Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hooon/Archive

Evidence submitted by McDoobAU93
User Hooon has made numerous unexplained edits to Disney theme park articles to the point of disruption and blocks by admins. Good faith was assumed until user started blanking and redirecting articles, again without explanation. Attempts to communicate with the user by numerous other editors were ignored. After another bout of unexplained edits, Admin Daniel Case blocked user indefinitely on 15 April 2010, both for repeated disruptive editing and a heretofore unknown username violation.

On 17 April 2010, an IP began making similar unexplained edits. When users and bots began leaving warnings on IP's talk page, they too were deleted without response. Edit style and lack of collaboration with other editors is nearly identical.

--McDoobAU93 (talk) 15:05, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Requested by McDoobAU93 (talk) 15:05, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

IP has been blocked for 24 hours. Please feel free to resubmit the case if any disruption continues from them after the block, or if they switch IPs. SpitfireTally-ho! 16:45, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by McDoobAU93
User Hooon has made numerous unexplained edits to Disney theme park articles to the point of disruption and blocks by admins. Good faith was assumed until user started blanking and redirecting articles, again without explanation. Attempts to communicate with the user by numerous other editors were ignored. After another bout of unexplained edits, Admin Daniel Case blocked user indefinitely on 15 April 2010, both for repeated disruptive editing and a heretofore unknown username violation.

The first of two anonymous IPs began making similar unexplained edits on 17 April 2010, with the second beginning on 18 April 2010. When users and bots began leaving warnings on both IP's talk page, they too were deleted without response. Edit style and lack of collaboration with other editors is nearly identical.

This is a refiling of the initial case filed 17 April 2010, as user has indeed switched IPs and continued its editing pattern.

--McDoobAU93 (talk) 14:49, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Requested by McDoobAU93 (talk) 14:49, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

thank you very much for resubmitting this case, McDoobAU93. The IP range in use here is, which is much too active for a block, see rangecontribs. The range will probably also be too wide to effectively search for sleepers, and I doubt that there will be any sleepers anyway (seems that the user has used one account, but has since then decided to use only IPs). I recommend blocking the most recent IP. Again, if you see further disruption from this IP range then please resubmit a case, McDoobAU93, but it may be better to submit it without a checkuser request, unless you believe the editor turns back to using accounts. Thanks again for bring this to attention. Regards, SpitfireTally-ho! 17:03, 18 April 2010 (UTC)


 * The most recent IP has been blocked already. No point in blocking the other IP since it seems that their IP changed. I agree that the range is probably too big and there's probably a high risk of collateral damage. Over 65000 IPs would be affected. Therefore, a rangeblock looks unfeasible. If they keep targeting the same page(s), some protections could be put on those articles.  E lockid  ( Talk ) 19:57, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by McDoobAU93
User is making same unexplained edits as permanently-blocked user Hooon. Attempts to communicate with user are ignored and talk page is blanked instead of responding to user comments or posted notes/warnings. M.O. is identical to Hooon's.

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Comments by other users
S071084's edits follow on directly from Hooon's in a very large number of articles, far more than could be chance coincidence. This is a total Duck. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:55, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


 * This duck has to be running an illegal bot as well. These edits were coming one after the other and it just took me more than ten minutes to revert his idiocy.  --PMDrive1061 (talk) 15:15, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Requested by McDoobAU93 (talk) 14:35, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Already blocked as a WP:DUCK. ~ Amory ( u •  t  •  c ) 16:33, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Report date April 30 2010, 14:15 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets

Edit frequency and pattern matches blocked user Hooon. McDoobAU93 (talk) 14:15, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Evidence submitted by McDoobAU93 (talk)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments


 * Moved from Sockpuppet investigations/Christopher wei.  E lockid  ( Talk ) 17:58, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Already blocked and tagged back Daniel Case.  E lockid  ( Talk ) 17:59, 30 April 2010 (UTC)