Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Jake Picasso/Archive

Evidence submitted by AnemoneProjectors
User:Jake Picasso was blocked indefinitely earlier this month. His edits included this: a false entry in List of EastEnders books. User:Francisco Firefly also added a book that doesn't exist to the same article. He also created Thomas Clements, which I deleted. Prior to this account being created, the IP address I have listed created a link to Thomas Clements in List of EastEnders characters (1986). This IP is now adding false information to other EastEnders-related pages such as here. Anemone Projectors  11:03, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

I am now adding User:Bobby Knutt for this edit. The IP is now making edits to Emmerdale articles, which User:Bobby Knutt has followed up on. Anemone  Projectors  13:16, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
All blocked. Thank you. Peter Symonds ( talk ) 21:07, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by Kinu
These editors appear to have very similar interests and editing habits. User:Johnny Partridge was active only on the 20th, and edits include creation of an article on Bob Brooks, edits to The Knowledge (film), and creation of several WP:BLP articles, as well as a hoax at Anthony and Zachary. User:Steve Fellows has been active since the 26th, and edits include information about Bob Brooks, creation of a hoax article about an alleged The Knowledge television series, and several WP:BLPs as well. Users appear to be sockpuppets, but brought here for a second opinion. Kinu t /c  08:56, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
 * And I've just found another hoax article, The Sound of Liverpool, and deliberate misinformation about that fake film at Bob Brooks. I might as well block both accounts based on WP:DUCK. Might as well consider this matter closed... no harm done, I hope. :) -- Kinu t /c  09:02, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I've also found another sockpuppet that goes further back, User:Keith Neill Parry, that created a hoax article which was later edited by User:Steve Fellows. Ugh. -- Kinu t /c  09:13, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
✅ the following are the same: It's The sockmaster appears to be. TN X Man 15:16, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
 * and
 * are related to that group.
 * All accounts tagged and blocked. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 16:24, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
 * TY to PeterSymonds for the move, Tagged . -- DQ  (t)  (e)  20:36, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

Evidence submitted by AnemoneProjectors
I have already blocked these accounts per WP:DUCK but I would like to request checkuser as "Jake Picasso" always has several accounts set up at once. Also is it possible to request some kind of IP range block, as he often edits while logged out and the IP addresses area all pretty similar. I've only listed the four most recent accounts I blocked in the last week, and two IPs blocked today. Anemone Projectors  14:33, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Auto-generated every six hours.
 * User compare report

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
A rangeblock is not possible, but I did turn up the following: ✅: match to the above, but ✅ with relation to each other:
 * TN X Man 19:06, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
 * All accounts have been blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 03:35, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I blocked and tagged the remaning ones, there were only two. Thank you. Anemone  Projectors  12:21, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * TN X</b> Man 19:06, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
 * All accounts have been blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 03:35, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I blocked and tagged the remaning ones, there were only two. Thank you. Anemone  Projectors  12:21, 7 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I blocked and tagged the remaning ones, there were only two. Thank you. Anemone  Projectors  12:21, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

29 November 2010

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every six hours.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''


 * Graeme Derek Henderson: Anthony Peck, etc. Invitrovanitas (talk) 16:12, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Bryan Fry: Snatched (film), Sam Oz Stone, Marcus Lyle Brown. Invitrovanitas (talk) 16:18, 29 November 2010 (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

 * I've blocked the account listed here and deleted a bunch of the articles they created. Per the master's history, though, I think we need a CU to see if there are any sleepers. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 16:17, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Both accounts are matches, but I didn't see any sleepers at a glance.  TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  17:20, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Alright, good deal. I've blocked and tagged the second account. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 18:52, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

21 December 2010

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every six hours.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

See Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents (permalink) Fences  &amp;  Windows  02:19, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm requesting a checkuser to see if we can rangeblock IPs, I'm already sure this is the same user. User:Keith Neill Parry was already blocked as a sock of this user, according to a prior SPI report. Fences  &amp;  Windows  02:22, 21 December 2010 (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

