Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jackieubar/Archive

Evidence submitted by Jeff G.
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rhacel_Parrenas&action=history  — Jeff G. ツ 02:48, 24 July 2010 (UTC) Sorry, I didn't get involved until after the 2nd warning on the 2nd account. — Jeff G. ツ 03:09, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

 * Of course this is the same user. We should be working with this person, who is likely the subject of the article, to address their concerns, not summarily rollbacking and blocking them. NW ( Talk ) 02:56, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Agreed. The better course of action here would have been to left them a hand written note, opposed to some scripted huggle issued warning. There is a big difference between a sock whose only intention is to vandalize and one who is attempting to edit constructively but is just not sure how to go about it. In the latter instance, communication is always the better option. And if communication fails, then we can move to blocks, but that should be the last step. Tiptoety  talk 02:59, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

← Closed as taken. I will monitor the account, and try and engage the editor in dialogue, no need to issue a sock block though. Tiptoety talk 19:40, 24 July 2010 (UTC)