Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Goofdawg/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Approximately six hours after User:Goofdawg was blocked, User:Therealdeans turned up and made a single edit to the Paul Scholes article (see here), adding exactly the same content that Goofdawg had attempted to add (see here, here, here, here, here, here and here - and those are only the identical edits!). It is pretty plain to me that these are the same person. – PeeJay 17:55, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

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

I am just trying to positively edit an article in Paul Scholes. If you look at my edit there is no misinformation nor vandalism. I had seen User:Goofdawg edits and thought that they were accurate this is why I reverted the changes. Everything I have done is in accordance with Wikipedia policies so to trying to accuse me of being a sockpuppet is morally absurd.Therealdeans (talk) 18:13, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * . Combined with behavioral evidence makes this ✅; thus blocked and tagged. Materialscientist (talk) 18:16, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Tagged the master (I assume that not tagging was a mistake. Feel free to revert if it was deliberate). Nothing left to do. Close. Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 20:25, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

New user who has immediately started editing the Paul Scholes article (see here) in exactly the same way as User:Goofdawg (see here) and targeted me with a talk page post. – PeeJay 23:21, 13 July 2020 (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

 * ✅., closing. Mz7 (talk) 01:42, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

A new editor with a username that could be seen as referencing my own immediately returns to the scene of the crime (see here, and these edits by their three other accounts). Pretty open and shut case if you ask me. – PeeJay 12:13, 7 August 2020 (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

 * ✅ and . Closing. TonyBallioni (talk) 00:19, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



 * Tools: Editor interaction utility • Interaction Timeline • User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

This user appears to have an obsession with me and the Paul Scholes article. They have appeared in the Paul Scholes article under different usernames, including User:Pajamas123 (diff), User:Paajones (diff), User:Goofdawg (diff) and User:Therealdeans (diff), all of whom have been blocked as known sockpuppets of each other. Now they have started adding sarcastic barnstars to my user page (diff, diff) and accusing me of being mentally retarded (diff). – PeeJay 12:34, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

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

. And now blocked by Materialscientist for socking it. Pahunkat (talk) 12:38, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Yepwestilldoingthis is stale for CU, yet I have indeffed them based on behavioral evidence. Materialscientist (talk) 12:37, 4 January 2021 (UTC)


 * I tripped over who was ahead of me handling this. Nothing more to do. Closing.  Cabayi (talk) 12:42, 4 January 2021 (UTC)