Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Alam567/Archive

Alam567

Alam567 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

27 April 2011

Suspected sockpuppets

Bhug678 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
99.93.166.162 (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log))

User compare report Auto-generated every hour.

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

Reverted the sockmaster on Battle of Cold Harbor here and left a message on user talk page. The user later blanked the page with "Busy" at 15:42 (UTC)

15:42, 27 April 2011 (diff) User talk:Alam567 ‎ (←Replaced content with '{{busy}}')

Within two minutes the sock created account

15:44 . . Bhug678 (talk ) new user account

Later on same article, the IP undid my revert of sockmaster

17:17 (cur) . . (-1) . . 99.93.166.162 (talk) (Undid revision 426248721 by Berean Hunter (talk))

...and I reverted again within a minute,

17:18 (cur) . . (+1) . . Berean Hunter (talk) (Reverted 1 edit by 99.93.166.162 (talk); Rv. (TW))

The sock showed up within a couple of minutes on my talk page with this

17:21, 27 April 2011 (diff ) User talk:Berean Hunter

The sock has no other edits outside vandalizing my talk page and the talk page of someone who reverted him. Special:Contributions/Bhug678

Due to the timing of the sock creation and sockmaster blanking his talk page warnings...and then over an hour later, the arrival of the sock immediately after I reverted the IP for making the sockmaster's edit again and the sudden arrival of the sockpuppet, I'd say they are related. Recommend checkuser to uncover other accounts.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 21:59, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

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

I certainly have not attempted to vandalize,destroy,or disrupt normal Wikipedia operations. The account Bhug678 was not created by me,and the creator is anonomous to me.Therefore,I should not be involved.Alam567 (talk) 03:11, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

Clerk endorsed - I've blocked the IP for a week, but am endorsing to find out about the other accounts, as well as to find sleepers. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 02:15, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Confirmed, no other accounts. Dominic·t 04:32, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Awaiting administrative action -- DQ (t) (e) 12:03, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note that there is also a Bhug677 account that has been interacting with this user. With Bhug678 being involved, someone is sockpuppeting here.
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► ((⊕)) 14:33, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You are right; that one is confirmed also. In my initial check, I simply did not notice the different last digits, and so didn't realize there were multiple accounts. Dominic·t 17:22, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked, tagged. TN X Man 17:54, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]