Jump to content

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Cadeken/Archive

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Cadeken

06 May 2019

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Cadetrain has a significant history of copyright violations on en.wiki (see user talk--example--and deleted/ revdel contribs) and on Commons. Following Cadetrain's last edit at 14:24, 6 May 2019, TrainSpencer was created at 14:29, 6 May 2019 and first edit was to Draft:Cooper Barnes (actor), an obscure topic/page created and primarily edited by Cadetrain. (Note also Cadetrain and TrainSpencer.) The first edit was to insert verbatim (copyvio) prose from deadorkicking.com and other (all?) edits have been blatant insertion of copyright violations (e.g., verbatim prose from a Greenville News article into Robert Eugene Brashers, also heavily edited by Cadetrain). While Cadetrain is not yet blocked on en.wiki, the duck sock has the functional effect of evading the scrutiny and disregarding the copyvio warnings issued to Cadetrain, which is an abusive use of a secondary account. Эlcobbola talk 21:56, 6 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

 Confirmed, blocked, tagged, closing.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:17, 7 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

16 May 2019

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


New account (16. May) - first edit is to draft space (just like TrainSpencer's first edit; draft space is esoteric for a newbie) then proceeds to edit Robert Eugene Brashers and then Jerry Walter McFadden, both heavily edited by Cadetrain. (Note also RailKenneth and known socks Cadetrain and TrainSpencer). Эlcobbola talk 23:49, 16 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

17 June 2019

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Cade1017 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has made inaccurate addition to Zodiac killer article and appears to have made previous changes under similar name Cadetrain (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), which was blocked by an admin as a sockpuppet. Thank you, David J Johnson (talk) 22:12, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

 Clerk assistance requested: Please fix filing.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:38, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

18 July 2019

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

This appears to be another sockpuppet account. Previous attempts have been:-

Cade1017 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Cadetrain (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) TrainSpencer (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) RailKenneth (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) David J Johnson (talk) 11:39, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

09 July 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

This account, like the other accounts, is disruptively editing Draft:Cooper Barnes (Actor), which has been the main target of the Cadetrain socks.

This will have to rely on comparison of the quacking because there haven't been any recent registered accounts from this duckpond. Robert McClenon (talk) 02:13, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
To me this clearly seems to be the same as another sockmaster, WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Cadeken. Similar user names. Edits articles related to prison sentences, mass murderers, school shootings, and other articles related to violent crime, as well as articles related to trains and railroads. This account popped up a few days after the most recent block of a Cadeken sockpuppet. Sundayclose (talk) 02:21, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that User:Sundayclose is suggesting that Cadetrain and Cadeken are all one sockfarm. That is likely true. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:07, 9 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

11 July 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

This account was created a few hours after the most recent block of a Cadeken sockpuppet. Same editing pattern: articles related to prison sentences, mass murderers, school shootings, and other articles related to violent crime. In addition to poorly sourced edits, once again the tell-tale sign is citing the general webpage of a prison or inmate locater but not linking to the specific page about the inmate: [1], [2] Sundayclose (talk) 03:17, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, when the archive of another sockmaster (Cadetrain (talk · contribs)) was merged with Cadeken's archive, two sockpuppets of Cadeken seem to have been lost: Railroad employee (talk · contribs) and Railroad worker (talk · contribs). Those need to be included in the archive because of the same editing pattern. Sundayclose (talk) 03:31, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

11 July 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

This is not a duck case, and will require IP address checking. However, the reason to think that this is a sock is, first, the complicated history of socking by Cadeken/Cadetrain, and, second, the focus on particular actors including Cooper Barnes, and, third, use of unnecessary disambiguation (Cooper Barnes - American Actor), which seems to be namegaming. This editor has edited within past 90 days. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:31, 11 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

25 December 2020

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


creation and buildup of Draft:Danny Ranes and Brent Koster which is the same article as Draft:Danny Ranes which was largely unsourced or insufficiently sourced in the same manner as Cadeken's previous works. started editing December 16, after previous ban on November/December. 2nd potential sock has submitted the Ranes and Koster article without any attention to the baggage from the previous article/editors. Checkuser requested. AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 01:41, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. Couldn't agree more. User also exhibits the characteristic behaviour of asking established editors to proxy for him. Compare [3] by Eric Klebold Johnson, and [4] by Kinkel Loukaitis Brazill with [5] or [6] for example. Meters (talk) 23:08, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

03 January 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


The latter article is particularly significant. Theresa Knorr is an obscure murderer who killed two of her children in the mid-1980s. Both socks are intent on using those convictions as a basis for relitigating her acquittal in 1964 for murdering her husband in an apparent domestic violence incident.

Such similar behaviour on such an obscure article is unlikely to be a coincidence. 92.40.195.119 (talk) 14:34, 3 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

09 January 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Among the usual common articles, there's the same moth to the flame return to the obscure article at Theresa Knorr (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) to add the same WP:BLPCRIME violation as the last sock see this. 92.40.189.55 (talk) 13:24, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

13 March 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Same editing pattern, including BLP violations at Theresa Knorr, and many of the same edited articles as blocked sockpuppet Darren Cross. Fences&Windows 11:02, 13 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
Red X Unrelated:
Kevin James Loibl (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 00:22, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

19 March 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Registered soon after most recent sock (Barbaro Reyes Cho) was blocked. Similar pattern of editing articles related to violent crimes ([8], [9]). Recent registered socks have three names for user names. IP socks are always located in central California. Sundayclose (talk) 17:34, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

03 May 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


First edit to recreate Draft:Cooper Barnes (previously created by known sock RailKenneth--see also Draft:Cooper Barnes (actor)) and username similarity (compare Kenneth to RailKenneth; Spencer to TrainSpencer; and 2000 to Freewayman 2000--sock name commonality is a known practice). Эlcobbola talk 19:43, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

14 May 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Continued loutsocking on various favourite pages of this master. Bbb23 has blocked 2601:206:301:6300:98:382B:B565:6E0 (talk+ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · spi block · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log)) for a week, but given that the /64 has been CU-hardblocked twice in the past ([10]), disruption resumed shortly after the last block expired and that the range has almost certainly been used only by Cadeken ever since it became active in November 2020, I think an extended block is warranted. --Blablubbs|talk 14:31, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

Pink clock Awaiting administrative action – please hardblock the range for 6 months. Not too worried about collateral since we've had two previous hardblocks, this is an ISP with pretty static assignment that (as far as I know) doesn't do shared /64s. I can endorse a check for collateral if you're not comfortable blocking without one, of course. Thanks. --Blablubbs|talk 14:31, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Blablubbs: Done as requested. I of course couldn't CU-block the range as Ponyo did, but it will accomplish the same thing. I had looked at the range using the single IP's address + /64, and the contribution history is the same as when one uses the shorthand expression of the range, but it doesn't show the block log, which in my view is a bug. If I had seen the two previous hard blocks, I would've hard-blocked myself. As long as I'm here, I also blocked and tagged two obvious socks: SpencerCade (talk · contribs · count) and Shooter Gilmore (talk · contribs · count). Closing--Bbb23 (talk) 15:17, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

30 May 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Recreates Draft:Cooper Barnes with very first edit. WP:DUCK. Asking for a CheckUser to look for more sleepers. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 03:06, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

08 June 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same pattern of previous socks. Edits articles related to violent crimes/criminals, mass shootings, school shootings, and prisons. A tell-tale sign when citing a source about an inmate's location is to cite a general webpage for the prison rather the specific page for the inmate, as done here. Restores edits of previous socks without explanation: [11]. Sundayclose (talk) 01:59, 8 June 2021 (UTC) Sundayclose (talk) 01:59, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

01 July 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Restoring edits of a previous sock (recently blocked) after they were reverted: [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18]. Same pattern of editing articles related to violent crimes, criminals, and prisons. Sundayclose (talk) 00:35, 1 July 2021 (UTC) Sundayclose (talk) 00:35, 1 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • @RoySmith:. The restored edits are linked in my first post. No suspense there. The socks are Keith Ann Nikolas (talk · contribs) and Barbaro Reyes Cho (talk · contribs). That suspense is easily resolved by a quick look in the history of the articles linked above. Sundayclose (talk) 02:05, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • @RoySmith: I'm glad this sock was blocked, and I appreciate your efforts. But you are, in fact, being a pain. It would have taken you about 30 seconds to look at the edit history (including character count, which is a big clue) you could easily have figured out the original edits. I'm not trying to be a pain either, but you are discouraging people like me from going to the trouble to make a simple, straightforward, and very obvious sock report. Have a good day. Sundayclose (talk) 15:10, 2 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

14 July 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Obvious sock as returned to the same topics. I've blocked them per DUCK and deleted their IMAX draft, I'm just adding this here for the record. Fences&Windows 10:31, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

