Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/William S. Saturn/Archive

Evidence submitted by X4n6
In the recent history of [], the 1st and 2nd users worked in tandem to avoid 3RR. User:EATC only appeared when User:William S. Saturn was warned that the next revert would violate 3RR. EATC immediately appeared to revert several more times.

Please do check to uncover if this is a pattern with these two accounts to "get around" 3RR.

Also, when User:William S. Saturn was politely warned on his talk page about WP:SOCK and other apparent violations of policy (WP:TE, WP:GOODFAITH), and reminded that he has been blocked before for violations, he deleted all those warnings and retaliated by posting a nonsensical "warning" about non-existent "vandalism" on my own talk page. I will address those abuses elsewhere. Thank you. X4n6 (talk) 04:03, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Comments by accused parties
See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
Requested by X4n6 (talk) 04:03, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

So they both edited a high-profile article and happen to agree with each other. Any other evidence? Remember,. Tim Song (talk) 04:23, 22 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Fair point. But please note the time-stamps. The account I believe is a sock only appeared immediately after I advised this editor that he was approaching a 3RR violation. So I'm not fishing. But I am aware of User:William S. Saturn's past history of abuses for which he's already been warned & blocked. A sock account is consistent with his past abuses, therefore CheckUser is appropriate here. Thanks. X4n6 (talk) 05:47, 22 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Please note that his most recent 3RR violation & block was just days ago. So there is a pattern.[]. Thanks. X4n6 (talk) 05:57, 22 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Who is User:IP address? Also please note that I've been editing since 2007, I don't see how an account created in 2006 could be my sockpuppet. --William S. Saturn (talk) 06:13, 22 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Removed User:IP address under addl. socks. And just because your current account is from 2007 - how does that keep you from having another account that was created in 2006 - just a few months apart? So then of course you would have no objection to running CheckUser to be sure, right?


 * Just like when your bogus claim that I too had socks was so easily destroyed - when they were IP blocked - while obviously I was not. X4n6 (talk) 08:47, 22 January 2010 (UTC)


 * Accepting this case per previous X4n6 case, and per the current ANI thread. Ok, both of these accounts are ❌ - A l is o n  ❤ 09:07, 22 January 2010 (UTC)