Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ChineseLamps/Archive

10 December 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Both users already blocked for vandalism, and sockpuppetry has been admitted. However, given this user's threat to continue socking, I'm filing a procedural SPI for the record, so that any future socks can be logged against it. This investigation can be archived. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  09:58, 10 December 2012 (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

 * Given their explicit threat to continue socking, I ran a check on Marqueesigns, and found no new accounts. However, this user also appears to be the operator of, which was blocked a couple of years ago. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:28, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Is this definite enough to warrant renaming this case, or will cross-linking be sufficient as only "possible"? Dennis Brown - 2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 13:48, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Oops, I edit-conflicted the close with your question. Reaper Eternal (talk) 13:51, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I just noted the older account for future reference if needed, so there's no need to change the case name at this time. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 13:55, 10 December 2012 (UTC)


 * I've tagged the sock and master account. I'm reluctant to treat BenderRobot as the master given how many years have passed since he last edited, and because his edits were generally tolerable. He has been blocked anyway. Closing. Reaper Eternal (talk) 13:49, 10 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Now that I see that BenderRobot has no SPI history, (I mistakenly assumed he did) I agree. Dennis Brown -  2&cent;    &copy;   Join WER 13:55, 10 December 2012 (UTC)