Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Multiculturalist/Archive

11 October 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Multiculturalist has been vandalising, leaving disruptive comments and leaving abuse on the British National Party talk page for many months. I am now convinced his account is a sock, since as soon as his account is mentioned by someone else he logs back on. Also the name is a kind of give away since he is editing/disrupting the British National Party page. Saxonshield (talk) 12:24, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

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

To be a sock puupet you need at least two accounts, someone can't be a sockpuppet of their only account.Slatersteven (talk) 12:26, 11 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I'm asking for the IP to be checked. His IP will be linked to many other accounts (socks). It could be anyone on the BNP page in the last month. If you want me to list suspected sock accounts i can, but there are too many. But i know for definate this guy runs multiple accounts from his IP. Saxonshield (talk) 12:31, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry but that fishinig, and SPI is not for that. Yiu are supposed to list all the suspected acconts.Slatersteven (talk) 12:33, 11 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Ok i'm going to add them. 1 sec. Saxonshield (talk) 12:36, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * its one of those listed. So if they check the IP's they will get the match. Saxonshield (talk) 12:46, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * I suspect you will not come out if this well, its a malicious and wholey unfounded accusation. Look over the talk page history. I urge you to withdraw this.Slatersteven (talk) 12:54, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

WP:SPI says: "Please provide evidence (preferably with diffs and any reasonable deductions and impressions as a result) that show disruption or deception via IPs or accounts via sock puppetry. Cases without any evidence or with solely vague beliefs or assumptions will likely be rejected... To request CheckUser, there must be credible evidence supporting the suspicion of sockpuppetry or abuse, and good cause why CheckUser is required. Requests for checkuser without evidence will be declined, because CheckUser is not for fishing."

In this case not only has no evidence been produced, this seems to have arisen because of arguments on the British National Party page. This is a pure fishing expedition and should therefore be rejected and the filer advised not to misuse these processes. Valenciano (talk) 13:21, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
Bad faith case, filer blocked. TN X Man 13:12, 11 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Has he been informed?Slatersteven (talk) 13:56, 11 October 2011 (UTC)