19 November 2021

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]


Same editing pattern: articles related to prison sentences, mass murderers, school shootings, and other articles related to violent crime. Often emerges as a newly registered account after a previous sock is blocked or, in this case, an IP in Tulare, CA (location of many IP socks) receives a final warning ([25]). In addition to poorly sourced edits, once again the tell-tale sign is citing the general webpage of a prison or inmate locater but not linking to the specific page about the inmate([26],[27], [28]), or citing dead links ([29], [30]). Lots of WP:CITEKILL:[31], [32], [33]). Sundayclose (talk) 21:04, 19 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

16 January 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Cadeken is a known Sock puppeteer. Based on the editing history of these reported users and a look at Cadeken's edit history made on multiple socks over the past two years, I suspect both accounts are other socks of his. Very similar editing pattern of editing pages related to convicted murderers and serial killers. Naming people who are not serial killers as serial killers: This edit was made by a previous sock of Cadeken (User:Afjnsd) back in November: [37] a month later a very similar edit on the same page which receives relatively few views: [38] Inexpiable (talk) 11:00, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The same example can be found here: An edit made by yet another sock of Cadeken: [39] Recent edit from Lightiggy: [40]. It's as if there is an obsession with trying to name as many serial killers as possible for people who do not fit the criteria.

In regards to the other sock: Again we have this obsession with adding non serial killers to the same list: recent edits by WERcndsk12: [41] this is literally the exact same edit made by yet another sock of Cadeken back in November in regards to the Larry Ranes entry: [42]. This information is actually incorrect as the murders by Larry Ranes occurred in 1964 not 1969 yet both accounts have made the exact same error? Furthermore, the edits by Cadeken (on sock Afjnsd) once again tried to add Gleason to the list when it has been established he is not a serial killer. The recent edits by Lightiggy show the same obsession with trying to name as many people as a serial killer as possible: [43]. You can confirm that both examples of the accounts I listed were more sockpuppets of Cadeken: User:Afjnsd and User:Darren Cross.

This user (lightiggy) already admitted to sockpuppeting a while ago: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lightiggy/Archive. One of the IP socks I reported: User:128.239.205.22 shows edits have been made before Lightiggy started editing so this user is definitely not a "new user". Inexpiable (talk) 11:17, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.
Further evidence for WERcndwsk12: Shows the typical tell-tale signs of Cadeken, including citing the general web page for a prison rather than the specific page related to the inmate ([44]) and WP:CITEKILL ([45]). Sundayclose (talk) 15:14, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
I did not check Lightiggy, but they didn't show up in the check, and I would have expected them to have shown up, but I'll leave open if a clerk wants to look closer. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:30, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think Lightiggy is Cadeken. The IPs at WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Lightiggy, which Lightiggy admitted were them, geolocate to a totally different part of the country than the IPs in the archives of this case (except for the 174 IP, which someone tacked on without any evidence). Lightiggy has also been editing since 2020, during which time Cadeken has been checked several times - if Lightiggy were them, it's very likely that they would have been picked up in a check at some point. Closing. Spicy (talk) 18:02, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

30 March 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

I was looking at this editor's recent contributions, and I saw that the two accounts have overlapping interests in serial killers and school shootings. However, the most incriminating evidence is that this current sock attempted to make the same edit twice on Osborn Correctional Institution. The first one ways by a confirmed Cadeken sock, and was reverted. The second one was by this newer Shktriib1 sock, but it was not reverted. Scorpions13256 (talk) 05:29, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]

Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims. I did my own behavioral examimation. This account and other socks overlap on nearly every page.  Sounds like a duck quacking into a megaphone to me. Scorpions13256 (talk) 21:09, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tell-tale signs for Cadeken socks are citing the general webpage of a prison or inmate locater but not linking to the specific page about the inmate and WP:CITEKILL: [46], [47]. Also adding dead links: [48] Sundayclose (talk) 03:44, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
  • This is  Possible from a CU perspective - the geolocations are in the same part of the same country. Behavioural investigation needed. Girth Summit (blether) 08:30, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not convinced Shktriib1 is Cadeken from the behavior. Sure, there's editing overlap, but these types of crimes attract a lot of interest. There's also very similar timecards, but that's adequately explained by two people living near each other. Other than that, there's a few behavioral quirks I'm seeing in Shktriib1 which I don't see in several recent Cadeken socks. In summary, a "possible" from CU isn't enough for me. Closing with no action. -- RoySmith (talk) 16:56, 5 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

