Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Dweeby123/Archive

Evidence submitted by Halsteadk
Currently a blocked user being discussed here. Evidence is there and picked up by a number of people. Very similar edit summaries, started editing at similar time as Dweeby123 was blocked. IP user happened to find and then comment on the WP:ANI discussion and make a big point of not knowing the blocked user. Halsteadk (talk) 18:39, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, the IP user is . Halsteadk (talk) 18:43, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * This case is full of quacking. I've blocked the IP for 72 hours for block evasion. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 23:27, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by JuneGloom07
Following Dweeby123's block, he revealed that he would be back and User:TwentyTen was blocked two days later. The Warbler102 account was created 3 hours after Dweeby123 had another unblock request denied. Warbler102's editing pattern is very similar to Dweeby123's as they only seem to edit soap opera characters (particularly EastEnders, Emmerdale & Coronation Street) articles and British BLPs. The edit summaries from Warbler102 were also similar (Warbler102, Dweeby123, Warbler 102, Dweeby123). Today he gave himself away by using the "tweaks", "minor-tweak" and the "++ dates" edit summaries that Dweeby123 regularly used. JuneGloom07   Talk?  15:41, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * Yeah, the quacking is a bit loud here. Tagged and blocked. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 16:16, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by JuneGloom07
The earlier edit summaries gave him away, the "++ I/Box2" and the "damn!!!" in particular. TheBubler2010 has been editing the same sort of articles as Dweeby123 (soap opera characters and British BLPs). The name of this account is also similar to the last one (Warbler102) that appeared. JuneGloom   Schmooze  23:13, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Auto-generated every six hours.
 * User compare report

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users
Oh it seems 406HDi was blocked for being a sockpuppet of User:WJH1992. This doesn't surprise me actually, it seems Dweeby123 was a sockpuppet in the first place. Anemone Projectors  23:40, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * And WJH1992 was actually a sockpuppet of User:Dodgechris. So there you go. I tagged all the pages because I'm watching this page. Anemone  Projectors  23:54, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
✅ the following are the same:
 * TN X Man 23:24, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Everyone's blocked and tagged here. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 23:53, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * TN X Man 23:24, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Everyone's blocked and tagged here. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 23:53, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

10 October 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Dweeby123 has returned under various IPs, but this is the first time for a while that he has created a named account. BVRT11 has edited similar articles to that of Dweeby (British soap opera characters, British BLPS). The edit summaries are a bit of a giveaway, using the same pattern as Dweeby and his other accounts. The IPs I spotted a few days ago, but didn't report as they'd stopped editing long before I saw them. 46.226.185.100 uses Dweeby's classic misspelling of Doh (do'h). JuneGloom   Talk  13:47, 10 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Contrary to what User:JuneGloom07 is saying I am NOT this user (User:Dweeby123) -BVRT11 (talk) 14:39, 10 October 2011 (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

 * I've blocked and tagged BVRT11 as a sock on behavioral grounds. As to the IPs, they match the location of at least one of the IPs in the archive. I've blocked both IPs for a week. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 17:49, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

23 October 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

The edit summary styles and the articles edited are consistent with Dweeby123. JuneGloom   Talk  16:48, 23 October 2011 (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

 * Sort of quacks, but technically ❌; in a different territory than the (ducked) sock in the archive. Due to certain things, I'm not attaching tons of weight to my own CU results, though. Courcelles 18:54, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Eh, I'm not wholly convinced. Closing for now with no action taken. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 23:45, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

27 October 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

I submitted a case before but got the sockmaster mixed up. Equalizer2011 I think is likely to be a sock of Dweeby123. If you could look into it that would be great. Thanks. GSorby – Ping!   11:23, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.'' Oops, I made a mess of this didn't I? Never mind, it still seems to be a sock of some account or other. GSorby – Ping!   20:00, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
This was already checked, no? The archive indicates a check was run last time. TN X Man 13:55, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm a lot more convinced than HA that the duck is quacking loudly. Blocked and tagged, but leaving this open for another clerk to review. T. Canens (talk) 14:31, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Given that two clerks have arrived at opposite conclusions, the opinion of the other clerks would be handy. AGK  [&bull; ] 19:21, 28 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Given this development, I ran follow-up checks on the accounts concerned. Technical evidence ✅ that = .   AGK  [&bull; ] 19:42, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * After comparing the edit summary usage, styles of editing, areas of interest, I'm convinced this is quacky. I'll note that thie true sock master is apparently so what should we do there?  Steven Zhang  The clock is ticking....  19:48, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
 * We've already got a history of cases under Dweeby123, so I'm inclined to just leave it as is (and not move the case.) Everyone's blocked, so I'm closing. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 23:07, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

03 November 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

similar user name and similar edits (Isle of Man people and topics) as a blocked user  R ad io pa th y  •talk•  21:34, 3 November 2011 (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
Both accounts are ✅ as. –MuZemike 21:39, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

06 July 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Hopefully this should be pretty painless. The IP is editing British BLPs and articles relating to EastEnders. The edit summaries are the dead giveaway though, particularly the "occ", "cu", "dashes", "infobox" and "ooopsy typo". Compare 195.194.238.104 to Dweeby123, Equalizer2011, BV76 -  JuneGloom    Talk  20:32, 6 July 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
Blocked 3 months. Elockid  ( Talk ) 00:42, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

01 October 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Similar to the last IP used. The edit summaries are the same style that Dweeby uses ("cu", " ", "occ", "infobox", "dash") and the articles (British BLPs and EastEnders characters) are also the same. JuneGloom   Talk  15:57, 1 October 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

 * IP blocked for 3 months. Jafeluv (talk) 07:08, 3 October 2012 (UTC)