Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Maniac2569/Archive

03 September 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Maniac2569 had an instance of vandalism at 0:55 2 Sept as seen here. I warned and reported the user to Administrator intervention against vandalism in which an admin replied with a block of the user at 01:06 2 Sept. An account was created at 01:26 with user name Maniac2570. One minuter later there was another instances of vandalism to the same article at 01:27 2 Sept., as seen here. Zepppep (talk) 01:42, 3 September 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
I've already blocked both the users now as the second one quacked loudly. I've also locked the BLP that was mainly vandalised in case the editor gets any ideas about creating a third account. To be honest I don't know if there's an awful lot (if anything) that Checkuser can do here. I checked the history of the pages vandalised and I'm happy enough that we've caught everything as there didn't appear to be any other similar edits.--5 albert square (talk) 01:57, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Whatever can be done to prevent the person from getting around their block would be great. As it's been said, the person is blocked, not simply the user. And thanks for your work! Zepppep (talk) 02:06, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * CheckUser isn't likely to reveal anything that isn't already obvious. WilliamH (talk) 12:11, 3 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Closing, everybody is blocked. There's no pressing need for tags for obvious vandals either. Reaper Eternal (talk) 18:13, 5 September 2012 (UTC)