07 September 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Same editing pattern: articles related to prison sentences, mass murderers, school shootings, and other articles related to violent crime. Often emerges as a newly registered account after a previous sock is blocked or an IP in southern California (location of all IP socks) receives a final warning. In addition to poorly sourced edits or edits that misrepresent a source ([49]), once again the tell-tale sign is citing the general webpage of a prison or inmate locater but not linking to the specific page about the inmate ([50]), edit warring (see August 25, 2022 at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_serial_killers_in_the_United_States&action=history, WP:CITEKILL ([51], [52], [53]), and asking other editors to revert edits in order to circumvent policies ([54], [55], a pattern also seen in their IP socks in southern California ([56]). Sundayclose (talk) 01:18, 7 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

09 October 2022

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Same editing pattern: articles related to prison sentences, mass murderers, school shootings, and other articles related to violent crime. Cadeken socks also edit articles related to trains and railroads, thus this sock's username. New socks emerge as a newly registered account after a previous sock is blocked or an IP in southern California (location of all IP socks) receives a final warning or blocked. Most recent sock was Shktriib1 (talk · contribs). In addition to poorly sourced edits, edits that misrepresent a source, or a source that only partially confirms an edit, and grammatical errors ([57], [58], [59], [60]), other similarities are WP:CITEKILL ([61]) and seeking help from editors previous sock have interacted with ([62], [63]). This sock also seriously violated WP:BLP by naming crime victims in Stockton serial killings not named in the source. Railtrailssuck made one correction only after receiving a warning. Sundayclose (talk) 15:18, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

16 April 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Same interests in school shootings, etc. Also see [64][65], [66][67], [68][69][70]. MarioGom (talk) 21:54, 16 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

27 June 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Was looking through the history of Draft:Traumpalast Leonberg IMAX Theater at AfC (cannot link the history bit directly?) and noticed the creator had been blocked for socking. The account which worked on the AfC draft most recently, Tularetrain, has the same pattern of interests (school shootings, mass shootings Special:Contributions/Tularetrain) as the main sock lead. It's also somewhat difficult to find AfC drafts if you don't know what you're looking for, which was the first red flag. SportingFlyer T·C 10:57, 27 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

06 July 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

This account sent me an email asking me to add the Club Q shooting to the List of longest prison sentences article, even though it's unprotected and they could easily do it themself. It is very strange that a brand new user is emailing other editors to update an unprotected page. Even if the page is protected, the next step is usually to request an edit via the talk page. A look at the page history shows that it is a frequent target of this sockfarm. [71][72] Even if this is someone else, they are clearly trying to WP:AVOIDSCRUTINY. Someone who's wrong on the internet (talk) 20:42, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

I also received two similar emails. This is classic Cadeken behavior: to avoid scrutiny of problem edits or evade a block, the sockpuppet asks others to make the edit. After being warned against messaging other editors to make edits, apparently they are now resorting to off-Wiki meatpuppetry. Cadeken frequently edits articles related to school shootings or other mass shootings, as well as prisoners and prison sentences. Sundayclose (talk) 21:16, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
@RoySmith: Should I copy and paste to your talk page? Sundayclose (talk) 15:27, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Better would be to email it to me, thanks RoySmith (talk) 15:30, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

10 July 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Quack! Someone who's wrong on the internet (talk) 14:51, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

New account editing the exact same topics as the previous socks. Also recreated this draft. Someone who's wrong on the internet (talk) 15:20, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

This is standard procedure for Cadeken. Create a new sockpuppet within a few days after the most recent sock is blocked, try to create an article, and edit about prisons and mass shootings. This is close to being a WP:DUCK, but I'll defer to CU. Sundayclose (talk) 15:34, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: confirmed to Tularetrain on Commons. Эlcobbola talk 16:49, 10 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

14 July 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

MACROQUACK! [73] Someone who's wrong on the internet (talk) 19:46, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]

23 August 2023

[edit]

Suspected sockpuppets

[edit]

Only edit thus far is to request unprotection for List of longest prison sentences, which was protected due to him around the last time he showed up here at SPI (2023/07/13). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v Source assessment notes 15:21, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by other users

[edit]
Accused parties may also comment/discuss in this section below. See Defending yourself against claims.

Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Cadeken/Archive&oldid=1175121543"