Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TungstenCarbide

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by MuZemike (talk | contribs) at 18:35, 23 February 2010 (Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments: Marking as closed. The last account will remain unblocked.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

TungstenCarbide

TungstenCarbide (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 Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TungstenCarbide/Archive.



Report date February 21 2010, 06:51 (UTC)


Suspected sockpuppets


Evidence submitted by Ks0stm

Account created yesterday right in line with the naming pattern [1]. Suggest a checkuser to block IP or range, since TungstenCarbide has created 6 accounts since the February 11, 2010. Ks0stm (TCG) 06:51, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]


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: E (Community ban/sanction evasion )
Current status – Completed: Reviewed by a Checkuser, results and comments are below.    Original block log for TungstenCarbide here. Checkuser requested by Ks0stm (TCG) 06:51, 21 February 2010 (UTC) [reply]
 Clerk endorsed to check for sleepers and possible IP block. Tim Song (talk) 16:24, 21 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Maaaaybe possible match for CeeKatzJump (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log· investigate · cuwiki). IP block doesn't look worth it currently. – Luna Santin (talk) 02:03, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Clerk note: Nothing much else to do here. Marking as closed without blocking that last one. –MuZemike 18:35, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This case has been marked as closed. It will be archived after its final review by a Clerk or Checkuser.

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