Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tlb1000/Archive

Report date September 6 2009, 15:24 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Evidence submitted by Timmeh

Both accounts have edited only the The Herald (album) and/or its deletion page. Tlb1000 has edited other pages only to add information about the alleged The Herald album. Both accounts were created in the past two days, and both have made strikingly similar and invalid arguments to keep the article at its deletion discussion page. See Tlb1000's comment and Boxcar90's. Tim meh  ( review me ) 15:24, 6 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.

Well I have nothing to do with the BoxCar account. Other editors has supported keeping the article too - that does not make any of them sockpuppets either. That basis is no evidence —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tlb1000 (talk • contribs) 15:32, 6 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by other users


 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * ✅ beyond any doubt. Both now permafrosted. --jpgordon:==( o ) 19:07, 6 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Conclusions
 * Tagged. NW ( Talk ) 19:19, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Report date September 7 2009, 20:34 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets


 * Evidence submitted by Benea

User has popped up with edits strongly consistent with the banned sockpuppeteer and disruptive editor User:Tlb1000, namely to recreate a hoax article at The Herald (album) that Tlb1000 first created two days ago but was deleted at afd (WP:Articles for deletion/The Herald (album)) the next day. When the recreated article was rapidly speedied Havock a questions the nominator in the same way Tlb1000 did. Havock a has also on Tlb100's announced decision here to upload album artwork. Tlb1000 was certainly aware of the use of socks, having attempted to use one (User:Boxcar90) to unsuccessfully influence the afd. Since it was established that the article Tlb1000 created was an obvious hoax, its recreation by another user makes it practically impossible that they are different people. Benea (talk) 20:34, 7 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.

I didn't see the recreated article before it was deleted again, but just the fact that the same blatant hoax article was recreated by this account is strong evidence that Havok is a sockpuppet of Tlb1000. In addition, his overall behavior strongly suggests it is the same person. It should also be noted that Havok was blocked a couple of hours ago for 31 hours for disruptive editing. Tim meh  ( review me ) 21:00, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments by other users

I did see the recreated article - but did not know it was a recreated article. It did have album art uploaded as suggested in the report. Additionally it had a set of links that were all false borrowed from a Linkin Park album page (a quick cut and paste) which triggered my suspicions about it being a hoax. With the evidence provided above by Benea it seems pretty clear this is a sock. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 21:20, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Those Linkin Park links were in the original version that Tlb1000 created, too. I think it's obvious it's a sock now. Tim  meh  ( review me ) 21:48, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Knowing that those Linkin Park edits were there as well is additional evidence that this is pretty clearly a sock then. ConcernedVancouverite (talk) 23:38, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

User:Havok a has been blocked for 31 hours for disruption by User:Kralizec!. MuZemike 01:04, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments


 * Conclusions
 * Blocked indefinitely as an obvious sockpuppet. NW ( Talk ) 01:16, 8 September 2009 (UTC)