Misplaced Pages

:Sockpuppet investigations/Phoenix and Winslow - 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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rschen7754 (talk | contribs) at 05:02, 18 September 2013 (Marking case as closed). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 05:02, 18 September 2013 by Rschen7754 (talk | contribs) (Marking case as closed)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Phoenix and Winslow

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

Populated account categories: confirmed · suspected

For archived investigations, see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Phoenix and Winslow/Archive.



15 September 2013

– This SPI case is closed and will be archived shortly by an SPI clerk or checkuser.

Suspected sockpuppets


Goodoldeboy has already been blocked as a sock but doesn't seem to have been reported here so is only included for the record. Comment on P&W's talk page "It should be noted that it appeared you went through some lengths to attempt to avoid detection" probably should also be included for the record. For this reason I am including Liangshan Yi who has already been checked but who has broken a silence of some months to revert removal of a tendentious P&W edit here: . Scoobydunk appears to be a brand new editor whose very first edit was to launch into an article WLRoss (an editor with whom P&W has been feuding for a few years) had been editing; with a suspiciously precocious grasp of WP jargon in the edit summaries and . Daveosaurus (talk) 02:43, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
  • no Declined - While I agree that Scoobydunk (talk · contribs) does have a solid grasp on Wiki jargon, I do not see much else that would suggest they are a sock of Phoenix and Winslow (talk · contribs). Just because Scoobydunk edited the talk page of an editor who P&W did not get along with does not really justify running a checkuser. Additionally, a CheckUser has already commented on the connection between P&W and Liangshan Yi saying the connection was  Unlikely. Lastly, Liangshan Yi did not show up in my most recent checkuser of P&W. Tiptoety 04:53, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
  • If there's no grounds to justify a CU in this case, there's not really grounds to block the two accounts either. Rschen7754 05:02, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
Categories: