Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Obscuredata (2nd)
- 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. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. 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 sockpuppeteer
Obscuredata (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
- Suspected sockpuppets
twoLove (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
- Report submission by
Nomoskedasticity (talk) 16:53, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Evidence
Obscuredata has been blocked per WP:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Drstones. Suspicion of further use of sockpuppets comes from participation on WP:Articles_for_deletion/Oxford_Round_Table_(re-nomination), where we see this.
This is similar to previous edits on the original AfD, see here and here. The logic of the posts is the same, as is the dodgy English (suggesting all edits made by someone with ESL).
It might also be worth considering whether there is overlap here with Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/Billingsworth; participation on the two AfDs seems similar, see here and here.
- Comments
I am not sure if this is a sock puppet or a SPA. The post [1] immediately made me suspicious, it suggests prior knowledge of wikipedia processes but the logic is spurious and flawed and the claims are largely false, whether this is evidence of editing inexperience or just POV pushing is anyone's guess. --neonwhite user page talk 18:02, 13 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Conclusions
Here TwoLove admits that he was asked to comment on the AFD by a blocked user. This in itself is not a reason to block him. He has not edited since the AFD, and I don't expect that he will. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 16:23, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]