Misplaced Pages

:Sockpuppet investigations/Scibaby: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 20:17, 7 January 2010 editMuZemike (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users71,084 edits →Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments: Marking as closed← Previous edit Revision as of 08:05, 8 January 2010 edit undoStephan Schulz (talk | contribs)Administrators26,888 editsmNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 342: Line 342:


{{SPIclose}} {{SPIclose}}
----


===== <big>Report date January 8 2010, 08:05 (UTC)</big>=====

{{SPIcat}}

<!-- Please do not add a header here -->

======<span style="font-size:150%"> Suspected sockpuppets </span>======
* {{checkuser|1=Utyl}}
<!-- Please duplicate the templates above ({{checkuser}} and {{checkIP}}) to list more accounts-->


======<span style="font-size:150%"> Evidence submitted by ] </span>======
<!--## Sign below your evidence with 4 tilde characters "~~~~" ##-->

Here we go again... --] (]) 08:05, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

======<span style="font-size:150%"> Comments by accused parties &nbsp;&nbsp; </span>======
<small><span style="font-weight:normal">''See ].''</span></small>


======<span style="font-size:150%"> Comments by other users </span>======


======<span style="font-size:150%"> Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments </span>======
{{RFCU| E | No2ndletter | New }} &nbsp;&nbsp; <small>Requested by ] (]) 08:05, 8 January 2010 (UTC) </small>
<!--## Replace CODE LETTER by the appropriate code letter and Replace No2ndLetter if you need a 2nd code letter (or leave it alone if not) ##-->
<!--## Codeletters are:
A - arbcom ban/remedy evasion
B - Ongoing serious pattern vandalism
C - Vote fraud, please wait until after vote closes
D - 3RR with socks
E - Evasion of community based bans or blocks
F - Other, please explain why a check should be run -->
<!--## Make sure your evidence explains why CheckUser is appropriate ##-->


---- ----

Revision as of 08:05, 8 January 2010

Scibaby

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

Populated account categories: confirmed · suspected

Older archives were moved to an archive of the archive because of the page size and are listed below:

For archived investigations, see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Scibaby/Archive.

A long-term abuse case exists at Misplaced Pages:Long-term abuse/Scibaby.

Report date December 20 2009, 11:27 (UTC)
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by KimDabelsteinPetersen

This mornings crop of socks, following all the usual characteristics and behaviours. --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 11:27, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Added 3 more with the usual characteristics. If a CU is interested in how i pinpoint these on behaviour, they can mail me (since GoRight seems to be disputing the requests). For each suspect i've listed there are at least 2 different characteristics that match, with scibaby's new methodology of creating a sock per edit it is rather hard to match more. --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 07:27, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Evidence submitted by Stephan Schulz

Added an IP. I think Kim's report included all that I reported up in the last report, too. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 12:18, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by User:Atmoz
Comments by accused parties   

See Defending yourself against claims.


I object most strenuously to being labelled a "sock puppet". There is no hand up my behind :) My edits thus far have been factual and i fail to see how i can be accused of being ] I request my name be removed from the above listing. mark nutley (talk) 09:10, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry about it too much, I was accused of being a sock puppet too when I first started editting the Barack Obama article. This is just a tactic to keep certain opinions out of wikipedia. TheGoodLocust (talk) 22:46, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Comments by other users

Discussion moved to Misplaced Pages talk:Sockpuppet investigations/Scibaby. Please don't continue the sniping at each other; I do not wish to ask you to stop contributing at SPI. NW (Talk) 22:54, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

CheckUser requests

{{RFCU}} is deprecated. Please change the case status parameter in {{SPI case status}} to "CURequest" instead.

Checkuser request – code letter: E (Community ban/sanction evasion )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by Kim D. Petersen (talk) 11:27, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

 Clerk endorsed –MuZemike 20:12, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. What do you mean by "continuation of prior dispute"? That would mean AA already was a sock? What might have lead to the fast block (apart from the POV-pushing fantasy-edits) might be the similarity in name to User:Institute of Klimatology, who is a confirmed Scibaby sock. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 10:03, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Conclusions
Report date December 28 2009, 10:40 (UTC)
Suspected sockpuppets


Evidence submitted by KimDabelsteinPetersen

The latest batch of editors that match with the established patterns. Please take notice of the last investigation, regarding the geocoding. Some of these have already been blocked (i presume by the duck-test, but confirmation as always should be preferred). Please also note the similar sock-masters that have been referred to in earlier SPI's (for instance Tinpac).

