Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wordfunk/Archive

15 January 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

User:Wordfunk was created in 2015. It was blocked on 13 January 2016 with TP access removed on 14 January 2016... and now this account magically appears. Similar account names, and similar disruption - see Jim1138's talk page history.  ~Oshwah~  (talk) (contribs)   06:28, 15 January 2016 (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

 * The two accounts are ✅. I've upped the master's block to indefinite and tagged both accounts. Closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:45, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

24 January 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets




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

Same wp:stick, wp:listen issue, still about. Wordfunk Word_unk Jim1138 (talk) 18:15, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

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

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

I think we need to go right back to the very beginning and address what happened. And stop all this negative, wasteful and pointless activity.

I think you've lost perspective about what this project is surely all about it.

In the first place, make a massive error copying and pasting back in an absolute duplication of content, 3 paragraph works immediately below the original. Of course, I remove it. It was a duplicate of what was already there.

Jim's response was to stick a false and erroneous tag on my talk page accusing me of edit warring. Of course, I was not. I just removed the duplicated material.

I politely requested that Jim remove and eraze it as I could not. He refused, continued to refuse to do so and refused even to acknowledge his error or apologize.

As I feared, the tag was erroneously used against me.

This was quite unfair. I had volunteered to help and cleaned up and developed a topic no one had any interest in and had been signaled for improvement for years. I even started discussion about the changes to which none of my accusers responded.

I cannot understand the "rat packing" of these other admins to defend Jim and punish me.

then, quite erroneously told me I should remove it myself. I cannot. That is a technical fact. And instead of doing so, banned me for 5 days.

A very strange encouragement for a volunteer project.

The entirely matter has since spiralled out of all proportion, consuming an increasing amount of energy that would be better spent on developing the content, and creating illwill.

I think it's about time that a mature cool head stepped in, that the original accusation tag was removed and erased and I was left along to contribute, as I did, quite positively.

Thank you. --Wordfu-k (talk) 15:33, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * If anyone reviews the talk page at user talk:Wordfunk. the above becomes a very clear illustration of the overwhelming WP:IDIDNTHEARTHAT and WP:STICK issue. I have also posted regarding this user at WP:ANI. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:45, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * , I'm not sure what it is you want at this point (I've read your comments at ANI as well).--Bbb23 (talk) 17:53, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
 * - The socks are all blocked, so the SPI can likely be closed (I don't think a check-user is needed). They aren't happy with my response (blocking socks and telling them to use WP:UTRS instead) - so hoping for a review of their claims as well. The SPI isn't the place for that - not sure ANI is either, but I started the thread there anyways. I'll post a clarifying comment there. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 18:03, 26 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Closing per Barek's comment. Bbb23 (talk) 18:10, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

31 January 2016

 * Suspected sockpuppets


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

Admits:. Still editing Indian pariah dog:. "Yes, but it was not edit warring and I did not harass anyone. I was the victim of harassment. And, now, your harassment." Not sure how to handle this, but reported nonetheless. GABHello! 20:49, 31 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Account blocked, feel free to close. Sorry for the unnecessary report. GABHello! 20:57, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Comments by other users
''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.''
 * Comment: Additional names used listed at Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Wordfunk (not all of which were on prior SPI reports - all blocked per WP:QUACK, so no check-user needed). --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 21:39, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

 * Close per Barek's comment. Bbb23 (talk) 23:58, 31 January 2016 (UTC)