Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lieingscum/Archive

Report date January 22 2009, 05:06 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets:

After I reported, who created the account today, the account was subsequently blocked for an inappropriate username today (Jan. 21) at 18:59 (UTC). However, the user evaded the block by creating a new account, at 19:48. In order to confirm a relationship with multiple accounts, I have checked Special:ListUsers/Lieing and found, who had only one contribution, but was still a vandalism-only account at that, meaning that the original puppeteer is likely to be Lieingscum (as in, "Liar").
 * Evidence submitted by ~ Troy (talk)

So, the first thing I would like to request is a confirmation of the above. If not, I will take another look at it to make sure; if so, then please consider doing the following:
 * Setting an indefinite Block (AO ACB or similar) on LieingScum's account for sock puppetry
 * Changing the block settings for Lieingbastard's account to an "Account Creation Block" to prevent further block evasion, and
 * Blocking White Hat or Black Hat in the same manner as mentioned.

~ Troy (talk) 05:06, 22 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.


 * Comments by other users

LieingScum can be adequately dealt with as a WP:UAA issue (it is also a clearly offensive username), and we can look forward to a more speedy resolution there (already reported).
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

Assuming that these are the same user, White Hat or Black Hat is then the only unblocked account. Given that we ask users who are blocked for an inappropriate username and have few edits to create a new account, there seems to be no issue here.Mayalld (talk) 13:50, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

two offensive usernames dealr with at WP:UAA. No further action required. Mayalld (talk) 13:50, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Conclusions

Tiptoety talk 20:48, 26 January 2009 (UTC)