Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/VacuousPoet (4th)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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:VacuousPoet

Suspected sockpuppeteer

VacuousPoet (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log · rfcu)

Suspected sockpuppets

ProtoCat (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)
ImprobabilityDrive (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log · rfcu)


Report submission by

Orangemarlin 23:02, 24 May 2007 (UTC)


Evidence
  1. This edit indicates involvement in a discussion well prior to the editor registering as a user.
  2. Editor mainly edits Intelligent Design where sockpuppets of VacuousPoet have shown up previously.
  3. First edit was on May 10, 2007, which was five days after ImprobabilityDrive's last edit.
  4. This edit is very similar to this edit in both style and content.


Comments

Certainly, User talk:ProtoCat is clear evidence of trolling, as is much of Talk:Intelligent design/Archive40. My experience wih them involved tthem asking me to continue a discussion on their talk page - then accusing me of stalkig - because I continued the discussion - on their talk page! Even if not a sockpuppet, this user seems to eeither be a troll or... rather seriously disturbed. Adam Cuerden talk 15:17, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Conclusions
  • A troll indeed, and quacks like VacuousPoet, who quacked like Kdbuffalo. So ProtoCat is blocked. --Akhilleus (talk) 03:13, 26 May 2007 (UTC)