Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Vandalpatrol/Archive

Suspected sockpuppets




Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

CheckUser requests
Requested by  Ikon   |no-blast 18:50, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

user:Magicalsaumy has similar pattern of abusive behavior as shown by user:vandalpatrol and his many other socks listed on deleted talk:bhumihar page. All the socks of vandalpatrol had attacked me with abuses, and very first edit of user:Magicalsaumy was []. I had never co-edited any page with this guy, and his patterns of edit and language shows he is the sockpuppet of permabanned used. When warning was issued to him, he hides it in similar fashion. One may easily get more information about several anon Ips through which vandalpatrol edited the now deleted Bhumihar page, which may confirm the real identity of magicalsaumy. Additionally, vandalpatrol had threatened me that he is the admin on Hindi wikipedia on Yahoo chat, and I find Magicalsaumy is the admin on Hindi wikipedia.

– User:Vandalpatrol is for CheckUser purposes. MuZemike 20:46, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Can you tell us what other accounts that have been socks of this user? I ask because there is no other socks listed, and there have been no other investigations against this user. MuZemike 20:49, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Please take this case very seriously. user:Badminton, and several other abusive/desruptive users were listed in a section on now deleted Bhumihar page. An admin may pull up the details. I myself had listed many anon. IPs of user:vandalpatrol, and socks on that page. Also, this user, mostly operated through 59.94..., 59.96.. IP, and same is the case with user:Magicalsaumy, look at his talk page once he has recieved a block too showing similar IP. Some of the socks I remember are:

user:PandalPetrol, and others were listed in a section on bhumihar page. Also, that page now has got deleted and created again. So this guy may be still editing that page too.  Ikon  |no-blast 03:04, 16 December 2009 (UTC)


 * We will, but you have to realize that CheckUsers won't be able to make any connections because the software won't allow them to search that far back for technical evidence. An admin (whether it be myself or another admin) will have to determine whether a block is warranted off behavioral evidence only. MuZemike 03:30, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Conclusions
Magicalsaumy blocked and tagged. Behavioral evidence is convincing enough, even though I highly doubt that user is editing again, anyways. MuZemike 19:02, 16 December 2009 (UTC)