Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mm777c/Archive

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.


Mm777c

Mm777c (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log· investigate · cuwiki)
02 October 2010
Suspected sockpuppets


Evidence submitted by GarnetAndBlack

The above accounts and IPs have been making the same tendentious edits in the Carolina–Clemson rivalry and Clemson University – University of South Carolina brawl for the past couple of days. The level of disruption has caused these once highly-stable articles to be full-protected. Diffs for the accounts believed to be involved in sockpuppetry are as follows:

Carolina–Clemson rivalry:
Mm777c [1] [2]
64.136.27.231 [3]

Clemson University – University of South Carolina brawl:
Mrcorrect255 [4]
Mm777c [5]
64.136.27.17 [6] [7]
64.136.27.231 [8] [9]

All these edits/reverts were made with no explanation whatsoever in the edit summaries, which seems odd considering that refs were being summarily deleted along with content in some cases. Also suspicious is the fact that the two username accounts have only ever made edits in the two articles mentioned here. The IP 64.136.27.231 has a long history of being used for vandalism and other disruptive activity and has been blocked eight times in just over two years. The account Mm777c also used the "minor edit" checkbox in an undo revert, another clear violation of policy. Further signs of sockpuppetry are WP:TIPPING, WP:AGAIN and WP:IDENTICAL. Not to mention WP:DUCK. Assistance in restoring some semblance of order to these articles would be greatly appreciated. Thanks! GarnetAndBlack (talk) 09:24, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mm777c has once again made suspicious edits/reverts to Clemson University – University of South Carolina brawl in essentially the same time frame as one of the IPs listed previously in this report. Diffs are as follows:
Mm777c: [10]
16 minutes later, Mm777c likely logs out and makes this reversion
64.136.27.17: [11]
How much longer do we have to put up with this disruptive behavior? A once stable article has required protection twice in less than a week due to this user and their sockpuppets. GarnetAndBlack (talk) 06:20, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by accused parties   

See Defending yourself against claims.


Comments by other users
Clerk, patrolling admin and checkuser comments

Mm777c and Mrcorrect255 are  Unlikely. However, Mm777 and Scdemetrius (talk · contribs) are  Confirmed. No comment with regards to the IPs. –MuZemike 06:50, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]