Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/FruitsAndVegetables133
- 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. 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.
- Evidence
- loghead1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) and FreshFruitsRule (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
Fruitsandvegatables133 was blocked originally for a week for sockpuppetry in a featured article discussion[1]. Freshfruits was created on May 31, 2006, 4 days after FAV133's block. Loghead1 has been floating around since May 14, 2006. Loghead1 left a few messages on FAV133's talk as if to try to show different users, also he asked a question about sockpuppetry and when it could be used[2]. In terms of edits, it appeared the FAV133's ultimate goal was to get Eburn, Ontario featured status, something that he was later blocked for. Freshfruitsrule and loghead1 show similar behavior to FAV133's edits in which all three have edited Eburn, Ontario, Cambridge School, and others. They all show similar behavior in how they act.
- Comments
Sorry for the screwups, my first time dealing with sockpuppets. Yanksox 02:32, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Will have to go to WP:RFCU, as there is limited evidence. OK, see Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/FruitsAndVegetables133. Iolakana|(talk) 17:03, 23 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Returned back "Inconclusive." Iolakana|T 13:35, 3 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]