 * - Sleeper check is needed here. The ranges needed to block those IPs in any capacity would be far too large. No one has salted Keith Parry; should that be on the table, or is that too much? —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 02:25, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
 * ✅, but a rangeblock is a no-go. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  02:30, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Users blocked, closing. Nakon  05:49, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

24 January 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Creation of multiple hoax articles about actors, in the style of Jake Picasso. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 22:04, 24 January 2011 (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
It's probably a good idea to look through these accounts' contributions to check for more hoaxes. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 13:39, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Behavioral evidence is not _quite_ the same, so I'm adding a CU to check, and also to root out sleepers, as we've seen with this case. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 22:18, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ matches, plus
 * All socks have been blocked and tagged. I also went through and deleted a few hoax articles, and left some AFD notes as well. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 14:03, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

27 January 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

For sock Philippines56: The Case of Fargo and Rogan (film): fake IMDB link, fake details. Borkificator (talk) 09:12, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

For sock N057: James Kealing, fake IMDB link, fake details, linked to The Case of Fargo and Rogan (film). Note sequential use of 56 and 57 in user IDs. Borkificator (talk) 12:03, 27 January 2011 (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

 * Both socks blocked per WP:DUCK, but I'm adding a CU for sleepers. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 12:53, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No sleepers. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  15:09, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

28 January 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

See closed investigation from 27 Jan. above: same long fake article with fake IMDB links. Borkificator (talk) 21:01, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I've added an IP address that I already blocked, they added an invented website to Linal Haft. New telltale sign is this and adding .html in weird parts of urls. – Anemone Projectors – 21:12, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Blocked and tagged per WP:DUCK. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 23:24, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

17 February 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Creation of hoax actor and movie articles. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 19:46, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

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


 * A number of accounts were recently checked and blocked through a report I made at AN (Administrators' noticeboard/Archive221) if that helps. --<b style="color:Navy;">Jezebel's</b> Ponyo <sup style="color:Navy;">bons mots 00:59, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * It's been awhile. I've blocked this account per WP:DUCK, but I'm adding a CU to confirm and to check for sleepers. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 00:48, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * The following are ✅ as socks of :


 * The following are ✅ socks of :


 * Base on behavioral evidence and CU evidence I would say it is that  and  are one in the same.  Tiptoety  talk 00:57, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I tend to agree with that. Everyone's blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 01:44, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

22 May 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Sullyd created hoax film actor articles Alan Hendry, Ronald Hamilton, Alan Cassady, with many empty header-only sections, which I'm told is characteristic of Jake Picasso. The IP helped with Alan Cassady and added the fake actors' names into many film articles; VocalZ1 also helped with Alan Cassady and made his own hoax What Lies Above. If not Picasso, these are certainly a collaborating group. JohnCD (talk) 20:00, 22 May 2011 (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
Sullyd and VocalZ1 blocked as hoaxers, IP blocked 24 hr. JohnCD (talk) 20:04, 22 May 2011 (UTC)
 * - The usual confirmation and sleepers. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 00:50, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

✅ as each other:



One of them is already tagged as a sock of, however. –MuZemike 01:05, 23 May 2011 (UTC)
 * All the confirmed socks have been blocked, and I've tagged them. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 01:17, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

27 May 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Duck creation of probable hoax article in the Picasso style and editing of acting-related articles beforehand, including edits on 1940 in film and 1941 in film, which fits in the pattern of editing year in film articles; for example Limestoke24.7 in the case above made an edit to the 1941 in film article. ]. Shaky Spades made an edit to the Peter Guinness (actor) article diff as did JGH06091997 tonight. Asking for checkuser as there are always more than one sock at a time, from previous evidence. FlowerpotmaN &middot;( t ) 22:04, 27 May 2011 (UTC)

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

My only comment is that most edits to Peter Guinness (actor) are hoax edits from Jake Picasso sockpuppets. – Anemone Projectors – 10:10, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * - It's been five days; let's see what's up. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 04:07, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * The following are ✅ matches to each other:
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 12:59, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * All blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 13:10, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 12:59, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * All blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 13:10, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * All blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 13:10, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