Also something seems to be wrong with the archiving bot (since the older cases haven't been archived) --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 10:40, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Prolog

Added User:Jon Drinkwater, User:Jesston and User:Glaucel. There seems to be a separate case for Jesston at Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Jesston, which could be merged here. Prolog (talk) 17:37, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties   

See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users
CheckUser requests

{{RFCU}} is deprecated. Please change the case status parameter in {{SPI case status}} to "CURequest" instead.

Checkuser request – code letter: E (Community ban/sanction evasion )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by Kim D. Petersen (talk) 10:40, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

 Clerk endorsed –MuZemike 20:17, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 Confirmed Scibaby (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) =

J.delanoyadds 02:52, 29 December 2009 (UTC)

Conclusions

--Kanonkas :  Talk  12:12, 31 December 2009 (UTC)


Report date January 1 2010, 17:00 (UTC)
Suspected sockpuppets


Evidence submitted by Short Brigade Harvester Boris

The usual.

Evidence submitted by Prolog

Added User:Stullen and User:Justisc. Prolog (talk) 07:55, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by KimDabelsteinPetersen

Added Heuristicitics and Carol Whit --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 12:51, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties   

See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users
CheckUser requests

{{RFCU}} is deprecated. Please change the case status parameter in {{SPI case status}} to "CURequest" instead.

Checkuser request – code letter: E (Community ban/sanction evasion )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 17:00, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 Confirmed, blocked, tagged,  IP blocked. J.delanoyadds 16:38, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Conclusions


Report date 08:10, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by Stephan Schulz

Per the usual. Stephan Schulz (talk) 08:05, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Added Oppuit (talk · contribs). --Stephan Schulz (talk) 07:50, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
And Shadowimages (talk · contribs). --Stephan Schulz (talk) 08:37, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Evidence submitted by ChrisO

I've added Jpat34721 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). This is a curious one. The account has been inactive for nearly three years and previously had only been used to edit two articles before turning up at Climatic Research Unit e-mail hacking incident. It went inactive a little before Scibaby's main account was blocked for sockpuppeting. The account was clearly not a new user at the time of its creation in January 2007 - it was already familiar with Misplaced Pages terminology and the language it uses is suggestive of Scibaby. It looks very much like an old sockpuppet recently reactivated, though I'm not certain whether it's Scibaby's or someone else's. -- ChrisO (talk) 08:50, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by KimDabelsteinPetersen

Added Tender & Privat,Excited State who are already blocked as scibaby socks, but with no CU confirmation. --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 16:05, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Added Robdevos2 as a possible. --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 16:21, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Added Funbutix --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 08:38, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Evidence submitted by TS


Comments by accused parties   

See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users
CheckUser requests

{{RFCU}} is deprecated. Please change the case status parameter in {{SPI case status}} to "CURequest" instead.

Checkuser request – code letter: E (Community ban/sanction evasion )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by Stephan Schulz (talk) 08:05, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

 Clerk endorsed Aaaarrrgghhh!!!!! –MuZemike 17:06, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

International Talk Like a Pirate Day is still 8.5 months off... --Stephan Schulz (talk) 17:26, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 Confirmed - the following accounts;
Red X Unrelated
No underlying socks or IPs block-able, sorry :( - Alison 01:23, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
Conclusions


Report date January 7 2010, 05:02 (UTC)


Suspected sockpuppets


Evidence submitted by KimDabelsteinPetersen

This mornings 3 suspects - sigh! --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 05:02, 7 January 2010 (UTC)


Comments by accused parties   

See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

{{RFCU}} is deprecated. Please change the case status parameter in {{SPI case status}} to "CURequest" instead.

Checkuser request – code letter: E (Community ban/sanction evasion )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Requested by Kim D. Petersen (talk) 05:02, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
 Confirmed - all three accounts - Alison 07:12, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
This case has been marked as closed. It will be archived after its final review by a Clerk or Checkuser.

{{SPIclose}} is deprecated. Please change the parameter in the {{SPI case status}} to "close" instead.


Report date January 8 2010, 08:05 (UTC)


Suspected sockpuppets


Evidence submitted by Stephan Schulz

Here we go again... --Stephan Schulz (talk) 08:05, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties   

See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

{{RFCU}} is deprecated. Please change the case status parameter in {{SPI case status}} to "CURequest" instead.

Checkuser request – code letter: E (Community ban/sanction evasion )
Current status – Awaiting initial clerk review.    Requested by Stephan Schulz (talk) 08:05, 8 January 2010 (UTC)


Categories: