Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/QuirkyAndSuch

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:QuirkyAndSuch

Suspected sock puppeteer

QuirkyAndSuch (talk⁺ · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets

ObamaGirlMachine (talk⁺ · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)
ChingyThingy (talk⁺ · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Report submission by

≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 16:35, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence

Check the contrib list : user User:ObamaGirlMachine shows up after a month of inactivity, just to revert back to a version by User:QuirkyAndSuch a few minutes after being blocked for disruption. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 16:35, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note both users referring to me as "she" when I am actually a "he". ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 16:40, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note recent disruption in redirecting this page after blanking. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 17:40, 23 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The owner(s?) of both accounts compulsively deletes warnings stepwise:

OGM:[1][2][3]
QAS:[4][5][6][7][8][9]

- Wikidemo (talk) 18:50, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another giveaway is the capitalization of user name. WP:DUCK, indeed. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 20:56, 24 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

These two accounts do seem very closely related. It seems, that ObamaGirlMachine, goes in, and, asks on the talkpage that the article be deleted [10], then, QuirkyAndSuch, pastes in a support in short order [11]. This happens again and again and again and yet again. They support each other in other places as well, again, pretty close together time-wise (altho in this instance they are seperated by a couple hours). UserCompare Summary SQL ^{Query me!} 19:06, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest consider topic ban of all Barack Obama-related articles given that most of the disruption was related to this topic, user was disrupting the articles in bad faith, and even after being warned[12] and clearly receiving the warning[13] that the articles were on probation the user continued to sock/edit war,[14][15][16][17][18] make accusations[19][20][21] wikigame,[22][23][24][25] and canvass[26] (X 22), and file bad-faith administrative actions[27] after receiving the notice. Wikidemo (talk) 11:37, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if this group might be connected more widely to any of the other sock families or instigators on the Obama articles. Wikidemo (talk) 17:34, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think that this is very clear. Propose to indef block one of the accounts. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 23:24, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in agreement, and I added ChingyThingy to the mix here. Same crap, same article relation, nip this in the bud. seicer | talk | contribs 13:48, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, that does seem to be related, and, the writing looks similar to me. SQL ^{Query me!} 19:01, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

All blocked as sockpuppets of QuirkyAndSuch. SQL ^{Query me!} 19:22, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]