Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Kennethcooke213/Archive

03 September 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Creating hoax articles in the same vein as User:Kennethcooke213 and User:Jake Picasso. Recreating hoax articles previously created by confirmed sock, User:Pootiewest. Repeatedly removing CSD tags. Cind.  amuse  (Cindy) 10:09, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * IP collaborating and removing speedies. JohnCD (talk) 10:42, 3 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
Blocked and tagged per DUCK. It would be interesting to know if this is Jake or an imitator. IP blocked 31 hr, though it's probably autoblocked anyway. JohnCD (talk) 10:42, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

05 September 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Recreating many of the same hoax articles as yesterday's sock account, or where those articles have already been salted, stuffing the talk page with rubbish instead. Biker Biker (talk) 07:29, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

More of the same, recreating the same hoax articles. Cind.  amuse  (Cindy) 07:33, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

More of the same. Cind.  amuse  (Cindy) 07:45, 5 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
Block as a duck. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:01, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Indef blocked. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:06, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

06 September 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

DUCK. Note upper-case "C" this time. JohnCD (talk) 21:31, 6 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
Blocked and tagged. JohnCD (talk) 21:31, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
 * This is the third time in three days. I'm adding a CU to see if we can get an IP block. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 02:20, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I absolutely do not like what I just saw, could another CU pls double-verify the results... - Mailer Diablo 05:21, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not seeing anything that particularly worries me. I'll e-mail functionaries with why. Courcelles 06:39, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Technical side is, settled on checkuser-l. I'll boldly send this back to the clerks, because I suspect MD has went to bed. Behavioural evidence should be relied on if contemplating a block. AGK  [&bull; ] 09:14, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The username and the only edit are enough for me to block, but I am consumed with curiosity about MD's remark above - is any amplification possible? JohnCD (talk) 11:43, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Just to update, it was a false alarm - fully satisfied with the explanation and this case can be closed. Thanks! - Mailer Diablo 13:15, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Apparent confirmed match to Jimbo Wales, eh? JohnCD (talk) 17:55, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Err... kay. I'm not sure what happened there, but I guess we're done. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 01:04, 8 September 2011 (UTC)