Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/JohnTombs48/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Obvious based on name and edit at Tommaso Zafferani that this is a sock just like previously blocked sock User:RobCrowley 50. Might be good to check for sleepers. Qed237&#160;(talk) 14:14, 15 November 2016 (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

 * - Katietalk 15:18, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ - I don't see any obvious sleepers. Blocked and tagged. Do we have an existing SPI on this guy? Several tagged socks but no previous file noted here. Thanks. :-) Katietalk 15:32, 15 November 2016 (UTC)  Katietalk 15:32, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Looks like cu-blocked them without an SPI. GABgab 22:34, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Obvious sock with same names as previous accounts. Qed237&#160;(talk) 21:24, 15 November 2016 (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

 * , please block. Thanks, GABgab 22:35, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
 * ✅ Katietalk 23:57, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppets



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

Obvious sock with same name as previous socks. <i style="font-family:Sans-serif"><b style="color:blue">Qed</b><b style="color:red">237</b>&#160;<b style="color:green">(talk)</b></i> 15:28, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Not sure if it is good to check for sleepers, the editor seems to make a lot of accounts and some might easily have been missed. <i style="font-family:Sans-serif"><b style="color:blue">Qed</b><b style="color:red">237</b>&#160;<b style="color:green">(talk)</b></i> 15:32, 16 November 2016 (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

 * Please block the duck; use your discretion as to whether CU is needed. Thanks, GABgab 19:42, 16 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Given how prolific this sock master has been lately. I've changed to CU request. It feels a bit like whack-a-mole as we can't even seen to archive cases before new ones are brought forward. I'd like to be a step ahead if we can -- I've gone ahead and blocked this account under DUCK. Mkdw talk 04:30, 19 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Let's have a list of all the ✅ accounts I found for this guy on this check:


 * All now blocked and tagged. I don't see any sleepers other than RobertCrowley50. Closing. Katietalk 13:35, 19 November 2016 (UTC)