Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Codetruth/Archive

24 February 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Codetruth was recently blocked (on 10:43, February 24, 2013) for 1 week for persistent disruptive editing. Realitybite (account created on 10:43, February 24, 2013) recently added the same or similar content.

Compare this reversion by Codetruth with this edit by Realitybite. The key is this edit to a cite: |last=Emerson|first=Steven|title=Jihad incorporated : a guide to militant Islam in the US|year=2006|publisher=Prometheus Books|location=Amherst, NY|isbn=1591024536|page= which is usually replaced by |title=Jihad incorporated: a guide to ... |publisher=Google Books |date=January 14, 2010 |accessdate=October 7, 2010|isbn=978-1-59102-453-8 This leads me to conclude that the same person is using the accounts. Auric   talk  14:28, 24 February 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

 * seems very likely to be block evasion per the diffs provided. Endorsed just to make sure. May wish to consider whether to extend Codetruth's block and whether to block the underlying IP address to prevent further evasion. SpitfireTally-ho! 14:43, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
 * - This quacks way too loudy to need a CU, and per that, I have blocked the sock and extended the master to two weeks. -- DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  05:26, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

08 March 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Similar MO as Codetruth. Has made three edits (1, 2, 3) to Aafia Siddiqui, each containing the same content, with misleading edit summaries. Content matches Codetruth's preferred version. Auric   talk  01:47, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Ha. Well. Ahem. I s'pose I should have looked deeper into the article history: this quacks loud enough and I've blocked indefinitely. Thanks Auric. Drmies (talk) 03:41, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Quacking duck blocked and tagged. Someguy1221 (talk) 10:00, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * this is the second time Codetruth has evaded a block. Needs to be considered whether to increase the length of his current block (which has already been extended due to the previous SPI case). SpitfireTally-ho! 15:37, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Spitfire, that is a good point. I'll make the call: an indef block since the editor is essentially an SPA who refuses to play by the rules. Thanks for the reminder. Drmies (talk) 17:09, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks Drmies! Closing this again now. SpitfireTally-ho! 18:06, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

14 March 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Recently changed Aafia Siddiqui (diff) to Codetruth's preferred version. Similar POV pushing and edit summaries. Checkuser requested, since the case is less clear than last time. Auric   talk  20:11, 14 March 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

 * - per Auric. Should also check for any sleepers. —  Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 05:33, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * WilliamH (talk) 09:22, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Blocked tagged and closing. Rschen7754 09:24, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * WilliamH (talk) 09:22, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Blocked tagged and closing. Rschen7754 09:24, 15 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Blocked tagged and closing. Rschen7754 09:24, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

03 April 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

This user re-added Codetruth's preferred version of Aafia Siddiqui, using misleading edit summaries.diff Also, the username is similar. Rather obvious, I feel, so CheckUser not requested Auric    talk  20:02, 3 April 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

 * . Blocked and tagged. Jafeluv (talk) 09:11, 4 April 2013 (UTC)