| Revision as of 23:37, 18 October 2010 editMuZemike (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users71,084 edits CU results← Previous edit | Revision as of 02:52, 19 October 2010 edit undoTnxman307 (talk | contribs)64,361 edits commentNext edit → | ||
| Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
| ======<span style="font-size:150%"> Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments </span>====== | ======<span style="font-size:150%"> Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments </span>====== | ||
| {{likely}}. AIK IF 2010 was using an open proxy, but user agents are similar. –] 23:37, 18 October 2010 (UTC) | {{likely}}. AIK IF 2010 was using an open proxy, but user agents are similar. –] 23:37, 18 October 2010 (UTC) | ||
| :MuZemike asked me to review this case. There was a lot of variation and the two users show similarities. My opinion is that it is either a joe-job by a troll or a {{possible}} connection. <font color="darkorange">]</font><b><font color="midnightblue"><big>]</big></font></b><font color="red">]</font> 02:52, 19 October 2010 (UTC) | |||
| ---- | ---- | ||
| <!--- All comments go ABOVE this line, please. --> | <!--- All comments go ABOVE this line, please. --> | ||
Revision as of 02:52, 19 October 2010
– A checkuser has completed a check on relevant users in this case, and it is now awaiting administration and close.
Heymid
Heymid (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Populated account categories: confirmed
For archived investigations, see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Heymid/Archive.
18 October 2010
Suspected sockpuppets
- AIK IF 2010 (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Evidence submitted by TFOWR
This edit (by AIK IF 2010, prior edit was by Heymid, edit summaries identical), AIK IF 2010's other edits are mostly to Heymid's talkpage.
This is currently at WP:ANI, and both editors are now indefinitely blocked. I don't feel entirely comfortable with this: the time this occurred is (slightly) outside Heymid's usual times for editing. I'd like confirmation that this was genuine socking and not "false-socking". TFOWR 23:21, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.
Comments by other users
- Could be the false flag sockmaster who has impersonated other users already in a bit of hot water, in an attempt to reach the boiling point, so I would like to see this checked. –xeno 23:25, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
- I've seen "false-flagging" done at least three times before and am the one who originally suggested a CU in the ANI topic in question; it can't hurt to be sure. HalfShadow 23:28, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Likely. AIK IF 2010 was using an open proxy, but user agents are similar. –MuZemike 23:37, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
- MuZemike asked me to review this case. There was a lot of variation and the two users show similarities. My opinion is that it is either a joe-job by a troll or a
Possible connection. TNXMan 02:52, 19 October 2010 (UTC)
Categories: