Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Spencer195/Archive

19 May 2011

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * (Was originally filled under this, and the checkuser result reflects this)


 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

''Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters " ~ "''

Based on his talk page comments on White supremacy, (which have a similar flavour to Mikemikev's style, eg the trolling reference to Hitler) on the fact that he added the peacock adjectives to the lede which were then restored by an IP 94.116.40.133 from a range that Mikemikev is known to have used, I think a SPI (or even a checkuser) could confirm that Rrrr5 is a sockpuppet of Mikemikev. In this diff with an IP from the same range, Mikemikev identified himself: Likewise with the IP he identified himself here  (edit summary:  I'm just pointing out the incompetence, and I'm right. It's you who's trolling.) and was subsequently blocked for ban evasion. Mathsci (talk) 09:10, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Oops, I missed out an "r" in Rrrrr5. Thanks for pointing it out and sorry for any confusion (Rrrr5 seems wholly unrelated). Mathsci (talk) 14:18, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

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

Mathsci: Why not just get back to editing articles? Why even worry about it or take time out of your day to bother posting here? And why are you still involved in racial articles? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.60.177.65 (talk • contribs) 08:23, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * I've blocked the IP for two weeks for evasion. Above you've listed Rrrr5 (one capital R, three lowercase) - did you mean to write Rrrrr5 (one capital R, four lowercase), or are you accusing both of them? —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 14:04, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * is ❌ to previous Mikemikev accounts. However, there is (possibly) more going here, so I'd like to send an email to get a second opinion. On hold until then. TN X Man  15:58, 19 May 2011 (UTC)
 * This case was on hold, but I'm relisting it as it's sat untouched for eight days. Should we just close this out? —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 16:15, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I guess. I didn't hear back from ArbCom, but there may still be some action taken in the (hopefully near) future. TN X Man  16:41, 27 May 2011 (UTC)


 * After taking a further look, I agree with Tnxman in both respects. Rrrrr5 is very unlikely to be related to Mikemikev, but this case is on hold pending investigation from the Arbitration Committee. No action should be taken absent word from an arbitrator. Hers fold  (t/a/c) 18:09, 29 May 2011 (UTC)


 * ✅;, , and  are all the same editor, but ❌ to Mikemikev. Note that the last is an administrator and that this aspect of the case is being handled in another venue.  &mdash; Coren (talk) 17:01, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm moving this back to the checked column, awaiting admin action. TN X Man  18:13, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

I've blocked the first three accounts from Coren's list, but whose socks should I tag them as? Leaving Spencer195, pending clarification at WT:ACN. HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   23:49, 30 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't believe the Committee is likely to opine on the socking issue proper beyond noting that all four accounts were clearly operated by the same person. &mdash; Coren (talk) 00:09, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Since Spencer appears to be the oldest account, it's probably best to file/tag the socks under him. TN X Man  12:49, 31 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Spencer was blocked by Deskana, were done here. -- DQ  (t)   (e)  12:23, 2 June 2011 (UTC)