are the same person editing the same things, and as importantly, Panem has used 71.253.57.234 to hide behind, its not a case of simply forgetting to log in.

Comments

I sometimes forget to log in, which is not an offense.

Brimba stands accused by me of a high degree of vandalism and censorship.

It is possible that that user did forget to log in; I am not going to the effort to create a report of WP:RFCU. If you wish to investigate further, Brimba, then you should continue to the follow the instructions there. Iola k ana| ^(talk) 19:37, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: Iola k ana| ^(talk) 19:37, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Ybitan

Evidence

It seems that Ybitan used Bzini ( talk · contribs) to create and maintain a spam article, See before you die. When the article was AfD'd, Ybitan was the first to show up to defend it, followed immediately by Bzini. When it seemed that wasn't enough, he then signed out and edited as 128.135.161.69 ( talk · contribs) to try to further influence the vote. Kafziel 16:41, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• I'd say this is quite possibly sockpuppetry case since User:Ybitan didn't edit the article but was the first to show up... -- Dijxtra 11:13, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Blocked. Iola k ana| ^(talk) 19:33, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: Iola k ana| ^(talk) 19:33, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Ph.D.Nikki

Evidence

User:Peter.M.D is inserting random comments vaguely related to the topic in random sections of articles, much in the same way as User:Ph.D.Nikki did before recently blocked. User:Peter.M.D started contributing shortly after User:Ph.D.Nikki was blocked. Paul C 10:33, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• It appears User:Dr.Bhatta preceded Ph.D.Nikki in this practice. Who knows how many other accounts this user is using to insert other non-contributory edits? Paul C 13:41, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
• First of all, User:Peter.M.D doesn't seem to exits. At least, I can't get to his contributions log. And then, User:Dr.Bhatta seems to have stopped editing Wikipedia after User:Ph.D.Nikki was blocked. Therefore, he didn't break any rules about alternate accounts... let's watch them for few days and then will see if those two continue to add nonsence to Wikipedia. If they do, I'll block them. -- Dijxtra 21:33, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
• Sorry, typo. It's User:Peter.M.D., but (s)he seems to have stopped editing. -- Paul C 21:34, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
  • They all seem to have stopped editing. But, since this is quite unique behaviour, it think it is safe to conclude that here we do have a case of using multiple accounts to disrupt Wikipedia and I have indefinetly blocked User:Peter.M.D. and User:Ph.D.Nikki, and warned User:Dr.Bhatta (didn't block him since he seems to have stoped editing, so it makes no sence to block him for a period... -- Dijxtra 11:21, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: Iola k ana| ^(talk) 19:30, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Hpuppet User:Hipocrite User:64.95.38.193 User:Whomp

These are all the same person, some months ago this person agreed to stop editing at Wikipedia and no further action was taken. Hipocrite ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is posting again and vandalised the Monkey-baiting article. Would you please "Block" all four of these accounts to stop this nonsense. Thank you 70.51.198.36 18:12, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I am NOT a sockpupped of User:Hipocrite, nor have I ever come into contact with him. This is a mere content dispute. - Whomp 18:27, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

You supplied little or no evidence, so the report is inconclusive. Iola k ana| ^(talk) 19:27, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: Iola k ana| ^(talk) 19:27, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:TOMATOBOMB

Evidence

[1] blanking of content from Kimi Ga Yo by 125.170.143.121, following similar edits made by TOMATOBOMB without adequate justification: [2], [3], [4]

Comments

TOMATOBOMB has made similar POV edits in other places, e.g. [5], but does not appear to have used sock puppets before.

PS: Thi sis the first time I've posted anything here. Apologies in advance if I do anything wrong. -- Sakurambo 18:14, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

OK, IP address has been blocked for a week, due to the similarity in edits. Never blocked TOMATOBOMB, simply warned him. Iola k ana| ^(talk) 19:07, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: Iola k ana| ^(talk) 19:07, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Timburhelgi , now User:limowreched

Evidence

This guy has started an attack on wikipedia. The Dutch (NL) wikipedia in the first place, but also the English wikipedia. His major contributions is an article High Icelandic POV pushing his own invention - High Icelandic. Subsequently, he and some friends translated it to many different other language wiki's. On some wiki's, it was removed, on the Dutch wiki, the WP:VANITY en WP:NPOV was corrected after lots of discussions. See [6] ... User:Braekmans (on NL-wiki), User:Fronkrakki, User:Timburhelgi, and ALL those anonymous IP-addresses (they are from a belgian ISP) are all the same person. On the NL-wiki, many of his sockpuppet username declared "war" on wikipedia. See Wikipedia:Village pump, or leave a message in the Dutch village pump ( nl:Wikipedia:De kroeg) if you want to see this confirmed. A CheckUser won't be really usefull, as the belgian ISP uses dynamic IP's.