29 May 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Duck edits for this account creating the obvious hoax James Cochrane (actor) (refs don't work; unlikely filomography mixing blockbuster or high-profile movies and small roles on UK soaps and various classic TV series, including a role of Doctor Who (again)); edited a year in British Television article (in this case 1945 in British television‎ and edits to various British actor articles. I know it is only two days since the last checkuser request, but more than likely at least one or two accounts out there that have slipped through the net. FlowerpotmaN &middot;( t ) 19:57, 29 May 2011 (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

 * - Blocked and tagged, but endorsing for sleepers and a possible IP block. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 19:59, 29 May 2011 (UTC)


 * No other sleepers to be on this IP address or range. A rangeblock would not only have a good bit of collateral but also wouldn't do much good, based on the ISP we're dealing with. <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:blue">Hers <em style="font-family:Bradley Hand ITC;color:gold">fold  (t/a/c) 20:10, 29 May 2011 (UTC)

31 May 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Duck edits from the two named accounts and the IP, which has been stable and making Jake-style edits since the 26th May. Yman5 created the Michael Lynch (actor) article, which although I didn't see it on Wikipedia at the time, I saw a the cached version from Google, which was the usual mix of UK soap and award-winning antics - this time a Tony award. Also had the usual edits to add the hoax to other articles; presumably he decided the game was up and edited the Brian Heenan article created by the other named account Agh5 when I db-hoaxed the article tonight. Agh5 created the Brian Heenan account tonight in the inimitable Picasso style with mentions of magnet article such as various Sharpe episodes. The IP 81.147.19.157 has been adding edits to support the various hoaxes. Again checkuser probably necessary for missed socks. FlowerpotmaN &middot;( t ) 19:53, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Edited to add Scala5 who edited the 1961 in film, but more importantly the Neil Morrissey article as said actor was featured prominently in Michael Lynch article.  FlowerpotmaN &middot;( t ) 20:08, 31 May 2011 (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

 * The usual sleeper check. And with the edits this close together (with the previous case), there's really nothing we can do in terms of a rangeblock? Seriously? —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 20:09, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ the following are the same:
 * There are two ranges in use- one is a /11 and one is a /13, so a rangeblock is out. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  14:44, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Blah, alright. Everyone's blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 15:13, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * There are two ranges in use- one is a /11 and one is a /13, so a rangeblock is out. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  14:44, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Blah, alright. Everyone's blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 15:13, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * There are two ranges in use- one is a /11 and one is a /13, so a rangeblock is out. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  14:44, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Blah, alright. Everyone's blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 15:13, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * There are two ranges in use- one is a /11 and one is a /13, so a rangeblock is out. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  14:44, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Blah, alright. Everyone's blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 15:13, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * There are two ranges in use- one is a /11 and one is a /13, so a rangeblock is out. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  14:44, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Blah, alright. Everyone's blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 15:13, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * There are two ranges in use- one is a /11 and one is a /13, so a rangeblock is out. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  14:44, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Blah, alright. Everyone's blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 15:13, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * There are two ranges in use- one is a /11 and one is a /13, so a rangeblock is out. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  14:44, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Blah, alright. Everyone's blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 15:13, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Blah, alright. Everyone's blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 15:13, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

02 June 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Two editors who only seem to have created one article apiece, but in the Jake Picasso style. Fneo created Richard Oxley, which has the usual range of roles in The Bill, Minder and Coronation Street. No refs offered, except for the External links collection of IMDB and IBDB entries, none of which work. Fuyu9 created George Purvis, which has a range of roles in films that of course are bogus; this one does have refs, but in the usual Jake Picasso style. Both are possibly stale for checkuser purposes for any current socks, but from having to deal with the last range of socks, which apart creating the obvious hoaxes which tend to be self-contained, were doing serious damage to other articles, including BLPs; unfortunately, any socks created around the time need to be tracked down. FlowerpotmaN &middot;( t ) 20:44, 2 June 2011 (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

 * Hmm. It's strange that these didn't come up in the previous CUs, but whatever. I've blocked and tagged both, and tossed those articles. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 20:51, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

05 June 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Classic Jake Picasso creation at Gary Keates: British actor with an astonishing body of work (wiith BAFTAs and Golden Globe nominations and all) without any working sources, of course. Was wondering where he had gone in the last few days since the last active sock was reported and experience dictates that this is probably not the only one active. FlowerpotmaN &middot;( t ) 22:47, 5 June 2011 (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
✅, blocked and tagged. –MuZemike 22:52, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

10 June 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Interesting set of edits by the IP and the named account, Turru5. Starting with the 4 edits (at time of writing) of Turru5: the first is fine, the second I'll come back to, the third adds the character Edwin Claypole (portrayed by Ted Hatchett) to the Sharpe (TV series) article. I had to check Google as the article n question was deleted a few weeks ago, but Edwin Claypole was played by James Cochrane in the hoax James Cochrane (actor) article, created by a Jake sock,  at the end of May. The edits of the IP editor and the second edit of Turru5 tie them together. The IP editor changes a name in the 1961 in film from Phil Allan to Ted Ratchet diff, then Ted Hatchett diff and then Turru5 changes him from an Irish American to British of Irish extraction 6 minutes later. diff. Coincidentally ( or not, when you think about it), Phil Allan was introduced by the Jake sock, Scala5, in April. diff. Asking for a checkuser for missed socks as he has had a few days. FlowerpotmaN &middot;( t ) 16:41, 10 June 2011 (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

 * Endorsing for confirmation, sleepers, and the usual notice that we can't do an IP block. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 16:47, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * , bordering on . Same country, different ISP. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  18:21, 10 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Sock blocked and tagged; the IP was autoblocked, but I blocked it anyway. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 19:15, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

07 July 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Creating British actor hoaxes and adding them to other articles. In particular creating the Bill Aaronovitch article and adding the link to the 1961 in British Television article, which is a Jake standard. While the Bill Aaronovitch article has been quickly and rightly deleted as a hoax, I can still see the Google cached version and that is a text-book no-shadow-of-a-doubt Jake Picasso creation, with the blockbuster roles garnering Oscar and BAFTAs, followed closely by small roles in various UK TV standards. Has the usual roles in one of the Sharpe episodes and an old favourite of Jake, The European, which has never had any existence beyond Jake Picasso hoaxes, Checkuser requested as no-one has asked in a while and there are normally other Jake socks floating about, which means cleanup of various BLPs might be needed. FlowerpotmaN &middot;( t ) 17:31, 7 July 2011 (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
✅, blocked an IP. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 18:10, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 01:58, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

24 July 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Usual preparatory work editing Year in film articles, including adding a fake entry, which took 4 attempts to add a fake entry to the 1961 in film starting with a real actor and then changing the first name in the next 3 edits. Usual editing of British actor bios, which will have to be examined for deliberate errors. But gets around to a palpable hoax in the Jake Picasso style at Alec Magowan. Checkuser requested to flush out any other socks. He's had a week without anyone checking on him and he's a busy guy. FlowerpotmaN &middot;( t ) 21:31, 24 July 2011 (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

 * - It's been awhile since we've had this case. Endorsing for confirmation and sleepers. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 22:59, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ and blocked an IP. Keegan (talk) 06:51, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Blocked/tagged. — G FOLEY   F OUR!  — 15:34, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

29 August 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Created a detailed hoax British actor article Stephen Fox (television personality) which looks similar to hoax articles created by previous socks, also added the name to a "year" article. January ( talk ) 11:46, 29 August 2011 (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

 * Adding a CU for confirmation and sleepers. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 13:06, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅ the following are the same:
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 13:44, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
 * All blocked and tagged. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:48, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 13:44, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
 * All blocked and tagged. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:48, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 13:44, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
 * All blocked and tagged. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:48, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
 * All blocked and tagged. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 15:48, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

23 September 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Following the same pattern as several previous socks, the user has created a detailed hoax British actor article with fake references, John Nathenson, and added the name to 1965 in British television. January ( talk ) 16:43, 23 September 2011 (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
✅ as being the same as, who was previously blocked as a sock. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 17:30, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 00:31, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

