Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TungstenCarbide: Difference between revisions
→14 August 2011: alter slightly |
Marking as closed |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
{{SPIpriorcases}} |
{{SPIpriorcases}} |
||
{{SPI case status| |
{{SPI case status|close}} |
||
=====<big>14 August 2011</big>===== |
=====<big>14 August 2011</big>===== |
||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
======<span style="font-size:150%">Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments</span>====== |
======<span style="font-size:150%">Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments</span>====== |
||
Sorry, there's nothing there. –[[User talk:MuZemike|MuZemike]] 01:54, 15 August 2011 (UTC) |
|||
---- |
---- |
||
<!--- All comments go ABOVE this line, please. --> |
<!--- All comments go ABOVE this line, please. --> |
||
Revision as of 01:54, 15 August 2011
TungstenCarbide
TungstenCarbide (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
For archived investigations, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TungstenCarbide/Archive.
– This SPI case is closed and will be archived shortly by an SPI clerk or checkuser.
14 August 2011
- Suspected sockpuppets
- TungstenSquash (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- TungstenC (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- User compare report Auto-generated every hour.
A rather bold assumption of WP:DUCK based on naming pattern on both and that the first account was created two days after the sockpuppet User:TungstenCarbide 10 (which appears to have already been blocked/locked). I don't know if CheckUser can give data from account creation, but just in case that works or in case it's worth looking for other non-edit actions I'm requesting checkuser to see if there are any related, undiscovered socks (User:Tungsten Tide gives me pause, but not enough to list it in the investigation)...if it's not worth it feel free to remove the checkuser request. Ks0stm (T•C•G) 22:04, 14 August 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
Sorry, there's nothing there. –MuZemike 01:54, 15 August 2011 (UTC)