His latest sockpuppet is User:limowreched; clearly inspired on MY username as you can see. on User:Thor NL he left - in dutch - a message that he will continue to attack wikipedia and many of its users, and you can clearly read that he's the Braekmans-person when you read dutch (you might ask assistence to one of the moderators that does read dutch).

His only contributions: Translating Tom Ordelman; a article that was similarly criticized for vanity and POV on the dutch-wiki; but in the meantime, that original author, Tom Ordelman aka Thor NL, has become a real valuable editor on the dutch wikipedia; whereas Braekmans only seeks "war", the same war he used for years on is.islenska newsgroup -- LimoWreck 17:10, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Comments

I have no idea what you mean; you have no evidence to substantiate your claim. Sorry. Iola k ana| ^(talk) 17:58, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

You might have actually read what I wrote, and done some research. Anyway, the user an his vandalising IP's have already been blocked a while by some admin who did pay attation -- LimoWreck 19:19, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: (INCONCLUSIVE) Iola k ana| ^(talk) 17:58, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Joe Smythe, AAAA, MAAAA

Evidence

http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Actuarial_Outpost&action=history

Note: all of the edits add nearly identical text regardless of username. These accounts are also recent creations. The User:Tom troceen one is especially relevant, as that is the name of the true administrator of the Actuarial Outpost, the article in question that this person is trying to vandalize repeatedly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RR#Avraham.2C_TheActuary Uses 3RR as a way to stop me from reverting his vandalism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Avraham#Please_follow_wiki_protocol

Some initial comments.

Comments

User:Joe Smythe, AAAA, MAAAA is also most probably User:Blisterino, User:Kentucky Janitor, and User:Just the facts maam as well as two IP edits. Further I suspect him of registering the User:Tom troceen ID, the real name of one of the people he is trying to smear. -- Avi 21:02, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

OK. Blocked. Iola k ana| ^(talk) 17:50, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: Iola k ana| ^(talk) 17:50, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Joe Muz

Evidence

• Account was created earlier today (5-16-06) and most of its edits seem in coordination with Doom127.
• [7] came out of nowhere to support Doom on recent edit/reversion war.
• [8] again user came in from nowhere(no previous edits on the page or talkpage) to support Doom's edits and arguments.
• [9] User immediately reverted to a version by Doom that was undone by another user.

Comments

Only one non user-namespace edit was not directly related to any of Doom127's edit conflicts. It would seem that this user was created by Doom127 and may possibly have been used to circumvent the 3RR (as in case #1) and to provide support for himself in edit/talk page conflicts. The user reacted somewhat sharply when I instigated this notion and mentioned it on an article talk page. -- Oni Ookami Alfador ^{Talk| @} 18:40, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

I am not sure if it is any indicator either way but as soon as these notices went up the user began to revert every placement of this template ont he designated pages and even blanked the template himself. The user also claims to have abandoned wikipedia as a result of this, claiming harassment. I am not sure if this supports the notion of sockpuppettry or not, but it is certainly something worth considering. -- Oni Ookami Alfador ^{Talk| @} 20:21, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

He's alreaddy watched. Just look at this [10] "only" 13 sockpuppets. -- Jason Five 22:01, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

It became watched when I added the template to the sockpuppet's userspace. This user appears to have "quit" wikipedia so it looks like we're finally done with his harassment. I will be watching out for other likely sockpuppets he uses though since he may only wish us to believe he is gone.-- Oni Ookami Alfador ^{Talk| @} 03:42, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Since he has quit, no further action is required here. Iola k ana| ^(talk) 17:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: Iola k ana| ^(talk) 17:36, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No furter edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Darknightonight

I suspect that there is a lot of sockpuppetry going on around the vote on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Camp Massad (2nd nomination). Some IPs with suspiciously close ranges have been editing and making very similar comments. I am not sure who the master puppeteer is and who the puppets are, but I'm deeply suspicious of User:Darknighttonight, User:24.66.94.140, User:24.79.132.194, User:24.79.136.83, User:24.76.228.13, and User:142.161.26.22. Páll ^{(Die pienk olifant)} 19:14, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Evidence

None per se, but it is highly suspicious to me that on one vote there should be over five brand new users, many of which have very close IP ranges. Their votes, language, and terminology is almost identical as well.

OK, IPs have been blocked, but master account (i.e. what you think is Darknightonight) has not, becuase there's no evidence against him. Iola k ana| ^(talk) 17:29, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: Iola k ana| ^(talk) 17:29, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions. The result was: Evidence too weak. Not blocked. Iola k ana| ^(talk) 17:10, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

User:Samuel Luo

Evidence

This user always surfaces when Samuel has exhuasted his reverts(3 reverts) and there are stronger reasons to suspect which I wish to make known directly to the administrators. Further Yueyuen's comments, reasons and usage of words bear a striking degree of similarity to Samuel Luo's.

