| Revision as of 07:13, 21 July 2008 editInetpup (talk | contribs)1,648 edits Undid revision 226047688 by Cumulus Clouds - try different approach; C.C. erased request; so try to replace text.← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:56, 21 July 2008 edit undoCumulus Clouds (talk | contribs)6,434 edits Undid revision 226949176 by Inetpup (talk) - that has nothing to do with this case. stop readding it.Next edit → | ||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
| ;Comments | ;Comments | ||
| Yes, this is an open-and-shut case. All user accounts are clearly the same person, and all should be indef-blocked. It might be worthwhile to do a checkuser to find if there are sleepers or if this is an established user in disguise. ] (]) 19:44, 13 July 2008 (UTC) | Yes, this is an open-and-shut case. All user accounts are clearly the same person, and all should be indef-blocked. It might be worthwhile to do a checkuser to find if there are sleepers or if this is an established user in disguise. ] (]) 19:44, 13 July 2008 (UTC) | ||
| * This is just a comment. I stumbled upon an interesting discussion between ] and ]: | |||
| <div style="border: 1px dotted grey; padding: 3px; margin: 3px;"> | |||
| {{cquote|Your responses here were appallingly inaccurate. Likewise, your request for input here from a heavily biased party was similarly disappointing. For you to turn from a sockpuppet case with weighty, voluminous evidence and then say that this is an open and shut case with far less evidence and with much less detail would lead me to question your neutrality in such cases. I do not think you would be fit to make judgements in SSP as an administrator.|20px|20px|Cumulus Clouds (talk) 05:25|14 July 2008 (UTC)}} </div> | |||
| :I couldn't find a way to wiki-link it because it doesn't have subsections. I'm just commenting here, because I'm willing to offer more detailed analysis here that I guarantee will be more complete than the analytical ''rubbish'' posted by the 'RFA' guy. I know we've had our differences, but maybe we can have a clean start that starts with my offer to help. I am even willing to support you for a CheckUser if the evidence warrants it. Thanks, cheers! --<span style="font-family:'Lucida Console',Geneva;color:#0000CC;border-top:1px dotted #66;">Inet<sup>pup</sup><sub style="writing-mode:tb-rl;color:#b8860b;">:o3</sub></span><sup style="color:#AFC7C7;"> ]▰]</sup> 09:26, 14 July 2008 (UTC) | |||
| ;Conclusions | ;Conclusions | ||
Revision as of 18:56, 21 July 2008
User:TheYieldCurve
- Suspected sockpuppeteer
TheYieldCurve (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
- Suspected sockpuppets
LogIn2CreateAccount (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
CumvIvs CIouds (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
MaxweIISmarter (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
206.53.144.25 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
216.9.250.114 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
various other IPs
- Report submission by
Cumulus Clouds (talk) 22:18, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
- Evidence
This is pretty open and shut, this account registered after questions were made about the edits of the IP to IndyMac Bank, which removed sources from that article. TheYieldCurve then registered and removed the same sources as the IP had done earlier. A comment on the page of that user was subsequently removed, and the IP left a comment on my talk page followed by a comment as their user account. The IP would later remark in an edit summary about the sockpuppetry notice left on the talk page of TheYieldCurve and their comments on mine, which I removed. User:LogIn2CreateAccount then registered and began restoring the refactored comments. Once these were removed again, the IP followed suit.
Ditto on User:CumvIvs CIouds and User:MaxweIISmarter
- Comments
Yes, this is an open-and-shut case. All user accounts are clearly the same person, and all should be indef-blocked. It might be worthwhile to do a checkuser to find if there are sleepers or if this is an established user in disguise. Yechiel (Shalom) 19:44, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
- Conclusions
Please everything void!