Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Fjfhgfhdstty/Archive

Report date July 6 2009, 12:39 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Evidence submitted by AussieLegend

User:Fjfhgfhdstty was originally blocked in January for disruptive editing, which seems to have resulted in the creation of User:Fgdsggureugb, User:Bhfkdjktrrerkgf, User:Ffaadstrbdetete and finally User:Suiteman as each editor was blocked after being identified. All of the accounts primarily edit FETCH! with Ruff Ruffman and List of FETCH! with Ruff Ruffman episodes. Each of the accounts, with the exception of User:Suiteman have previously been blocked as sockpuppets of Fjfhgfhdstty. When unblock requests are denied another account is created. To be fair, but also because I think this needs to be documented for future reference in the event this user asks to be unblocked, I think the original block as a vandalism only account was a bit harsh, as only 5 of the editor's 21 edits were disruptive and this was probably due to frustration because his attempts to improve the article were reverted without any attempt at explanation. Subsequent contributions by Fgdsggureugb, Bhfkdjktrrerkgf and Ffaadstrbdetete have been generally constructive. After Ffaadstrbdetete was blocked, User:Suiteman was created and the talk pages of some of the socks were edited by other members of the family, including the IP. Each of the edits was the same, changing the contents of the respective talk page to contain only retired, clearly identifiying Suiteman as the newest incarnation. Unlike the previous incarnations, Suiteman is becoming increasingly disruptive, ignoring policy and edit-warring so it seems time for him to leave Wikipedia. I have tried to turn this particular editor away from the dark side by pointing out the consequences of his actions, but the editor responded by blanking my warning and all subsequent warnings placed on his talk page by me and other editors. I am sure that when he too is blocked he will not hesitate to create another account so it may be prudent to block the underlying IP as well. --AussieLegend (talk) 12:39, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments


 * Conclusions

Quite a big difference with the name, but judging by the contributions, I'm going to call a quack a duck. Blocked/tagged. Peter Symonds ( talk ) 14:28, 7 July 2009 (UTC)