Samuel Luo has been blocked/warned multiple times for vandalism on Falun Gong page. Dilip rajeev 00:42, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

On History of Falun Gong article"Yueyuen" left this comments:

"23:57, 24 May 2006 Yueyuen (anyone compares these two version can see that. You should talk with others before making big changes, I am not the only one complaining, check your mail box)"

At the same time I recieved an email from "Samuel Luo" saying:

"Please show some respect for other editors by discussing the changes you want to make before making them, thanks --Samuel Luo 00:10, 25 May 2006 (UTC)"

Fnhddzs 00:37, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Comments

Samuel Luo's "email" message is a talk page post.This accusation of sockpuppetry is ridiculous. -- Миборовский ^{U| T| C| M| E| Chugoku Banzai!} 01:16, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. Looking at the time/date stamps, it appears that Yueyuen is referring to my post on Fnhddzs' talk page. CovenantD 01:46, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Your wholesale removal of sections from the article WITHOUT DISCUSSION is pure vandalism. If you feel they are redundant, bring it up on the talk page FIRST! I am sick of this and will report ANYBODY who continues this childish behaviour. CovenantD 22:38, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Why you are so angry? Fnhddzs 22:39, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Because you're not even talking about the massive changes you're making - that's not operating in good faith. CovenantD 22:42, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Although it is interesting that Yueyuen only edits the Falun Gong article. CovenantD 01:46, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Dilip rajeev and CovenantD, you guys are always on line at the same time does that make you the same person? -- Yueyuen 02:08, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Most people have a job (or school) so there should be no surprise that many people are online at the same time. -- Миборовский ^{U| T| C| M| E| Chugoku Banzai!} 02:11, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: Iola k ana| ^(talk) 17:10, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Jerry Jones

Evidence

User:CongressRecords is an obvious puppet of Jerry Jones ( talk · contribs)/ JJstroker ( talk · contribs), who has been banned by a broad consensus on AN/I for plagiarism, copyright violations, POV pushing, and disruption. Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive103#Jerry Jones/JJstroker.

• Woofie ( talk · contribs)
• USHistory ( talk · contribs).
• Also, I.P. addresses in the 71.131.x.x and 71.132.x.x

- Will Beback 10:39, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

PS: as of 06:33, May 31, 2006 I have provisionally blocked this editor pending resolution of this checkuser request. - Will Beback 09:10, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Comments

Ok, all have been blocked, though check the block log for the blocking admin. Iola k ana| ^(talk) 16:43, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: Iola k ana| ^(talk) 16:43, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Zanoni666

Evidence

changed sig from HermeticScholar to Zanoni666

Comments

step through the next few edits from [11]

- 999 ( Talk) 02:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

I have blocked user:HermeticScholar indef as a sockpuppet, but would like to have a confirmation. The evidence is quite clear. Also, the account was created during the 3RR block of User:Zanoni666, and went straight to the same page as he was editing. Seems quite clear to me. -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 02:47, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Contacted Kim van der Linde, above, about this case and supplied all the diffs. Will wait for their response, which may be while since they are on a WikiBreak. Iola k ana| ^(talk) 18:02, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Blocking is in the first place to prevent disruption, and that iswhy I in the first place blocked the sockpuppet. I am not fully familiar with all the rules related to the puppeteers, so I will leave that to others to decide. -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 05:54, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

OK. Iola k ana| ^(talk) 16:39, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: Iola k ana| ^(talk) 16:39, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:maddyfan

Evidence

Evidence of sockpuppetry

See: Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of maddyfan

1. 22:39, 11 June 2006 - "Extraordinary Machine, don't be ridiculous... STOP VANDALIZING! We will boot your butt right out of here! This is not your page." (Note: the diff link shows that 68.46.186.126 ( talk · contribs) and Maddyfan are the same editor.)
2. 15:37, 14 June 2006 (by Xtinamoline ( talk • contribs)) - "Extraodinary Machine must leave the page. Others cannot work on this page with this person here. They have used up their chances, and there are not enough notices on Wikipedia to help them understand this. Please unlock the page, and please extraodinary machine, leave Christina's page. Thank you for trying, but you're just not contributing to the situation. Everyone's additions were deleted thanks to you." (Compare with [12] from Maddyfan.)
3. 21:57 June 19, 2006 Checkuser confirmed that Xtinamonline is a sockpuppet of Maddyfan.

