Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Joeyjoejoeman/Archive

Joeyjoejoeman

Joeyjoejoeman (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

15 March 2014[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

Umesswithdawrongguy (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
WorldOneExpert10102 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
BlackBelt360X (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
TotalGamer15015 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
Editor interaction utility

All of these accounts have focused solely on List of World War I video games, Talk:List of World War I video games, and their userpages. All of the account have been used to insert a bad list entry to to the WWI games list. Additionally, these account fail to use edit summaries, they don't indent on talk pages, and they refer to User:Thetalkingheads and Talking Heads (WorldOne, Total, BB360X, Umess)

All of the suspected socks first two edits are to Talk:List of World War I video games and their respective userpages. Each user has a different reason for supposedly registering an account, however, they only exist to readd a spam link.

Tying JJJM and Umess together specifically: Umess userpage has a poorly done ebonics attempt (notice 'yo', 'cuz', u vs. you inconsistency). JJJM attempts a user warning in the same faulty ebonics form (notice 'yo', 'cuz').

I believe there is enough here to block on the grounds of great quackery. Ish dar ian 19:47, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users[edit]

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

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments[edit]

CheckUser requested - Self-endorsed by clerk for checkuser attention - Looks pretty likely to me, but can a CU take a look and confirm + check for sleepers. Thanks, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 03:34, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
All four accounts listed are Confirmed as Joeyjoejoeman (talk · contribs). No sleepers found.--Jezebel'sPonyo ^{bons mots} 18:00, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
All indefinitely blocked and tagged. Closing now. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 05:10, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]