Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/TungstenCarbide

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.

– This SPI case is closed and will be archived shortly by an SPI clerk or checkuser.

24 September 2010

Suspected sockpuppets

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

Evidence submitted by Ks0stm

Another TungstenCarbide sock following the usual naming pattern. Somehow he's managed to create socks 3 times in the last two months, so some sort of IP (possibly range?) block might be useful. Requesting checkuser to determine if an IP block would be feasible, but no hard feelings if the checkuser check is declined.

Former sockpuppets that would be helpful in determining a range if checkuser is endorsed include the most recent two blocked ones: TungstenCarbide XXV (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki) and TungstenCarbide XXIV (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). Ks0stm ^(T•C•G) 14:25, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by accused parties

See Defending yourself against claims.

Yes, I am indeed TungstenCarbide and every time I'm blocked I create a new account. It's simply not in your interest to keep blocking me. I don't cause much trouble and the blocking doesn't work. So why bother? Why not just let me have my say? Why the heavy handed censorship? Best regards __TungstenCarbide XXVI (talk) 14:54, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

Confirmed (obviously), but a the range is too busy for blocking. TNXMan 15:08, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All blocked up. -- DQ.alt (t) (e) 17:42, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]