Comments

Please see Wikipedia:Requests for comment/maddyfan

Not sure what has to be done here. Anyway, blocked maddyfan for one week for being a master sockpuppet. Iola k ana| ^(talk) 16:30, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: Iola k ana| ^(talk) 16:32, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Samvak

Evidence

Samvak is once again (he has done it before, most notably here: Talk:Narcissistic personality disorder) prancing around, without logging in, on IPs belonging to his ISP mt.net.mk insisting he is a woman called Meri and trying to find various ways to perpetuate the legend he wishes to become on the Sam Vaknin article. He isn't even sufficiently noteworthy for an article IMHO, to the extent that a pre-existing article was deleted by concensus earlier this year. Someone reinstated it, with serious factual errors, so I corrected it, and, in accord with protocol, accepted it's reinstatment and tried to expand the stub into something factual and impartial (in contrast to the saturation self promotion this guy usually goes in for). -- Zeraeph 18:44, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets:

• 62.162.216.180
• 62.162.218.68
• 62.162.211.178

A little more evidence: Compare this: history suspected sockpuppet 62.162.218.68 With this, posted today: Thoughts on the Internet's Founding Myths by Sam Vaknin It's almost as if he is deliberately goading to my mind. -- Zeraeph 19:07, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Comments

Blocked for a week, since they are IP addresses. As well as the case near the bottom of the page. Iola k ana| ^(talk) 15:22, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: Iola k ana| ^(talk) 15:25, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Samvak(2nd)

Evidence

User:62.162.217.63, an IP belonging to mk.com.mk, the ISP from which Sam Vaknin has posted to his mailing lists almost every day for some years, appears to be quite obviously User:Samvak trying to replace a thoroughly sourced and balanced biography writting in strict accord with WP:LIVING with his usual, unsourced, self promotional "Resume" most of which does not check out as accurate with any third party sources.

He has already done this before Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Samvak, and Talk:Narcissistic personality disorder. In addition he is abusing the edit summary in an attempt to post confidential information only known to Sam Vaknin about an individual without their consent.-- Zeraeph 11:30, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

The relevant edit has now been permanently deleted to remove the confidential information -- Zeraeph 21:06, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

User:62.162.223.55 repeating the same kind of behavior today, vandalising more than one page this time thus, requesting deletion of confidential information again, but the rest will remain -- Zeraeph 11:17, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Comments

Blocked for a week, since they are IP addresses. Iola k ana| ^(talk) 15:25, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: Iola k ana| ^(talk) 15:26, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Primetime

Evidence

Special:Contributions/Djf2006

Comments

This user has created sockpuppets before. See Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Primetime. Another good page on this abuser is at Wikipedia:Long term abuse/Primetime. I cannot paste {{subst:Socksuspectnotice|1=Primetime}} ~~~~ on Primetime's talk page because it is protected due to his vandalism of his talk page.

User:Djf2006 is his latest account. Jesse Viviano 20:33, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

User:Djf2006 blocked indef.-- Commander Keane 21:15, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: Iola k ana| ^(talk) 15:08, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Filmfan1971(5th!)

Evidence

This account (User:Filmfan1971) is certainly a sleeper account set up to get around a semi-protection status, is and sock puppet of banned user User:Argol136. This account is set up to circumvent indefinate blocks due to multiple 3RR violations and vandalism to Shaw and Crompton which also goes against Wikipedia:Naming conventions (places).

For confirmation, see the Shaw and Crompton edit history.

This user uses Dynamic IP allocation, but, since semi-protection was put in place, has also used sock puppets User:Algol126, User:Praesepe913, User:Hankinshaw and User:MillwardBrown.

This user is simply trying to hide mentions of Metropolitan Borough of Oldham from the article (we've even had to provide a reference for it), in place of an ancient and disused land division called Lancashire. The reason being due to the Oldham boroughs association with high ethnic minority population (see [ this edit and Oldham Riots).

This latest account does deviate from previous styles of editing, but the edits largely try to 1.- Alter the Shaw and Crompton article to the same effect, and 2.- Try to get me in trouble.

Swift action would be much appreciated due to this user's increasing sophistication with using Wikipedia.

If an admin could contact me about this kind of behaviour, and how I can stop this user a little more easily (I have documented all of their edits and accounts) I would be very grateful, as I'd rather be adding content than fighting this guy. Jhamez84 18:43, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Comments

Blocked. Responded to the question on the user talk page. Iola k ana| ^(talk) 21:00, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: Iola k ana| ^(talk) 21:00, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Pravi Gusinjez

Evidence

User:Pravi Gusinjez says "Dino, go suck Jasmin's and Suad's penis." on [13] User:BaCK2EssEnce wrote "I am a huge penis sucker!!!!!!!! and so is jasmin suad and all dino freinds" on [14]. You can see that these two statements that were put on my userpage are very, very similar (the names, subject, everything). Both are from Plav-Gusinje, Montenegro. The owner of these two usernames even told me in real life that since he was blocked, he made a new one.

Crna Gora 03:36, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Comments

Will investigate this now, a WP:RFCU may be required. Also fixed link (not editing your version) [15]. Iola k ana| ^(talk) 16:42, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Investigation complete, RFCU was not required. Pravi_Gusinjez block indef as vandalism only account, as was BaCK2EssEnce a few days ago. Iola k ana| ^(talk) 16:50, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: Iola k ana| ^(talk) 16:50, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Praesepe913

Evidence

This account (User:Praesepe913) is certainly a sleeper account set up to get around a semi-protection status, and is a sock puppet of banned user User:Argol136. This account is set up to circumvent indefinate blocks due to multiple 3RR violations and vandalism to Shaw and Crompton which also goes against the formulation dictated in the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (places).

For confirmation, see the Shaw and Crompton edit history.

This user often users Dynamic IP allocation, but has also used sock puppets User:Algol126 and User:MillwardBrown.

This user is simply trying to hide mentions of Metropolitan Borough of Oldham from the article (we've even had to provide a reference for it), in place of an ancient and disused land division called Lancashire. The reason being due to the Oldham boroughs association with high ethnic minority population (see [ this edit and Oldham Riots).

Swift action would be much appreciated as this user is sophisticated and may attempt to delete this case. Jhamez84 12:03, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Comments

Impossible now. Blocked. It appears that any malicious edits to this article that are similar to the blocked user get an immediate block. Iola k ana| ^(talk) 16:23, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: Iola k ana| ^(talk) 16:23, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:ReginaA

Evidence

• Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of ReginaA
• This account has several likely sockpuppets. They've all been posting in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Craig Jordan, and posting "Do Not Delete", rather than the typical "Keep". This AfD is their only edit. They have similiar writing styles, as well as similiar or identical arguments. Until recently have been posting with fake signatures due to a non-understanding of how to use tildes (the clue was that they were writing in their own local time and such, which does not match up with UTC). -- Consumed Crustacean | Talk | 01:27, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Comments

Taken care of. Master sockpuppet, i.e. ReginaA, has also been blocked for creating abusive sockpuppets. K ilo-Lima| ^(talk) 11:25, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Case closed. K ilo-Lima| ^(talk) 11:30, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:WoodDaver

Evidence

• All contributions of Gene Chris Jones ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) are related to banned vandal WoodDaver ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) and his sock JizzyJonII ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Has contacted users that have had contact with these and requested that they be unblocked, e.g. [16]. Has also removed block tags from User:JizzyJonII [17]. Pretends that he is a college professor named "Gene Chris Jones", despite there being no such person as per Google, and despite spelling errors more characteristic of teenagers. Maintains the reality of the hoax article Infidel Iggens originally created by User:WoodDaver. Sandstein 04:49, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
• Add GeniusCreator ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) to the list of sockpuppets; that user's only contributors are a petty nonsense edit ( [18]) and silly crap regarding the abovementioned sock case ( [19]). Sandstein 05:04, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• I'm not sure whether this should be construed as a genuine request for unblock, but I counsel against it as long as he persists in sockpuppetry. He shows no inclination to contribute actual encyclopedic content. In the meantime, block this sock. Sandstein 04:49, 6 June 2006 (UTC)-

• JizzyJonII ( talk · contribs) Blocked. K ilo-Lima| ^(talk) 18:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• GeniusCreator ( talk · contribs) Blocked (vandalism only account). K ilo-Lima| ^(talk) 18:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• WoodDaver ( talk · contribs) Blocked. K ilo-Lima| ^(talk) 18:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
• Gene Chris Jones ( talk · contribs) Blocked. K ilo-Lima| ^(talk) 18:44, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Case closed. K ilo-Lima| ^(talk) 18:45, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:CENA LUV

Evidence I presume WWEFAN4EVA to be a sock puppet of CENA LUV and also Oth is luv. This person was first blocked for link spamming under the name Oth is luv she also ignored advice on images and links as she constant keep changing them to old picture or uncopyrighted pictures she also had a major problem in me telling her, she found it unfair because i changed the picture before she did. She then changed her name and done the exact same thing again and once again had a major problem with me telling her to stop it and she refused had a major problem that i once again updated pictures before she did. She has within the last 48hours once agian change her name to WWEFAN4EVA reason i know this is because she carried on the discussion we're having under her last username.

Both are blocked; [20] and [21] is evidence of the sockpuppet. His/her writing style is very similar. Master blocked for two weeks. K ilo-Lima| ^(talk) 18:53, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: K ilo-Lima| ^(talk) 18:53, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Rgulerdem

I suspect this user to be the puppeteer of User:Mokotok and/or User:Light&Truth because:

Evidence

• The two suspected Sockpuppets both edit almost exclusively on the Fethullah Gülen article. User:Rgulerdem is a long-time editor of this article, that has a bad history [22] of insults and edit warring.
• The first edit of both suspected sockpuppets [23] [24] was removing a {{NOPV}} tag from that article. Both did that repeatedly, one was blocked for doing so for 24h. User:Rgulerdem pioneered this approach [25] [26] but subsequently laid low, adding only relatively well-beahved commentary,
• The 2 suspected sockpuppets subsequently embarked on a spree of insult"I have no time to play with kids. Be mature Netscott. Or go and play with the people of your IQ level :) The work is in progress and no tag is needed" [27] or "The NPOV tag is not needed because you ruined the whole article as you wished still crying. You are vandalizing the article still crying. You are hiding the facts and truth and pretending like you are trying to put it into NPOV form. It is so bad man, it is so bad." [28] [29] and a smear campaign of sorts [30] [31] [32] These are just examples. Basically 90% of their contributions have had at least borderline insulting character.
• The 3 share the same spelling errors (Can't write Gülen with an Umlaut, have problems with using the past tense of 'being biased', and spell intelligent with one "L" only [33] - (use the browser search function))
• The accounts for the 2 puppets were established within days of one another, and have edited the same article (with some pro-forma spelling corrections on random articles). They were both opened at at time when Rgulerdem had reason to believe that he was facing opposition at the English Gülen article (because editing there picked up after some period of relative inactivity), and his being blocked from the Turkish WP for meddling with their Gülen article.
• the initial user pages of User:Rgulerdem [34] and User:Mokotok [35] look very much alike.

Comments

• Azate, in my opinion this case merits a WP:RFCU. From my own previous exprience of editing in regards to User:Rgulerdem, I 100% agree with you that this line The NPOV tag is not needed because you ruined the whole article as you wished still crying. You are vandalizing the article still crying. is virtually identical to previous phrases/expressions he's said. User:Rgulerdem has strong motivations to not edit under his own user name (and war with it) due to the fact that he is currently under mentorship by User:Johntex after having had an indefinite block lifted from him. Despite his mentorship if Resid Gulerdem behaves as he did on Wikipedia:Wikiethics where he owned the project and was frequently highly disruptive then he'll be subject to reinstatement of his indefinite block. Netscott 23:22, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

• You are not the only one. Check this out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Aaron_Brenneman#Possible_sock_puppet_from_User:Rgulerdem
• I am a student and friend of Mr. Gulerdem. The evidences provided above is meaningless. I am not suckpuppet of anyone else. Light&Truth 08:25, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
• This is ridiculous. Resid is one of the greatest scientist I have ever met and a true genius. We have been long friends. He introduced me to this project. That is the only connection between us. The evidences you provided worthless to mention. (We are all living in US and do not worry about writing Gulen in its original form. Do you have a 'u character with two dots' on your keyboard?) Well, you may expect some other people also joining to the discussion. You will not be able to hide the facts anymore. Bad for you... Mokotok 09:15, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Let's see: ÜÜÜÜÜÜÜÜÜÜÜüüüüüüüü. Yes, I appear to have this 'u character with two dots'. Azate 09:38, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I am a part of the Üü club too! On keyboards without a given character the easiest way to produce it is by copying and pasting it .. you've just got to find a web-site that has the needed character.  :-) Netscott 11:11, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Another thing that caught my attention is Light&Truth wrote "Wellcome" in his user page and User:Rgulerdem wrote "wellcome" in Fethullah Gulen's discussion page. Caspase 12:58, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

• In case this is useful, here [36] [37] is some evidence rgulerdem has been using 128.255.45.117 and 216.248.122.150. -- noosph e re 20:54, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

• All 3 have been indef blocked. Case closed. Unblocked again. Azate 22:26, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Response

I hope this action of admin User:Cyde makes it clear that how and admin can misuse his privileges irresponsibly. He did that before and even without waiting the result he blocked my account indefinitely again now. Thanks for the NSLE that he unblocked my account and I am able to write this response. I leave the decision about admin User:Cyde's action and his ideological and personal motivations to the community. He is looking for an opportunity to unblock me indefinitely again. I will try to explain what is happening, I hope I can make the facts clear:

• I already quitted from the discussion of the article Fethullah Gulen because I was really tired of unfruitful discussions. And I did that long before these messages are posted. I do not need suckpopets support in an discussion that I am absent.
• The editor User:Azate is continuously
  • censoring the facts,
  • vandalizing by blanking the useful information from the article,
  • categorizing the article with his POV, and
  • inserting incorrect statements into the article.
• I do not like to get into these kind of childish games as he is doing, but I think I need to do this: User: Azate is most likely User:Baroqqque, who were using IP address User:70.22.220.53 and derivative of it before. He was causing the same kind of problems and edit wars before as well. It is important to realize that because he has self-contradicting remarks. He both claims that 'he's on home turf at the article', and also he is new to the discussion. His references to the past diffs shows that he has well aware of the history of this article. He had to leave because of his violations and irresponsible actions.
• I would like to ask the CheckUser please check if these two guys has something to do with User:Netscott simply because
  • they are insisting on the same tag, the same way on this article,
  • both are violating the 3RR rule ( User:Netscott somehow could manage to hide from block though), and
  • supporting each other.
• Now User:Azate's claims are not serious and I cannot find an argument to answer. One of them answered by User:Mokotok. He is tragicomically using the word 'hi' as an evidence. It is very common expression. I do not know how many else had the same. In fact, if you check his page, he starts with the same greetings too. He changed it today. I hope I do not need to prove him that, I actually am different from him. We ( User:Azate and me) are both Turkish as well as User:Light&Truth and User:Mokotok. So it should be understandable that we may have common mistakes and common way of using English.

