This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Daedalus969 (talk | contribs) at 18:25, 23 December 2010 (→Comments by other users: t). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 18:25, 23 December 2010 by Daedalus969 (talk | contribs) (→Comments by other users: t)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
– This SPI case is open.
Daedalus969
Daedalus969 (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
For archived investigations, see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Daedalus969/Archive.
23 December 2010
- Suspected sockpuppets
- Demiurge1000 (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- User compare report Auto-generated every six hours.
Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"
First time I have heard about user:Demiurge1000 (the account was created less than a 6 months ago) was today, when the user has suggested blocking me for absolutely nothing. The the user went canvasing. I run wikistalk on the users. Here's what I got IMO the post on AN/I, requesting blocking me on a more than unwarranted accusation, canvasing and wiki stalk report are enough evidence to run SPI Mbz1 (talk) 18:03, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Comments by other users
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
Lol. I didn't do this. Feel free to CU me. All this really is is harassment since Mbz1 can't have her block of me she requested at ANI.— Dædαlus 18:25, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Categories: