Misplaced Pages

:Sockpuppet investigations/Spudpicker 01 - 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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Jeffro77 (talk | contribs) at 09:40, 12 December 2011 (←Created page with '{{subst:SPI report |checkuser=yes <!-- Please do not enter anything in the subject/headline box! If you want to request checkuser, simply change the line above ...'). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 09:40, 12 December 2011 by Jeffro77 (talk | contribs) (←Created page with '{{subst:SPI report |checkuser=yes <!-- Please do not enter anything in the subject/headline box! If you want to request checkuser, simply change the line above ...')(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

– A user has requested CheckUser. An SPI clerk will shortly look at the case and endorse or decline the request.

Spudpicker 01

Spudpicker 01 (talk · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

For archived investigations, see Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet investigations/Spudpicker 01/Archive.


12 December 2011
Suspected sockpuppets


An anonymous editor has used several IP addresses in the last few days (in addition to those explicitly stated above, mostly 98.92.x.x); WHOIS indicates they are all dynamic BellSouth.net IPs. (e.g. in this edit, 184.37.2.116 admits to being the same person who made this edit as 98.92.249.28.) The editor has recently indicated his contempt for the system, taunting that because he has a dynamic IP, that "maybe you will succeed in getting this dynamic IP address banned for a few days too", limiting the repercussions against his inappropriate edits. He has been active at Chronology of the Bible (and its Talk page) and at Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses beliefs. The anonymous editor has been 'arguing' (really, just asserting that he doesn't like it) for several days for the deletion of Jehovah's Witnesses beliefs (see Talk:Jehovah's Witnesses beliefs#This whole page should be deleted). After being told an anonymous editor could not complete the nomination process, yesterday he 'threatened' that he would create an account ("Do you honestly think I cannot create a user account? really?") Today, a newly registered account, with no other edits, has claimed at the Talk page that, "I had to agree with the anonymous user above, this page seems to be highly slighted against witnesses, so I went ahead and completed the deletion request for the page for the anonymous user, since they weren't able to do so themselves." Whilst there would be no problem if the editor freely admitted to being the same person, there is a clear and deliberate attempt to mislead, by claiming that another editor supports his view. Jeffro77 (talk) 09:40, 12 December 2011 (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
Categories: