Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Whitmore 8621/Archive

< Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations | Whitmore 8621


Whitmore 8621

Whitmore 8621 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
Report date March 7 2010, 19:03 (UTC)
edit
Suspected sockpuppets
edit


Evidence submitted by Eaglestorm
edit

[1] - one instance of using same 'making things hard' on edit summary. Whitmore 8621 used same language on my talk page twice.

[2] - the very first one made by 122.107.239.241 on my talk page.

[3] - most edits are focused on either WWE-related articles, Bentleigh, Victoria, and Metal Gear Solid: Peace Walker, where a content dispute is ongoing and a protection template placed by Cirt has been automatically lifted. IP has been active since December 2009 and editing patterns are mostly consistent with [that of sock-puppeteer. As indicated by this, Whitmore 8621 "tag teams" by logging out then continuing to edit using IP, then logging back in, as exemplified by this. --Eaglestorm (talk) 19:03, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties
edit

See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users
edit
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
edit
Checkuser request – code letter: F (Other reason )
Current status –   Declined, the reason can be found below.    User has deployed IP socks to create tagteaming instances.Requested by Eaglestorm (talk) 19:03, 7 March 2010 (UTC) [reply]

  Question: Are you trying to find edits within the IP range? Otherwise the IPs looks duckish to me. The IP 122.107.214.146 looks to be the more recent IP. The other IP looks to be unused now. No point in blocking that. In regards to the cases of tagteaming, this could be meatpuppetry instead of sockpuppetry. Elockid (Talk·Contribs) 04:36, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

the recent IP is a cause for concern because of what i described above. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eaglestorm (talk • contribs)

  Clerk declined This is pretty clear without a CU. Old IP is old, but I've blocked the active one for a little bit and Whitmore 8621 for a month. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 15:01, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  This case has been marked as closed. It will be archived after its final review by a Clerk or Checkuser.
17 August 2010
edit
Suspected sockpuppets
edit


Evidence submitted by Eaglestorm
edit

IP has been used in meatpuppetry several months ago (mentioned in previous SPI) and in circumventing current block, usually in removing confirmed sockpuppet template on IP userpage. Sockmaster, who was reprimanded by at least three editors before for his actions, has admitted using the IP in arguing his unblock request for another matter. This is not a case of harassment; it's about helping the community reel in errant editors who run afoul of the project time and time again despite many chances to reform. IP and sockmaster's history exhibit same editing patterns, such as blanking of talk page. Eaglestorm (talk) 15:37, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties   
edit

See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users
edit
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
edit

  Clerk declined as Whitmore 8621 has already been blocked today for edit warring; I'm pretty sure the autoblock has gotten the IP. Marking as closed. –MuZemike 19:04, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

28 August 2010
edit
Suspected sockpuppets
edit



Evidence submitted by Eaglestorm
edit
Comments by accused parties   
edit

See Defending yourself against claims. Why Am I on the list for check user list and that certain user Whitmore 8621, I removed that users edits from The Living Daylights I do not appreciate being accused for something like this. As for the suppose time of 16 minutes it is most likely I created my account around the same time the user acknowledged his indef block. I do not like my privacy being invaded. Kennedy, 007--Kennedy, 007 (talk) 17:54, 28 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Comments by other users
edit
How can you base that off of editing patterns? It's very likely that people are gonna have the same interests. Other than the editing pattern, you don't have any evidence. So can you give me some evidence other than that of why you think Whitmore is him? Endofskull (talk) 02:10, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
edit

-- Avi (talk) 07:45, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  Administrator note Whitmore 8621 blocked and tagged. Elockid (Talk) 12:27, 29 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

16 September 2010
edit
Suspected sockpuppets
edit


Evidence submitted by Eaglestorm
edit
  • 220.244.146.157
  • This is an obvious sock of Whitmore 8621. According to contributions, first recent edits came on 11 September, with those edits focused on Denis Hart, Metal Gear Solid, and my talkpage, where lone edit was a personal attack. Judging by language in edit summaries undoing my edits (including flagrantly false claim of having met me off-wiki), sock fails Duck testing. Although NuclearWarfare has blocked him for one day, it is this editor's firm belief that IPsock's (and by origin, Whitmore8621's) disruptive behavior will continue upon lifting of block.

