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.

Suspected sock puppeteer

HHNRecordsPR (talk⁺ · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Suspected sock puppets

• GhostDog21 (talk⁺ · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)
• BubbleGum Gang Leader (talk⁺ · contribs · deleted contribs · tag · block user · block log · CheckUser)

Report submission by

• Kww (talk) 03:09, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence

As for identity, it's the classic "I made that comment with the wrong account, so I better go change the signature strategy. As for abusive sockpuppeting, they both participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HHN Records, (see this deleted edit for HHNRecordsPR)and it's pretty obvious that HHNRecordsPR had a pretty strong motivation for keeping the article and disguising his identity during the argument.

Comments

• Please remember to notify all accounts listed as possibly linked to the sock puppetry in question (instructions).

• HHNRecordsPR was banned from posting any more infomation on this site. Since that was everything I wanted to say, I placed my signature at the end of the comment. Also, since you are looking into the posting history, you can clearly see I placed my signature there after they were banned. Question, If I was HHNRecords, Why whould I disguise my identity if I thought I was posting the comment under the GhostDog21 user name? I know the person HHNRecordsPR, and just like me, they are not with the label either. I'm not sure why they picked that name, dumb idea. That person told me the reason they were banned was due to them having the label name in thier user name, and it seemed like they worked for the label, which is B.S. I noticed on the history of G-Unit Records and Shady Records that there are user names with the label in them, Heck, there is even an administrator with G-unit in their user name, and they make contributions to the label articles. • GhostDog21 (talk) 12:07:19, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Either way seems like puppetry (even if of the meat kind) which isn't allowed. And changing someone else's signature is stictly verboten anyway. Jasynnash2 (talk) 11:05, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• BubbleGum Gang Leader seems a little too keen at establishing they are not a sockpuppet. — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 20:26, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm glad someone notified me of this. Otherwise I would have known nothing about it and couldn't have defended myself or even ask questions. What I do recall is me stating that I would like to upload a proper article for HHN Records on wikipedia. After requesting GhostDog21 to send all his information on the company to me. I found out that you had the name blocked from recreation. I told you that I had no affiliation with the company and that I understood wikipedia's policies and guidelines on uploading an article on a business company, and to see if you would take the protection block off the name. I don't understand how that could make me a suspected sock puppet. I don't think there is really much I could do about being labeled a suspected sock puppet. I'm just going to try my best to get HHN Records a proper article and to become an established editor again. Thanks for those options on your talk page. ~ ~ ~ ~ BubbleGum Gang Leader (Talk|contribs) 18:54:36, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusions

• Blocked Ghostdog indef. Gonna AGF with BubbleGum and assume that he isn't a sock. Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 16:23, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

---