Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Niama13/Archive

Report date September 15 2009, 23:51 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets

Adding, based on the logs

Adding, based on further activity at User talk:PMDrive1061

Besides the similarity in names, all of the users have only intent/edit. Harrassng PMDrive. Abce2 | This is  not a test  23:51, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Evidence submitted by Abce2 |  This is  not a test


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.

Just a thought, but perhaps is one of the employees at his or her home or something. Abce2 |  This is  not a test  03:30, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments by other users
 * Also, what may happen when they (or he/she) gets home? Start another account. We should probaly keep an eye on the article and other things involved in this. Abce2 | This is  not a test  03:38, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, as Heinz13 created both these accounts, and a couple of others that I've added above, and Heinz13 was created just half an hour or so after Niama13 was blocked, it's a clear case. All socks blocked. Someone care to check that I've tagged everyone correctly? I don't come here often enough to know the tagging templates off by heart... BencherliteTalk 00:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

Update - I have blocked Adinene and Lambo123 as socks based on behaviour, and have added them here in case a checkuser fancies a look. BencherliteTalk 01:00, 16 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Since this guy claims to be operating from a commercial facility (and his edits prior to his giving my talk page the ninth degree bear this out), I am hoping that a formal complaint to his IP for a TOS violation is more than warranted. I've been hassled before, but this is as bad as I've had to endure and I don't want to have to keep dodging and parrying this guy's socks.  He has a co-worker with an active account, User:Shootmeplz, but he's OK.  No bad edits.  PMDrive1061 (talk) 01:07, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Self-endorsing for CheckUser attention for underlying IP/range and sleepers. MuZemike 01:59, 16 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Conclusions ✅ =

From a technical standpoint, appears very  to be related, but not completely impossible.

and are obviously ✅. All accounts blocked. J.delanoy gabs adds 02:26, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

All accounts now tagged. Marking as closed. No action taken on User:Adinene. MuZemike 18:52, 17 September 2009 (UTC)