Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tommy814/Archive

Report date July 27 2009, 19:09 (UTC)

 * Suspected sockpuppets

I am not sure if Tommy814 has been abusive under this name, other than the fact that he is supposed to be blocked for his previous behavior, and would be evading a block. Theserialcomma (talk) 19:09, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Evidence submitted by Theserialcomma (talk)


 * Comments by accused parties    See Defending yourself against claims.

Ummm......excuse me? First you accuse me of knowing Frank Dux and now you're accusing me of sockpuppetry? What's the deal?Tommy814 (talk) 06:08, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Just my 2 cents worth: I was involved with all the previously blocked accounts. I did initially suspect Tommy814 was one of them. But to this point, I have to say he has conducted himself civilly in the discussion. If he is one of the previously blocked accounts, he has certainly done a 180 on his conduct. Niteshift36 (talk) 07:19, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments by other users

Please provide additional evidence that Tommy814 is these other people as well within the new few days, or this case will be closed and archived. NW ( Talk ) 04:29, 2 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
 * all alleged socks are blocked SPAs (except for the accused) that only edit Frank Dux, a low traffic article. No other evidence is available from me, other than the behavioral evidence of all SPAs unilaterally supporting complete charlatanry and only editing this one article. When one sock is banned, another shows up. This is the latest.

Theserialcomma (talk) 09:01, 2 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Insufficient evidence in this case to support the allegation of sockpuppetry by Tommy814. Reading the talkpage, his editing and discussion don't follow the MO of the prior accounts. Nathan  T 21:43, 4 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Conclusions