Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Superiorsuperstar/Archive

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



Superiorsuperstar

Superiorsuperstar (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log· investigate · cuwiki)
Report date October 3 2009, 23:06 (UTC)[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Evidence submitted by Uncle G

All four of these accounts reinstate the same text into Deborah Glick (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and Jerrold Nadler (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Uncle G (talk) 23:06, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.
Comments by other users


CheckUser requests
Checkuser request – code letter: D + F (3RR using socks and another reason)
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by Uncle G (talk) 23:06, 3 October 2009 (UTC) [reply]


I've already blocked Hopenope (talk · contribs) on behavioural evidence alone. That account is obviously a sockpuppet of one of the others.

I think that this is the closest code. Note that this is one of two related SPI cases, involving New York politics. I'm dividing the cases up by what the apparent political motivations are, although CheckUsers are welcome to just check the lot in bulk and let the wiki software sort them out. I don't particularly care about the politics. But the edit wars and AFD discussion shenanighans, as well as the BLP issues (We can do without this (see edit summary), for example.), need to stop.

JamesMLane states that these are sockpuppets of Nleobold (talk · contribs · checkuser · block user · block log · edit count). Those edits are far too old to CheckUser, unfortunately. Uncle G (talk) 23:06, 3 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Conclusions
  • Both users blocked indefinitely; IP blocked for a week. NW (Talk) 18:13, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This case has been marked as closed. It has been archived automatically.