The abominable Wiki troll (talk+ ·tag ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·spi block ·block log ·CA ·CheckUser(log) ·investigate ·cuwiki)
Older archives were moved to an archive of the archive because of the page size and are listed below:
Checked based on suspicious activity atWikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Jubilees.ST47 (talk)05:41, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. SeeDefending yourself against claims.
Confirmed via the CU log toWibbleewobbleee (talk+ ·tag ·contribs ·deleted contribs ·logs ·filter log ·block user ·spi block ·block log ·CA ·CheckUser(log) ·investigate ·cuwiki).
Blocked and tagged.ST47 (talk)05:41, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]The usual preoccupation withOrchestral Manoeuvres in the Dark related articles ([1] &[2],[3] &[4]). As for Shadikk and WHone, here's only a few examples of intersection with previous socks:[5] &[6][7] &[8],[9] &[10];[11][12],[13] &[14],[15] &[16]. Same interest in the same topic areas (Britpop artists, Gary Oldman films, etc).Sro23 (talk)00:51, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. SeeDefending yourself against claims.
Clerk endorsed - Endorsing own request. There are more than likely several undetected accounts.Sro23 (talk)00:51, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Possible same country, different range, different UA so
Behavioural evidence needs evaluation.Callanecc (talk •contribs •logs)06:31, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]Behaving identically to previous sockpuppets, same old fixation on British pop culture and music reviews ([17][18]). As always, the overlap with past socks is extensive ([19][20],[21][22],[23][24],[25][26],[27][28],[29][30],[31][32],[33][34] etc). Same/similar edit summaries too. Given that this account has been around since last year and CheckUser usually uncovers several more accounts, a sleeper check would be a good idea.Sro23 (talk)07:20, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. SeeDefending yourself against claims.
I am a constructive user. The good-hand/bad-hand stuff was years ago: I am now an adult and my mood problems have been treated. This silliness really ought to stop.Boonslud (talk)12:39, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk endorsed - Please compare to last blocked sockpuppetUser:Dory Funk.Sro23 (talk)07:21, 23 December 2020 (UTC)[reply] Confirmed to each other:
Clerk note: Tags applied.GeneralNotability (talk)03:05, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]Edit warring at wrestlerBig Van Vader, TheManTheyCallAdam wrote in an edit summary "There was already a reliable sorce when i added the edit 3 years ago."[35] TheManTheyCallAdam first edited Wikipedia on 6 January 2021. It wasClatson50, a sock ofThe abominable Wiki troll, who inserted the phrase, in full and sourced, on 12 November 2017.[36] I'm not familiar with the sockpuppeteer but such tenacity in blatant contradiction of the source and article history also seems in keeping.NebY (talk)18:05, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Unlikely. --RoySmith(talk)15:53, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply] Behavioural evidence needs evaluation certainly applies. --RoySmith(talk)15:55, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]widely regarded asone of the greatest super-heavyweight professional wrestlers. The specific edit that TheManTheyCallAdam was edit warring over was changing that to
widely regarded asthe greatest super-heavyweight professional wrestler. I've looked at some recent TAWT socks and they seem much more savvy than this editor (e.g. often using WP policies and jargon in edit summaries - see[38]). I'm not at all convinced that this is the same user. I can't account for the "3 years" thing, but perhaps they were just lying because they thought that would make their edit stick. Also, 2017 was 5 years ago (feel old yet?)Spicy (talk)16:32, 4 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]