Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Knowhands enjoykeep

The following discussion is an archived debate of the case of suspected sockpuppetry. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page. All edits should go to the talk page of this case. If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to open a new case of sockpuppetry of the same user, read this for detailed instructions.

User:Knowhands enjoykeep

Suspected sockpuppeteer

Knowhands enjoykeep (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

Fdgdf3 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Kjngjkn (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Erj4ll (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
45oht3 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
4oujh56 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Style oh! style oh! (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

EdJohnston (talk) 15:24, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
User:Kjngjkn and associated information added by AussieLegend (talk) 12:41, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence

User:Knowhands enjoykeep was edit-warring to insert a 'Lack of language provision' section in the Mac OS X article. The claim that this was a disadvantage of Mac OS X had no appropriate source and seemed to reflect only his personal opinion. He was blocked for 3RR on both May 7 and May 9 by two different admins. Later, on 17 May, an edit war developed in which both Knowhands and a new editor called Fdgdf3 were cooperating. Fdgdf3 tried to re-insert the information that had been previously disputed, and was blocked by User:AlistairMcMillan for 3RR. A code letter 'E' case (to take note of the 3RR proxying) was opened by User:AussieLegend at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Knowhands_enjoykeep.

User:AlistairMcMillan has issued an indefinite block to Knowhands for disruption and repeated edit-warring, but Fdgdf3 has so far been given only given a 24-hour block. I suggest that an indef block for Fdgdf3 might be considered if Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Knowhands enjoykeep comes back positive.

In the checkuser case, User:AussieLegend notes that Knowhands was hit by the autoblock when Fdgdf3 was given *his* 24-hour block. This suggests that the two editors use the same IP. Note this comment that the editor sent email to Alistair that both of his accounts had been blocked. If in the future there is continued edit warring on Mac OS X while both users are blocked, I suggest that a block of the underlying IP be considered, but I don't know the rules for setting that up.

User:Kjngjkn has now replaced both Knowhands enjoykeep and Fdgdf3 as the active editor, edit warring on Mac OS X, List of sexual slurs and Battlestar Galactica: The Second Coming. He has also placed several random and unjustified warnings on User:AussieLegend's talk page.[1] Based on this edit summary at List of sexual slurs and the limited edit history which targets pages edited by the administrator who blocked Knowhands enjoykeep the editor is most likely another sockpuppet of Knowhands enjoykeep.

And an hour after the Kjngjkn account was blocked, User:Erj4ll was created and made the same reverts to the same articles and user talk pages.

Comments

Is this another sockpuppet of User:Primetime? The Knowhands account was created it seems to re-created the deleted article List of sexual slurs, which was worked on heavily by User:Primetime (most of those edits are now deleted under the article's previous name Glossary of sexual slurs) and some of his sockpuppets (for example User:List Expert). —Preceding unsigned comment added by AlistairMcMillan (talk • contribs)

Hello AlistairMcMillan. I don't see any sockpuppet tags on User:List Expert. The latter doesn't seem to be as nasty as Knowhands, so I wonder if they are really the same person. List Expert appeared to be a slang enthusiast, but the worst he ever did (that I can see) was he did some canvassing, he created some unnecessary redirects, and he had strong feelings about some AfD discussions. He was blocked once, but it was then undone as a mistake. He is not currently blocked; he's not been active since August 2006. EdJohnston (talk) 20:01, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Will BeBack seemed to think List Expert might be a sockpuppet of Primetime.[2] If look at List Expert's earliest edits,[3] he seems to be more than a little familiar with Wikipedia editing. Aside from that I don't have anything else except they have edits to a number of the same articles and the List Expert account was created with a couple of months of Jimbo blocking Primetime. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 22:07, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Primetime case does look to be very large and messy. My guess is that we don't have to understand Primetime just to answer the question about Fdgdf3. If you are comfortable using behavioral evidence to issue an indef block of Fdgdf3, then we are done, and checkuser might not even bother. It's up to you. If it were me I would wait for checkuser, since there could be future misbehavior and CU could collect some data before it goes stale. CU could also compare Knowhands' IP address against whatever they still have from Primetime. EdJohnston (talk) 03:15, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's doubtful that its Primetime; he just seems to be going after the blocking administrator/opposed user's last edits.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:11, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I changed the block on Fdgdf3 before reading this. Also this morning I've received 197 emails saying simply "Fuck you" from an account called User:45oht3 that was created this morning and has no edits, so I may be going out on a limb, but I believe this is the same guy. AlistairMcMillan (talk) 14:58, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

4oujh56 is now active with a similar MO to one of the others. --AussieLegend (talk) 21:30, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked indef 4oujh56 due to the pattern, after I noticed he appeared to be systematically reverting small edits on unrelated articles by User:AussieLegend and User:Blueboy96, besides ClueBot. EdJohnston (talk) 21:54, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked indef User:Style oh! style oh! because his entire edit history consisted of reverts of my own edits, due to the analogy of the attack on AussieLegend and Blueboy96. EdJohnston (talk) 22:11, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

All blocked as socks of long term vandal Primetime (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), per this Checkuser request. Blueboy 96 19:22, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]