I inform the people around me about the project and encourage them to contribute. Two of these guys, who are actually a couple living at the next door, joined to the discussion of the article. (I leave it to User:Azate or User:Netscott to figure out who is the boss at home). They contributed independent from this article as well and are planning to continue to contribute in their area of specializations (history and biochemistry). I hope that is fine to encourage people to contribute to Wikipedia. I will, however, won't be able to edit for a long time, because I lost so much time here and I am tired of unfruitful discussions, I need some rest. The users User:Light&Truth and User:Mokotok (except once) did not violate Wikipedia rules, and in that sense too, this complaint is not meaningful. Thanks Resid Gulerdem 02:40, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

RFCU result in

Confirmed. They are all the same person [38]

Case closed: K ilo-Lima| ^(talk) 18:27, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions. The result was: Anytime a user account is created with the words "smugface" or "dwarf", this is most likely a sockpuppet. If you notice one, alert an admin soon.

User:Smugface the Dwarf

I suspect that this user is the controller of User:Smugface the untrustworthy dwarf.

Evidence

The user page of User:Smugface the untrustworthy dwarf states that the user is the "son of" User:Smugface the Dwarf (indefinitely blocked).

Both user pages have statements similar to "the order of krill lives".

Similar vandalism to my user page here and here indicate this may be the same user.

Kevin 13:09, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually, these are both sockpuppets of User:Carbine, who has done little more than make inane edits since he originally created his account ( [39], [40], [41], [42], and plenty of others, some deleted). When he found them reverted, he then began to entertain himself through vandalism and trolling ( [43], [44], etc.). Presumably, he thought that the creation of these two accounts would be undetectable... diffs aren't really needed here, as the contrib history on both are brief and entirely related to vandalism.

In two months time, this user has shown little desire to make meaningful contributions to the encyclopedia or willingness to heed advice or warnings. Tijuana Brass ^E@ 07:21, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Comments

dear kevin their is not phyisical proof that we are one there is only lies.

Smugface could be my relative anyway their is no rule against sock puppeting

... HAHAHAHAHAHAHA... Danny Lilithborne 22:26, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

peace out

Case closed: K ilo-Lima| ^(talk) 18:22, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Abba13133131

Evidence

As with User:Moonlight serenade, the identical edits to the Gnosticism in modern times article says it all.

Comments

Currently evading 7-day block for 3RR Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR#User:Ndru01. -- Cedders ^tk 03:10, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: Blocked. K ilo-Lima| ^(talk) 18:13, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Demiurge010

Evidence

As with User:Moonlight serenade and User:Abba13133131, the identical edits to the Gnosticism in modern times speak for themselves. -- Lambiam ^Talk 16:46, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: Blocked. K ilo-Lima| ^(talk) 18:13, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Demiurge011

Evidence

As with User:Moonlight serenade and User:Abba13133131, the identical edits to the Gnosticism in modern times speak for themselves. The account was created to evade a block of Demiurge010 (see block log). -- Lambiam ^Talk 20:03, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Also, predictably, Demiurge001 (see [45]) has been created. -- Cedders ^tk 07:51, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Case closed: Blocked. K ilo-Lima| ^(talk) 18:03, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

Suspected sock puppets of User:Ndru01 include:

Registered users:

• Infoandru01 ( talk · contribs)
• Moonlight serenade ( talk · contribs)

Anons:

• the gtcust.grouptelecom.net anon, geolocated in Toronto, has used IPs including:
  1. 64.187.60.98 ( talk · contribs)
  2. 64.187.60.18 ( talk · contribs)
• the Bell Canada GT anon, also geolocated in Toronto, has used IPs including:
  1. 209.135.115.121 ( talk · contribs)
  2. 209.135.115.132 ( talk · contribs)

• Moonlight serenade ( talk · contribs) interests coincide with Ndru01 ( talk · contribs)
• are also linked by times.
• A previous sockpuppet had a very similar name; see Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Ndru01

Ndru01 ( talk · contribs):