23 October 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

User has created two detailed hoax articles with fake references, Kirsty Adamson and Billy Rutherford. Subjects are musicians rather than actors but the style is very similar (eg Wikilinks that link back to the same article to give the illusion of bluelinked names, dob sourced to Birthstones), another similarity was that one of the names was added to a year article. January ( talk ) 21:01, 23 October 2011 (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
if the data isn't stale I'm going to say. Alexandria  (talk)  21:12, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Destinystreet is to be Burghnova, the most recent sock in the archive. However, these accounts have separate socks.  is ✅ to also operate these accounts:
 * (ie Jake Picasso) is ✅ as operating these accounts:
 * AGK [</nowikI>&bull; ] 21:32, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * (ie Jake Picasso) is ✅ as operating these accounts:
 * AGK [</nowikI>&bull; ] 21:32, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * AGK [</nowikI>&bull; ] 21:32, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * AGK [</nowikI>&bull; ] 21:32, 23 October 2011 (UTC)


 * AGK blocked everyone; I updated the tags based on the findings. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 23:29, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

03 November 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Terry David appears to be one of this user's typical hoax actor articles with fake references. January ( talk ) 17:32, 3 November 2011 (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
✅ the following:
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 17:59, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * blocked and tagged Alexandria   (talk)  18:05, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 17:59, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * blocked and tagged Alexandria   (talk)  18:05, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 17:59, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * blocked and tagged Alexandria   (talk)  18:05, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

03 November 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Distance99's edits to Gary Stevenson led me to these accounts, who appear to have created this hoax between them. January ( talk ) 18:53, 3 November 2011 (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
WilliamH (talk) 19:19, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

The following are ✅ as. WilliamH (talk) 19:42, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
 * blocked and tagged. Alexandria   (talk)  19:46, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

07 November 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Has created a hoax article on an Emmerdale character Russell Barnes (previous sock User:Bobby Knutt also created an Emmerdale-related hoax), as with previous articles it contains Wikilinks that link back to the same article to give the illusion of bluelinks. January ( talk ) 19:04, 7 November 2011 (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

 * Prolific socker, time to weed out the farm if one exists Alexandria   (talk)  19:06, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * ✅, .  Not marking as checked because I didn't find any sleepers, so someone might want to do a double-sweep.  That said, the last sleeper run was Thursday, so there might be none. Courcelles 19:21, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I didn't see anything either. Marking as checked. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  19:34, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Account was blocked already, tagging and closing Alexandria   (talk)  19:37, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

07 December 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

All accounts appear to be contributing to the same hoaxes involving Bob Knowles (deleted as a hoax) and "The Pathfinders" fictional band. 7upnone is the earliest account (see also deleted contribution histories). Quack quack? ~Amatulić (talk) 18:57, 7 December 2011 (UTC) ~Amatulić (talk) 18:57, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * I was about to come here to create an SPI on these accounts as well. A block per WP:DUCK seems legitimate, but an SPI might be worth it to find any sleeper socks. -- Kinu  t/c 19:23, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Part of me says. Hoax articles, placing links everywhere, just feels like him. Alexandria (chew out) 22:03, 7 December 2011 (UTC)


 * I did some digging in reference to Jake Picasso (noting that he is ) and was able to come up with some prior IPs that some of his socks used. Given that I don't have access to his useragents, it is not the most solid technical evidence but the IPs belonging to the accounts above and Jake Picasso's geolocate to the same general area. Tiptoety  talk 04:05, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree, this is Jake Picasso from everything I can see. Blocked and tagged the lot. Courcelles 04:33, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I've moved the case. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 04:47, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

20 January 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Looks like Jake Picasso is back, along with his IP User:121.44.193.239. Creating hoax articles on films linked erroneously to both WP articles and external sites. Best regards,  Cind.   amuse  (Cindy) 03:27, 20 January 2012 (UTC)


