Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Richard Deagon

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.

[edit] User:Richard Deagon

Suspected sockpuppeteer

Richard Deagon (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Suspected sockpuppets

209.212.28.50 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)

Report submission by

Erik (talk • contrib) - 17:26, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Evidence

At Choke (film), 209.212.28.50 attempted to add an unverifiable photo of a piece of paper that purportedly lists the production schedule for the film. Edit warring took place, at which I stopped at my 3RR limit and the anonymous IP exceeded his (he was warned after his third revert of the 3RR violation). I filed a 3RR violation report, seen here, which went through, and the anonymous IP was blocked for 24 hours. The article was left at the last revision by that editor, since I had exceeded my limit and the article receives no apparent traffic. Shortly after, Richard Deagon, not having edited since July 25, 2007, began editing the article. This evidenced sockpuppetry allowed the user, initially editing on his IP, to sign onto his registered handle, to continue editing on Wikipedia despite the 3RR block.

Comments

The evidence is compelling: both the user and the IP have focused on the articles Choke (film) and Choke (novel) on July 25 and again yesterday and today. An appropriate punishment, in my opinion, would be a long but not indefinite block for Richard Deagon - maybe one week. Shalom ^Hello 12:49, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Sir Nicholas has already blocked the IP for 24 hours for violating 3RR. Shalom ^Hello 12:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

This is a reverse situation. The IP edited first, then when it was blocked, the editor logged onto the registered handle to continue editing, despite the 3RR block. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 15:15, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Conclusions

The editing patterns strongly suggest the named account and the IP are used by the same person, but this activity is now stale, and a block would serve no purpose at this point. If any further problems occur, blocks would certainly be appropriate. --Akhilleus (talk) 03:45, 16 August 2007 (UTC)