Crouch, Swale

Crouch, Swale (talk+ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · spi block · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
21 June 2011
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Identical editing style - creating stub articles on remote places in Cumbria. Username taken from geographical location i.e. first article created. NtheP (talk) 08:03, 21 June 2011 (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]
Article creations also deleted per WP:CSD#G5. –MuZemike 17:06, 22 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
27 July 2011
[edit]

I suspect User:Watlingfen could be a Crouch, Swale sockpuppet.

  1. The user name is based on an English place name.
  2. Watlingfen's contributions to Hinckley include some poorly structured sentences.
  3. Watlingfen's inline references for Hinckley lack citation templates.

This doesn't sound much, and so far Watlingfen has not been nearly as bad as either Crouch, Swale or some Crouch, Swale sockpuppets. However, Crouch, Swale is a proven liar and has an indefinite block. Please will a senior admin at least test Watlingfen via CheckUser to either put my mind at rest or conform a link with Crouch, Swale?

Thanks, Motacilla (talk) 00:18, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It doesnt sound much, but as a user who limits themselves pretty much to small Lincolnshire related (hamlets etc) articles, Ive been approached by someone called User:Kkumar123 and wonder why this might be? Im hardly well known, and this person approached me yesterday in regard to "how to edit" Wiki. I was previously approached by User:Brattleby 36 who turned out to be a sock of User:Crouch, Swale and am now concerned that this may be the same person Panderoona (talk) 19:11, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
10 August 2011
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets


Maybeabout 4 edited the userpage of I hate you a lot tdf (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) to remove the sockpuppet notice. He had created his userpage and talk with a template, and I saw that behavior on The Red House 5 earlier (among other things, Red House 5 also created userpages for a bunch of other editors who had previously deleted their userpages (like JZG). Maybeabout 4 is blocked with email and talk page access blocked, but Red House 5 is able to edit their talkpage in case I am wrong (and using this template is some new suggested thing that I am ignorant of. Checkuser needed to confirm, as well as check for sleepers. Thanks! Syrthiss (talk) 13:45, 10 August 2011 (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]

I saw this about the same time Syrthiss did, I think. I've blocked and tagged several accounts, and blocked some IPs. I'm not sure how much good the latter will do, but we'll see. TNXMan 14:12, 10 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

02 November 2011
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

Created vandalism page of the same name as the user. Calabe1992 (talk) 21:16, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Added another contributor to the scibaby page.... Sailsbystars (talk) 21:24, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by other users
[edit]

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

Also, perhaps User:Frzt62910? Similar style of name. Calabe1992 (talk) 22:11, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, User:Jay12298 possibly. Searching for others. Calabe1992 (talk) 22:12, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Clerk, CheckUser, and/or patrolling admin comments
[edit]
I did a check around the same time Courcelles did. Those accounts look Red X Unrelated compared to the available data on Scibaby. Those batch of socks are editing from a different continent from Scibaby. Other accounts look Red X Unrelated as well. Elockid (Talk) 23:32, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All above-reported socks, along with about 100 others (including Scibaby 30 (talk · contribs)) are  Confirmed socks of Crouch, Swale (talk · contribs) and have all been blocked and tagged as such. –MuZemike 01:28, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note that User:Jay12298 and User:Frzt62910 do appear to be Red X Unrelated, though. –MuZemike 01:30, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
14 December 2011
[edit]
Suspected sockpuppets

I'm not sure what this person is trying to accomplish, but it seems pretty evident that these are socks of Gh18929, it seems accounts are created and then shorty after they edit Gh18929's userpage.. Just something to look into, I guess.. - Dwayne wuz here! ♫ 15:21, 14 December 2011 (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]

The following are  Confirmed as Crouch, Swale (talk · contribs):

–MuZemike 16:40, 14 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

More