Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Davidgoodheart/Archive

28 December 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

After getting an edit-warring warning, master uses IP sock to continue the edit-war on Unexplained disappearances adding fictitious accounts of vanished people from an unreliable source. No communication, no explanation for his reverts. . Δρ.Κ. λόγοςπράξις 12:45, 28 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Added evidence
 * Overlap in article interests
 * Lou Albano: Master editing the section "In wrestling" fixing "page" field vs. IP editing the section "In wrestling" fixing "page" field
 * Tito Santana
 * Oleg Taktarov: Master editing the section on Championships and accomplishments vs. IP editing the same section
 * Turban: Master editing the section on Turban colours vs. IP editing the same section
 * Back from the Dead (Adler album) (article created by Davidgoodheart)
 * Sid Eudy
 * Stan Lane
 * Unexplained disappearances: Master edit-warring adding fictitious disappearances based on ghost stories vs. IP adding the same

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
I've blocked the IP for one month and warned the named account. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:16, 31 December 2014 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

recently has expressed agitation for his articles being nominated for deletion in a good faith practice. Despite advice offered from experienced users, including myself, he does not seem to get why his articles are not notable and rejects consensus. A new account has emerged and the account's editing history is completely devoted to agreeing with David at AfD. TheGracefulSlick (talk) 21:32, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note - I have added another account to the list that was recently created to exclusively vote at an AfD.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 01:09, 1 October 2017 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''

Okay, I admit I did this, but I DIDN'T know this was against the rules, as many people agreed with me my articles should NOT have been deleted, but they didn't have accounts, so I had them make accounts to agree with me, but they truly did agree with me that my articles should have not been deleted and the reasons people gave for this were not good ones, so if you want to temporarily block me I am okay with that, but I still say that my articles should not have been deleted. Davidgoodheart (talk) 22:23, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment - I have worked with regularly and it disappoints me to say this does match his editing style.  I believe this is a duck as well. --  Dane  talk  22:24, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - this seems pretty obvious, but let's be sure. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 18:49, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I've blocked block socks indefinitely and blocked Davidgoodheart for 3 days. Given how long he's been around I don't accept that he didn't know sockpuppetry was a bad thing. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 02:27, 6 October 2017 (UTC)