 * User:Pj7 created the hoax article Private Jake (TV Series), using the same procedures and editing practices as User:Jake Picasso, i.e., hoax articles on television series and films. A comparison of articles created is clearly duck material. Best regards,  Cind.   amuse  (Cindy) 09:10, 21 January 2012 (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
Could you provide more evidence of the link between this account and previous Jake accounts? As for the IP, any IP mentioned in the archive (without commenting on whether they are actually connected to Jake or not) all geolocate to England. This IP shows as Australia. TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 14:24, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * It's not "clearly duck material". There have been countless hoax articles created on Wikipedia, so not everyone who creates one is Picasso. This doesn't really match Picasso's MO in terms of focus (people vs shows), style (prose) and so on. On the other hand, it's been awhile since we've swept this case for sleepers, but I'll leave that decision up to a CU. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 14:29, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

I haven't checked Pj7 in absence of any evidence linking that account to Jake Picasso, so I would not take any further action there. I can however get on board with a check of prior socks considering the number of accounts listed in the archive of this case page: It's ✅ that are the same. I haven't looked at their edits, there may still be need of cleanup. Amalthea 23:41, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * FWIW, also matches, which is marked as a sock of , which is mentioned in this case page's archive, but has its own category: Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Destinystreet. Not sure how all those socks were connected to each other, but there may need to be some merging to do. Or not, doesn't make much difference in the end. :) Amalthea  23:50, 22 January 2012 (UTC)


 * I've blocked and tagged all the confirmed accounts, and have done a bunch of cleanup there. I think we can leave Destinystreet alone; we have newer evidence anyway. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 04:16, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

07 February 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Deadboy9 created a hoax yesterday, Ricky Richards (musician biography, now deleted), detailed and filled full of fake references, and then new account Noremorse300 turned up to add a link to the hoax to various band articles, indicating a connection between the two users. Today, Noremorse300 went on to edit the Chris Rhea discography, cleaning up some stray caption text left by 7upnone, an account indefinitely blocked as a sockpuppet of Jake Picasso. Both 7upnone and Deadboy9 have edited Live Aid (the latter to add a fake Thin Lizzy reunion); Deadboy9 also edited Paul Young (singer and guitarist), which received some attention from Endnight0, also blocked as a Jake Picasso sockpuppet.

Scanning through the archive of this page suggests the fake Ricky Richards biography resembles the sort of thing done by other Picasso sockpuppets. Which hopefully means I'm not seeing a connection that isn't there. Several Pending (talk) 20:47, 7 February 2012 (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
✅ the following are the same:
 * They are matches to the last batch of accounts in the archive.  TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  21:15, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Socks blocked and tagged as suspected. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 02:26, 8 February 2012 (UTC)
 * They are matches to the last batch of accounts in the archive.  TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man  21:15, 7 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Socks blocked and tagged as suspected. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 02:26, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

21 May 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Another creator of incredibly detailed hoax TV and film articles and bios, this time at George Brookfield and Grant Hardcastle. WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 15:30, 21 May 2012 (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
✅ the following are the same:
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 16:03, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  16:40, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 16:03, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  16:40, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * TN <b style="color:midnightblue; font-size:larger;">X</b> Man 16:03, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Blocked and tagged. -- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  16:40, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

29 July 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

From 8–10 June, Ohio99, 86.170.70.162 and 86.170.68.88 added hoax characters to the 1985 and 1990 EastEnders cast lists (discussion linked to) and created an article for a made up British actor, Jim Rodgers. Showbrown2 showed up today and added a made up character to the EastEnders cast list, they also created hoax pages for Saskia Jackson, Katie Pearce and Sophie Angels. I notice on their talk page they have started a draft for an actress called Kaylee Elizabeth Procter. When I googled her name, User:Halowill came up and I found they had created a draft for the same actress on their user page. I then discovered that they too had created an article for Saskia Jackson. 82.30.31.34 is possibly related as they have edited Showbrown2's user page. JuneGloom   Talk  22:45, 29 July 2012 (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
— Berean Hunter   (talk)  18:30, 30 July 2012 (UTC) — Berean Hunter   (talk)  02:16, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * - to confirm socking and find sleepers. It is clear from deleted contribs that the accounts, Sarah Hatways and Anne Handyless are connected but are stale for CU purposes as it goes back to October of last year.
 * all accounts are related. ✅ = ., bordering ❌ to the accounts in the archive.  on the IPs. --  DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  01:56, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Noting the technical differences and blocking based on behavioral similarities.

11 August 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

-- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  01:06, 11 August 2012 (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

 * the following are related, bordering on ✅:

-- DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  01:09, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
 * All are already blocked and tagged - closing. ​—DoRD (talk)​ 12:30, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

18 November 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Seems to be blatant; creating fake actor bios for imaginary British actors and adding them to Year in Film and Year in British Television articles. CU request for the frequently accompanying sleeper accounts FlowerpotmaN &middot;( t ) 01:47, 18 November 2012 (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

 * CU has nothing for you, things have gone CU and there is no immediate active socking going on. --  DQ  (ʞlɐʇ)  08:11, 18 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Imagecapture77 is already indeffed for creating inappropriate pages, I have tagged as a suspected sock based on behaviour. January  ( talk ) 08:39, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

— Berean Hunter   (talk)  15:42, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Closing.

November 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets



Putting this straight into the archive for reference purposes, since I've already blocked the account as an obvious duck. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  13:49, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

December 2012
And another. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  14:16, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Suspected sockpuppets

January 2013
And here's this month's offering. Yunshui 雲 &zwj; 水  14:18, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Suspected sockpuppets

11 June 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

Hoaxes of a similar flavor in one case, an obvious article history in another. The hoaxes at Nigel Dawson, Antony Salvestine and Tony Catherton are from Hyperdrive9, an AfD for Dawson reminded one participant of the 2011 case Articles for deletion/James Bate, a quacking similarity I saw as well, based on well-composed British theater actor hoax bios. A look into the history of Bate showed that it had been created twice, once by User:Scrappuy, the other by User:Blueplaay, who has been CU'd above as part of this sockfarm.

That these last two editors are the same seems extremely quacky as repetitive creators of the same hoax,

Hyperdrive9 seems less certain to be the same editor, which is why I'm asking for a professional evaluation (just regarding the quacking, I don't think a CU is warranted). As this sock doesn't have any recent history, and it would be informative, I believe, to know if hey are still active.

IP 2.218.136.121 I've added here based on that editor's expansion efforts on the hoax at Nigel Dawson.

--j⚛e deckertalk 00:12, 11 June 2014 (UTC) j⚛e deckertalk 00:12, 11 June 2014 (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

 * is certainly a Jake Picasso sock. A CU check also finds (who edited William G. Schilling, which was created by a Picasso sock and should be evaluated to see if it warrants deletion as a hoax). Other socks include  and . Any article created by these socks need to be evaluated for hoax material and falsification of references.--<b style="color:Navy;">Jezebel's</b> Ponyo <sup style="color:Navy;">bons mots  17:52, 20 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Roger that, thanks! I'll take a look at William and try and comb through other contributions of the other logins as well.  Very much appreciated!  --j⚛e deckertalk 18:32, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I have a relatively long history with this master (even predating my admin days) and I'm certain once you start digging through the hoax article histories you'll find a nest of abandoned socks and bogus articles. How much fun is that!? --<b style="color:Navy;">Jezebel's</b> Ponyo <sup style="color:Navy;">bons mots 18:53, 20 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm actually enjoying it, but I rarely participate in this sort of thing, so it's a bit novel. What's interesting is that *some* of what's gotten written appears to be verifiable, but some of the full bios appear to be complete (redacted), and one particular thing I've found so far has me wondering whether he's actually gotten an obit published on a hoax. *shakes head*  That might be a little paranoid, I grant. :)  --j⚛e deckertalk 19:16, 20 June 2014 (UTC)

21 June 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

User hasn't been active since December last, but edits in the same subject areas as Jake and was warned for creating hoaxes, including in particular, an article for Tom Prescillo. I have seen the article as (unfortunately) it's still hosted on a deleted pages Wiki and it looks like an obvious Jake creation, but in addition, after Coburt56 added a link for Prescillo to the 1945 in British television article diff, the next edit to that article was by FloydFan99 (see above), who added a death date for the fictitious actor in this edit. Edits might well be recent enough to uncover a few more socks. <span style="color: #004080; font-family: Courier New, monospace;"> FlowerpotmaN &middot;( t ) 00:06, 21 June 2014 (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
I agree with Dennis. No action is needed. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:08, 22 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm not a clerk anymore, but I'm confident that a clerk will decline this request for CU as it is stale, over 3 months old. Honestly, I doubt anyone will investigate at all for being stale.  I've been pitching in here this evening because SPI is so backlogged.  Investigating and blocking an account that hasn't been used in half a year isn't considered "preventative". Dennis Brown &#124; 2¢ &#124;  WER  00:27, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I will have to break Dennis' confidence and have a CU decline this one :P. per Dennis. --  DQ   (ʞlɐʇ)  15:16, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

