User talk:Killing Vector/Archives/2009/April

Serial sockpuppetry
helpme

Some of the articles I watch have been the subject of serial sockpuppetry for over a year. Every time I or someone else reports a sock, the puppetmaster just creates a new account and starts vandalizing the same articles. What's a longer-term solution than filing the same sockpuppetry case over and over again? --Killing Vector (talk) 19:00, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * If it's a small group of articles and they're being heavily vandalised, then page semi-protection might be worth investigating, I guess. Pseudomonas(talk) 19:26, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I was just passing by and I saw this. Is the problem mostly link spam?  If so, maybe it can be dealt with by WP:SPB.  -- Mufka (u) (t) (c) 22:27, 6 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Not sure if I should have created a new section, but thanks for the heads-up on the sockpuppetry. Hope I have not put my foot in it. I think anyway it is tangential to the article topic, though have no huge objection to it per se. I've had no further replies so it does smell somewhat like old socks. SimonTrew (talk) 00:19, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

BJCP
I notice you are a large part of the cabal that has been using wikipedia as your own personal playground rather than as an encyclopedia. This isn't a game, if you have a valid reason to accuse someone of sockpuppetry than do so. I agree it has been a problem and it needs to stop now, from both sides of the pond. I have gone to several beers' talk pages and have requested that the BJCP is represented by a link. Make your case there and if need be we will have a third opinion. BJCP (talk) 05:18, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Additional information needed on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BJCP
Hello. Thank you for filing Sockpuppet investigations/BJCP. This is an automated notice to inform you that the case is currently missing a code letter, which indicates to checkusers why a check is valid. Please revisit the page and add this. Sincerely, SPCUClerkbot (talk) 23:27, 7 April 2009 (UTC)