Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Zhand38: Difference between revisions
→11 September 2011: note |
|||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
======<span style="font-size:150%">Comments by other users</span>====== |
======<span style="font-size:150%">Comments by other users</span>====== |
||
<small>''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Guidance#Defending yourself against claims|Defending yourself against claims]].''</small> |
<small>''Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See [[Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SPI/Guidance#Defending yourself against claims|Defending yourself against claims]].''</small> |
||
:Seems so. Blocked account is enthusiastic to a fault, and could someday be a valued contributor. For now article ownership and lack of willingness to work toward improving edits to meet encyclopedic guidelines remains problematic, a situation exacerbated by apparent use of multiple accounts. Page protection may well be the way to go. [[Special:Contributions/99.184.129.216|99.184.129.216]] ([[User talk:99.184.129.216|talk]]) 16:01, 11 September 2011 (UTC) |
|||
======<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>====== |
||
Revision as of 16:01, 11 September 2011
– A user has requested CheckUser. An SPI clerk will shortly look at the case and endorse or decline the request.
Zhand38
- Zhand38 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Populated account categories: confirmed
11 September 2011
- Suspected sockpuppets
- Hmilz38 (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
- Okapi2196 (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.
Quacking is loud enough here for the first account that a checkuser may not be strictly necessary, but I think it may be important to check on the other one as well. Both are single purpose accounts with numbers in their names focusing on the article that seems to obsess User:Zhand38. I'm afraid that this may become an ongoing problem. User:Zhand38 was blocked for disruption and may not currently be able to work within Wikipedia norms. I have not blocked in spite of the strength of quacking. Given his history and my current contract, I should not. I may semiprotect the article, though, if this continues. :/ (Note: I am not informing the user, as I think it probably in our best interests not to do so.) Moonriddengirl (talk) 15:40, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Comments by other users
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
- Seems so. Blocked account is enthusiastic to a fault, and could someday be a valued contributor. For now article ownership and lack of willingness to work toward improving edits to meet encyclopedic guidelines remains problematic, a situation exacerbated by apparent use of multiple accounts. Page protection may well be the way to go. 99.184.129.216 (talk) 16:01, 11 September 2011 (UTC)