1. 21:14, 13 May 2006 (hist) (diff) m User:Infoandru01/ Gnostic Infomysticism
2. 21:11, 13 May 2006 (hist) (diff) m User:Ndru01/ Gnostic Infomysticism
3. 21:10, 13 May 2006 (hist) (diff) m User:Infoandru01/ Gnostic Infomysticism
4. 20:57, 13 May 2006 (hist) (diff) m User:Ndru01/ Gnostic Infomysticism
5. 16:59, 3 May 2006 (hist) (diff) m Gnosticism in modern times
6. 16:51, 3 May 2006 (hist) (diff) m Infomysticism
7. 09:40, 2 May 2006 (hist) (diff) m Gnosticism in modern times
8. 09:32, 2 May 2006 (hist) (diff) m Gnosticism in modern times

64.187.60.98 ( talk · contribs) (the gtcust.grouptelecom.net anon; geolocated in Toronto, CA)

1. 21:18, 13 May 2006 (hist) (diff) Gnosticism in modern times
2. 21:17, 13 May 2006 (hist) (diff) User:Ndru01/ Gnostic Infomysticism

...

1. 01:42, 13 May 2006 (hist) (diff) Gnosticism in modern times
2. 11:40, 12 May 2006 (hist) (diff) Gnosticism in modern times
3. 04:00, 12 May 2006 (hist) (diff) Gnosticism in modern times
4. 23:34, 11 May 2006 (hist) (diff) User:Infoandru01/ Gnostic Infomysticism
5. 23:32, 11 May 2006 (hist) (diff) User:Infoandru01/ Gnostic Infomysticism
6. 23:27, 11 May 2006 (hist) (diff) Gnosticism in modern times
7. 22:04, 11 May 2006 (hist) (diff) Gnosticism in modern times

Moonlight serenade ( talk · contribs):

• 04:04, 12 May 2006 (hist) (diff) m Gnosticism in modern times (rv)
• 16:41, 5 May 2006 (hist) (diff) m Gnosticism in modern times (rv)
• 18:21, 4 May 2006 (hist) (diff) m Gnosticism in modern times
• 19:55, 3 May 2006 (hist) (diff) m Gnosticism in modern times (rv)
• 17:24, 3 May 2006 (hist) (diff) m User talk:Moonlight serenade (top)
• 17:21, 3 May 2006 (hist) (diff) m Gnosticism in modern times (rv)

Comments

The (rv) is an evasion as it is apparently designed to look like an admin has already reverted the reinsertion. -- Cedders ^tk 22:41, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

The Bell Canada GT anon is geolocated in Toronto and has used IPs including

1. 209.135.115.132 ( talk · contribs)
2. 209.135.115.121 ( talk · contribs) (the Bell Canada GT anon; geolocated in Toronto)

Evidence:

1. In this edit and others, this anon signs itself Ndru01
2. This anon has violated WP:3RR at Morphic field; see
   • these edits
   • this edit
   • this edit
   • this edit
   • these edits
   • this edit
   • this edit
   • this edit
   • these edits
   • this edit, all on 30 May 2006

User is already blocked. Nothing more can really be done. K ilo-Lima| ^(talk) 17:36, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:Suspected sockpuppets/Ndru01
• WP:SOCK
• WP:3RR

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:PennyGWoods

Evidence

User:PennyGWoods has been banned for a week for incivility and threats. Her talk page is locked. User:80.58.205.39 has edited User:PennyGWoods in the first person, and has signed as Penny and as PennyGWoods. Λυδ α cιτγ^{(TheJabberwock)} 04:56, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Comments

I can't add a warning message to Penny's talk page, since it is locked. Λυδ α cιτγ^{(TheJabberwock)} 04:56, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

I blocked the IP address for a week. I will continue the investigation tomorrow, when I have time. I won't be that long! I now think that since she has engaged in sockpuppetry, made death threats et al, an indef block may be required. K ilo-Lima| ^(talk) 19:41, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I have blocked PennyGWoods indefinitely. I hope this solves the problem. K ilo-Lima| ^(talk) 17:14, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Guillen

Evidence

• User:Guillen ( Special:Contributions/Guillen), User:Elbautista ( Special:Contributions/Elbautista), User:201.209.104.7 ( Special:Contributions/201.209.104.7), and User:G.ELIECER ( Special:Contributions/G.ELIECER) all edit the same articles, make the same accusations of pro-Catholic bias, use the same broken English, and make the same edits.
• User:Eliecer - made edits to the same articles in the same manner BigDT 17:41, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Comments

• Case history: User:Guillen was blocked by User:AmiDaniel ( [46], [47]) after repeated personal attacks and questionable edits. He then blocked User:G.ELIECER as an obvious sock puppet of Guillen ( [48]). Since that time, Guillen has edited as User:Elbautista and User:201.209.104.7. BigDT 03:18, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
• Elbautista ( talk · contribs · logs) has also now been indef blocked, as given the case history it was a quite obvious sock. The IP (201.209.104.7) was blocked for 24 hours for evading a block. AmiDaniel ( talk) 04:53, 3 June 2006 (UTC)