Evidence includes the articles above, plus [on talkpage] that about non-notable Bleemcast 'release' of game. Meatpuppetry evident by the fact that both accounts' edits occurred within the same timespan and new account focuses on aforementioned articles. Like sockmaster, sock also adds name before or after signature. Eaglestorm (talk) 08:06, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties   
edit

See Defending yourself against claims. This is over the top, I am not the same person as Whitmore 8621 why am I being accused, I was reading both Eaglestorm and 220,244,146.157 contributions. Added discussions for the disputes on Metal Gear Solid and Dennis Hart, I read the source its true about the IP address users said About Archbishop Hart, It was on the News a few years ago I met Dennis Hart in person and got his autograph and got in a photo with him 5 Years ago, He has gotten into troule with the Public hey He got into Trouble with Father Bob Maguire, Who I have also met,. Tanner- 2762--Tanner- 2762 (talk) 09:43, 16 September 2010 (UTC) Just for the record this is my IP address 211.28.45.180 I would like the above accusation removed Please?.(Tannner- 2762) --Tanner- 2762Tanner- 2762 (talk) 10:00, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
edit
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
edit

The new account is   Confirmed as being the same as the others in the archive. No comment on the IP. TNXMan 11:51, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

29 October 2010
edit
Suspected sockpuppets
edit



Evidence submitted by Eaglestorm
edit

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Special:Contributions/Katter-_1993 - user's editing patterns, focus on same Australian topics (such as those related to 1980 elections), and name styling are dead giveaways of being a sock of indefblocked sockmaster. contributions list indicate first edit made almost 24 hours before the last edit of blocked sock Tanner-2762 on 16 September, indicating another of possibly many sleeper sock accounts. activity only resumed on 19 October, with this edit on Denis Hart another giveaway.

Comments by accused parties   
edit

See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users
edit
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
edit

  Confirmed TNXMan 15:04, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

31 October 2010
edit
Suspected sockpuppets
edit



Evidence submitted by Eaglestorm
edit

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Keating_1991 - although most of the edits now concern Australian politics articles, naming pattern and putting username (common nuances of sockmaster) before sig are still consistent with sockmaster.

As evidenced by this edit, suspected sock makes vigorous defense of editing patterns. References to sockmaster's purported vendetta against me, "notable factor" about recently blocked sock and references to another blocked sock, albeit condensing them in one big block of a paragraph, are also obvious. The fact that this happens within 24 hours of Katter's blocking is still another black mark on sockmaster's profile. While the large number of edits are worthwhile, this is not an excuse to get away with block evasion, and telling editors reverting contributions to be more familiar with Australian politics to the point of namedropping does not help. Eaglestorm (talk) 06:05, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties   
edit

See Defending yourself against claims. HEY HOW DARE I AM ACCUSED OF BEING A SOCK MASTER IM NOT SUPIRSED KNOWING THIS ENYCLOPEDIA AND ALSO THAT USER WHO HAS ACCUSED ME IS A BIT MENTAL AND HAS A PROBLEM WITH USER IN REGARDS TO GETTING BLOCKED IN HIS CASE I'D MAKE IT RETROSPECTIVE, I AM A RECENTLY SIGNED UP WIKIPEDIA USER. --Keating 1991Keating 1991 (talk) 06:34, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
edit
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
edit
  • User's second unblock request is pretty much a confession, as they state their old account has had it's talk page access removed. Don't really think a check-user is required here anymore. ---Taelus (Talk) 13:43, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Marking for close. TNXMan 14:31, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
11 November 2010
edit
Suspected sockpuppets
edit



Evidence submitted by Eaglestorm
edit

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Special:Contributions/Simpson_742

  • possible sockpuppet. Articles edited include 2010 version of GoldenEye and several articles related to Australian politics. Name design is still consistent with sockmaster. While contributions may be notable, this must not set precedents for future block evaders. Sockmaster has long since exhausted community patience with frequent creation of socks and has yet to come clean on activities. User:Timeshift9 earlier recommended I put the man on the sock list. Eaglestorm (talk) 06:53, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Auto-generated every six hours.

Comments by accused parties   
edit

See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users
edit
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments
edit

  Confirmed and   IP blocked –MuZemike 06:59, 11 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

04 December 2010
edit
Suspected sockpuppets

Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Special:Contributions/Calwell_1961 - sockmaster continues usual editing pattern of adding user tag before or after signature, like this for example, focusing on Australian political articles, including those already handled by previous socks. This editor will continue to reiterate that sockmaster's good faith edits, while they may or may not add substance to article, are not an excuse to avoid indef block. Recommend rollback of all edits, ban request pending. Eaglestorm (talk) 13:47, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
edit

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
edit
Whitmore has also been using pretty static IPs, would appreciate an IP block. Elockid (Talk) 15:12, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  Confirmed and   IP blocked. TNXMan 15:30, 4 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
07 December 2010
edit
Suspected sockpuppets

Please list evidence below this line. Remember to sign at the end of your section with 4 tilde characters "~~~~"

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Special:Contributions/Hewson_1994 - continued block evasion by sockmaster. articles mostly concentrated on Rob Hudson, indicating tendencies of possible SPA behavior, improper use of edit summaries. Eaglestorm (talk) 06:38, 7 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users
edit

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
edit

17 May 2016

edit
Suspected sockpuppets


There's also a shared interested in Metal Gear Solid ([15], [16]) if that's not enough evidence to make this obvious. Note that this seems to be a static IP. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:18, 17 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

edit

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.


Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

edit
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Whitmore_8621/Archive&oldid=1138681863"