Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Groupthink/Archive

Report date March 14 2010, 21:54 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets

See this talk page. Groupthink has admitted using these IPs and his account for disruptive edits. SuperSonic SPEED (formerly known asChaosControl1994). 21:54, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Evidence submitted by SuperSonic SPEED (formerly known asChaosControl1994).


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.

Well, "Groupthink has admitted using these IPs and his account for disruptive edits" isn't exactly (or at all) true: Seethis talk page for my exact words. Beyond that, I believe the evidence alone will be sufficient to close this investigation with no finding. Groupthink (talk) 00:05, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * That's EXACTLY the same evidence I have submitted against you. SuperSonic SPEED (formerly known as ChaosControl1994). 17:03, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Then I'm confused: How does "Would you kindly... clear my name?" constitute an admission of guilt? Groupthink (talk) 18:19, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * How do you know these IPs? Toddst1 knows you used the IPs for inappropriate editing and the RFCU has been clerk endorsed as of the evidence against you. If I'm wrong about you being a sockpuppeter then fair enough but from this point, I'll let CheckUser decide your fate.SuperSonic SPEED (formerly known as ChaosControl1994). 19:22, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) Here's where the IP addresses came from (it ain't rocket surgery); 2) Toddst1 knows no such thing, which is why he, and I, want this SPI; 3) I eagerly await vindication.

Oh BTW, shouldn't the RFCU code be "D - 3RR violation using socks"? Groupthink (talk) 00:13, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Re Xero's comments below: Yes, I remember you making that accusation almost two years ago, and I can't help but think that you're repeating it here because you're still sore that consensus went against your reversions of my improvements to List of government agencies in comics. Would you kindly provide evidence to support your fishing expedition, please? Groupthink (talk) 03:49, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

I've added as well per contrib in the middle of an edit war. If false, please release my block of the IP.Toddst1 (talk) 22:57, 14 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comments by other users
 * I'd like to refer you to this this page Talk:List of government agencies in comics where I user Xero (formerly Basique) believed that Groupthink was a sockpuppet operated by user Phil Sandifer, in fact I've been waiting for him to re-activate this account. --Xero (talk) 03:27, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Requested by SuperSonic SPEED (formerly known as ChaosControl1994). 21:54, 14 March 2010 (UTC) , noting that the IPs geolocate to very different places. Tim Song (talk) 06:00, 15 March 2010 (UTC)
 * CheckUser requests


 * I'm very reluctant to do a check here, as this has basically been requested by Groupthink to prove a negative, which checkuser cannot do; I also dislike attempting to connect accounts to IP addresses for privacy reasons. Looking at the WHOIS data, one of these IPs is from UC San Diego, another from Texas, and the other Sweden; unless the latter two are proxies, this seems remarkably unlikely. Is a checkuser really needed here? If so, I'll leave this for an opinion from another CU, as I've very tempted to say no. Hers fold (t/a/c) 18:09, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The only reason I endorsed it is possible use of proxies, but, well, you decide. Tim Song (talk) 18:41, 17 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments


 * Conclusions
 * Per Hersfold. -- Avi (talk) 19:19, 17 March 2010 (UTC)