Misplaced Pages

:Sockpuppet investigations/Torkmann: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 10:17, 22 January 2010 editSpitfire (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers29,508 edits Archive.← Previous edit Revision as of 16:33, 25 January 2010 edit undoRichard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users195,161 editsmNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
<noinclude>__TOC__</noinclude> <noinclude>__TOC__</noinclude>
{{SPIarchive notice|Torkmann}}<br />{{SPIpriorcases}} {{SPIarchive notice|Torkmann}}<br />{{SPIpriorcases}}


===== <big>Report date January 25 2010, 16:33 (UTC)</big>=====

{{SPIcat}}

<!-- Please do not add a header here -->

======<span style="font-size:150%"> Suspected sockpuppets </span>======
* {{checkuser|1=Delicious carbuncle}}

======<span style="font-size:150%"> Evidence submitted by ] </span>======
This account was started a few days after the last account by the banned user was closed, the new user's first edits are to properly format an AFD and vote in several other AFDs. The same MO as the previous half dozen accounts. And of course the user brought another of my articles to an AFD. While this particular one should be deleted, the odds that four random new editors would pick a random article started by me to delete, within their first 50 edits would be 3 million to the 4th power. See also ] the original investigation was split between two names. --] (]) 16:33, 25 January 2010 (UTC)


======<span style="font-size:150%"> Comments by accused parties </span>======
<small><span style="font-weight:normal">''See ].''</span></small>


======<span style="font-size:150%"> Comments by other users </span>======


======<span style="font-size:150%"> Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments </span>======
{{RFCU| CODE LETTER | No2ndletter | New }} &nbsp;&nbsp; <small>Requested by ] (]) 16:33, 25 January 2010 (UTC) </small>
<!--## Replace CODE LETTER by the appropriate code letter and Replace No2ndLetter if you need a 2nd code letter (or leave it alone if not) ##-->
<!--## Codeletters are:
A - arbcom ban/remedy evasion
B - Ongoing serious pattern vandalism
C - Vote fraud, please wait until after vote closes
D - 3RR with socks
E - Evasion of community based bans or blocks
F - Other, please explain why a check should be run -->
<!--## Make sure your evidence explains why CheckUser is appropriate ##-->


----

Revision as of 16:33, 25 January 2010

Torkmann

Torkmann (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Populated account categories: confirmed · suspected

For archived investigations, see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Torkmann/Archive.



Report date January 25 2010, 16:33 (UTC)


Suspected sockpuppets
Evidence submitted by Richard Arthur Norton

This account was started a few days after the last account by the banned user was closed, the new user's first edits are to properly format an AFD and vote in several other AFDs. The same MO as the previous half dozen accounts. And of course the user brought another of my articles to an AFD. While this particular one should be deleted, the odds that four random new editors would pick a random article started by me to delete, within their first 50 edits would be 3 million to the 4th power. See also Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Drawn Some/Archive the original investigation was split between two names. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 16:33, 25 January 2010 (UTC)


Comments by accused parties

See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

{{RFCU}} is deprecated. Please change the case status parameter in {{SPI case status}} to "CURequest" instead.

Checkuser request – code letter: CODE LETTER (Unknown code )
Current status – Awaiting initial clerk review.    Requested by Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 16:33, 25 January 2010 (UTC)


Categories: