Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TJ Spyke/Archive

20 January 2012

 * Suspected sockpuppets




 * User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

Suspicion sparked by TJ Spyke's edit here (violation of WP:R2D, TJ Spyke has been blocked three times for this in the past) coming at the same time as a mass of edits by the IP (including, , , , , , , ) - all similar violations of WP:R2D involving the same subject and the same link alteration Harry Smith (wrestler) --> David Hart Smith as TJ Spyke's edit. Further investigation of the IP found this and this subjective edit, a stance which TJ Spyke advocates on his userpage thus: "Help move ECW and SmackDown back to their CORRECT names of ECW on Syfy and WWE Friday Night SmackDown, not the bastardized names they are at right now.". Since his most recent ban for repeatedly ignoring WP:R2D, TJ Spyke has rarely edited in mainspace whereas the IP has made numerous unhelpful edits to visible links (e.g., , ). ŞůṜīΣĻ ¹98¹ Speak 17:51, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

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


 * The edits are similar, and the IP appears to be in the same city as the user, although if they are the same person I'm not sure if it would be inappropriate - the user isn't evading editing restrictions, and many users (including administrators) don't always log in when editing. The edits may be unnecessary but have not damaged the articles, they have only added to the page histories, and the reverts have had the same effect and are equally unnecessary. Peter&#160;E.&#160;James (talk) 02:01, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The salient point is that, regardless of personal opinions on the damage it causes, such editing is in violation of a clearly-established guideline. If it was a matter of a few (or even quite a number of) instances during the course of wider article improvement then I wouldn't have given it a second thought. But if an individual has taken it so far that he's received three blocks, and when if IP has contributed little apart from edits of this nature, then it has gone way past the point of un-necessary editing if the two accounts are related. ŞůṜīΣĻ ¹98¹ Speak 14:04, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
I'm sorry, but checkusers do not generally disclose connections between IPs and named accounts. TN X Man 19:42, 20 January 2012 (UTC)
 * This is a hard one. On the one hand, TJ is a very experienced editor, having racked up more than 89000 edits. On the other hand, there is a massive amount of overlap in these two accounts' edits. On the other other hand, there's one little piece of evidence that's keeping me from blocking the IP, inclined as I am. Any other clerks care to weigh in? —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 14:47, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I haven't checked, but: I agree that the page overlap is strong, particularly on Wrestling articles. Edits there are often of the same kind, as shown by Suriel1981. I didn't find similarities in edit summaries, and found it odd that edits by IP and account are often strongly interleaved. However, two edits sold it for me: IP and account both making the exact same edit (the Dred Scott Case → Dred Scott v. Sandford) on a non-Wrestling topic on two different pages, 108 seconds apart. That's too much of a coincidence. I haven't investigated the background behind the WP:R2D blocks, but at first glance it appears that TJ is quite systematically avoiding scrutiny by spreading his edits across IP and named account, and continues with the very edits that were repeatedly found to be problematic and against consensus. That is both disruptive and an inappropriate use of multiple accounts. The TJ account hasn't made edits since this case was openend, I have left a pointer on User talk:96.25.248.210.  Amalthea  13:39, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
 * I don't edit that often now, and was just trying to help. I did not mean any harm, and was not doing much more than fixing spelling errors and stuff. I have only made like 2 edits since all this began and will voluntarily keep up the low rate I edit now. 96.25.248.210 (talk) 17:57, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
 * As I see it, you would be welcome to continue editing at your normal rate if you just left those redirects in peace (and preferably stayed logged in). Isn't that something you can do? Amalthea  21:14, 28 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Following their post here, the IP has stopped editing. I say we leave it at that. —  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 15:50, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

31 December 2013

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

WP:DUCK - The IP (which has previously been blocked for a year as a sockpuppet of TJSpyke) has recently recommenced serial violations of WP:R2D (e.g.   ), something the sockmaster has been warned against repeatedly and blocked for. The sockmaster is, of course, "indefinitely blocked" at the moment. I have not informed the sockmaster/sock of this investigation as (1) he is supposed to be banned and (2) I have prior experience of his extreme incivility and have no wish to put up with it again. ŞůṜīΣĻ ¹98¹ Speak 03:42, 31 December 2013 (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
Obvious block evasion, IP blocked again. FTR, the third diff you listed changed the displayed link name, not the link target. Amalthea 10:33, 31 December 2013 (UTC)