Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cmmmm/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets
These are prior socks, ✅ by checkuser:
 * Prior confirmed socks
 * Prior confirmed socks
 * Prior confirmed socks
 * Prior confirmed socks
 * Prior confirmed socks
 * Prior confirmed socks
 * Prior confirmed socks
 * Prior confirmed socks
 * Prior confirmed socks
 * Prior confirmed socks
 * Prior confirmed socks
 * Prior confirmed socks
 * Prior confirmed socks
 * Prior confirmed socks

Evidence submitted by Cirt
Disruption and POV pushing by has pushed several pages into deletion discussions that were otherwise unnecessary, and due to this sock's disruptive activity, a waste of Wikipedia editors' time: -- Cirt (talk) 11:53, 8 November 2010 (UTC) Auto-generated every six hours.
 * Sock of User:Cmmmm, same exact behavior as blocked sock, User:Clearcrash1
 * 1) Compare with contribs of.
 * 2) When compared with - same anti-Muslim behavior.
 * 3) When compared with - same overloading portals with Mormon related material.
 * 4) Note userpage, created to make it as a bluelink, with one-line bit of text.
 * 5) = similar to prior socks, see contribs, Jehovah's Witnesses edits.
 * 6) For example see edits by a blocked sock of User:Cmmmm,, at.
 * Disruption and POV pushing causing problems across multiple pages
 * 1) Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Television/Selected picture/21
 * 2) Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Film/Selected picture/25
 * 3) Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Film/Selected picture/24
 * User compare report

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

I admit that my edits are wrong, please give me the chance to be a good editor.Xpjohn (talk) 13:22, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * The sock accounts of should be indef blocked. The main sockmaster account should be blocked of a duration up to judgment of reviewing admin. The sock should refrain from socking as with, and stick to its main account . -- Cirt (talk) 13:24, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

I admit that I´m Cmmmm but I can not stop editing because I´m addicted to wikipedia.Xpjohn (talk) 15:48, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
– Cmmmm and Clearcrash1 are, so there is nothing to check by. This will need to be determined on behavioral evidence. –MuZemike 01:41, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay, no worries, but still the behavioral evidence is quite obvious, would respectfully request an evaluating admin to take action here based on that behavior pattern. -- Cirt (talk) 16:33, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm inclined to say the behavioral patterns are extremely similar, but as I'm involved with this user, I'm not blocking. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  13:50, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Request reviewing admin that evaluates the behavioral evidence, to block the socks indef, and the main sockmaster account for a duration up to judgment of the admin. -- Cirt (talk) 13:51, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Who it is a sock of, I'm not sure. It could very likely be Cmmmm, it could be someone else, but it's clearly a sock. No one finds portals on their first day and sets out to disrupt them. It's like hitting the submarine on your first turn of Battleship (it's a game, please someone know what it is...) Quacks like a duck. It's rabbit duck season admins. Sven Manguard  Talk  15:36, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with that WP:DUCK applies here and the socks and sockmaster should be blocked. -- Cirt (talk) 15:44, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, this ended exactly as easily as I could have hoped for. The person admitted to being Cmmmm. It's on my talk page. Sven Manguard  Talk  16:03, 8 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Blocked now that it is obvious, per WP:DUCK and per . -- Cirt (talk)