21 June 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

The above are editors involved in creating and expanding a group of articles concerning the band Moving Vehicles in 2012, a band that despite being asserted to have more than one number one album on both sides of the Atlantic, seems only to exist on Wikipedia. (The article and spinoffs make a classic walled garden) I should add here that, at the time of writing, these articles are currently at AFD, nominated by me as being hoaxes; however, as I would think the evidence below would show that they seem to be obvious socks of Jake, it would be helpful for future reference to have the evidence here as well.

An article on this band was created by Foreignlanguage999 on Feb 16, 2012 in this edit, with the article being expanded within minutes by Timeout9 (and subsequently by an IP editor) in edits beginning with this edit. A week after Timeout's last edit, Institutehouse9 and Lawhalt66 joined in, first editing the band article and then creating spinoff articles, with Institute creating Moving Vehicles Extended for a supposed album and a  Members of the band Moving Vehicles  article and Lawhalt creating the Moving Vehicles + Pino Palladino article. Timeout went on to create the Paul Oates article, a fictional member of this fictional band, while Escapevelocity707 creates the Moving Vehicles discography article. But where the connection to Jake becomes apparent is in the article creation of Moving Vehicles (album) by Megaidiot6, who also created the Keith Parry article, which is the giveaway here. When I was scanning the archives of sock reports back in 2011, I saw someone suggesting this page should be salted, as Jake had created a hoax there (and also used the name in his sock names) and I also noticed that the link was blue. :) The clincher was that a recent CU confirmed sock Tamon4 redirected the Moving Vehicles article to the Vehicle article in this edit one week ago. Why he did this, I do not know, but he did.... and I thank him for it.. :)

While it might seem a bit over-enthusiastic (or anal-retentive or whatever :) to go for a sock block 2-and-a-half years after the fact, the point is that I found these socks and have nominated seven long-lived articles as hoaxes based on information in the archives from three years ago and from last week, and he obviously does come back to check on his fakes. So if the above ends up essentially as an archiving operation, that's fine, as long as the link to between Jake and these articles is acknowledged. <span style="color: #004080; font-family: Courier New, monospace;"> FlowerpotmaN &middot;( t ) 11:29, 21 June 2014 (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

 * , perhaps leave a note for as he is weeding through some other Jake Picasso hoax material at the moment. --<b style="color:Navy;">Jezebel's</b> Ponyo <sup style="color:Navy;">bons mots  17:53, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm probably off for about 24-36 hours, but I will be delighted to put some time into this tomorrow. I suspect these have a distinctive enough scent, or quack, that I doubt a CU would confirm much we wouldn't be sure enough to act on in any case. --j⚛e deckertalk 18:08, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
 * I responded at Joe's TP without seeing his response here, but that's fine. I should be around evening hours UT and possibly into the early wee hours for the next few days. <span style="color: #004080; font-family: Courier New, monospace;"> FlowerpotmaN &middot;( t ) 02:33, 22 June 2014 (UTC)


 * Those are all quite clearly part of the same frenetic festival of fraudulence, there are a few additional hoaxes in the history of deleted articles (e.g.., Anthony Scarborough, The Quadriples, Scots Aid), you probably caught deletion noms for one or more of these. : I did find one or two remaining individual edits to other articles that remained from the hoax, e.g., the listing at "1952 in British music". Anyway, I'd say everything above you've mentioned quacks like Jake.  --j⚛e deckertalk 16:36, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, folks, but I'm not blocking accounts that have been dormant for over 2.5 years. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 17:10, 22 June 2014 (UTC)