Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/PlayCuz/Archive

01 February 2014

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
 * Editor interaction utility

A passing accusation of sockpuppetry was made during a dispute/edit war here, and apparently ignored. It seems the two editors do not have much interaction except at that article, House of Dlamini. However, on 5 August 2013: That appears to be a very curious sequence of events and might need some explanation, in particular as to why FactStraight described PlayCuz's edit as "my edit". Checkuser requested in the hope of confirmation or rebuttal of this suspicion. And apologies to all concerned if the suspicion is unfounded. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 13:47, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
 * FactStraight modified a talk page comment by PlayCuz, substituting his/her signature for that of PlayCuz, with the edit comment "correction to my edit"
 * Three minutes later, PlayCuz removed FactStraight's signature and substituted his own, with the edit summary "correction"
 * Neither editor complained at the behaviour of the other

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

 * In light of the signature issue and the tag-team edit warring they've engaged in I'm endorsing this request for CU attention. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:43, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Both are ✅. Reaper Eternal (talk) 19:44, 2 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Wow, six years of socking. I've blocked FactStraight indef and PlayCuz for one week. Closing now. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:27, 2 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Way post-archival note - Just in case anyone reading this in the future is confused, at the user's request, I swapped around the blocks: indef'ed PlayCuz as the sock and unblocked FactStraight. See User talk:FactStraight. ☺ ·  Salvidrim!   ·  &#9993;  04:08, 9 April 2014 (UTC)