Wikipedia talk:Requests for checkuser/Case/Soxrock

message: :The following rebuttals are in response to the two examples given for "policy violations" which are to prove that Soxrock is not the user who is responsible for those accounts.
#Why would Soxrock vandalize his own page?  ('
#As far as the Around the Horn AfD, Soxrock was a major contributor to that page, so why would he nominate a page he spent a lot of time on for AfD?  Soxrock has made a total of 656 edits to the AtH page
:The rebuttals provided above should prove as sufficient evidence that Soxrock is not responsible for the accounts which were blocked indefinitely for policy violations as were provided as examples above.  Ksy92003(talk) 08:24, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added a diff where A. Shakespeare requested an auto block caused by  being blocked (thanks to Irishguy for finding that one).  The connections are so numerous that I had decided a checkuser was unnecessary (although I do welcome one for further assurance).  As for why he did what he did with these accounts, your speculation is as good as mine.  Soxrock is still denying involvement - otherwise you could ask him.  My guess on the vandalism account is that one of his friends got on his computer and started acting the fool.  He's claiming to be a teenage kid and I tend to believe that (as opposed to other claims of these accounts that juxtapose races, genders, and religions).  —Wknight94 (talk) 14:07, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

text: Soxrock is now saying that Mrjiggyfly1121 is his older brother attacking him....  More details are in Soxrock's post here where he makes a statement pleading guilty but maintaining innocence (which I don't really understand). --After Midnight 0001 15:10, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Then he made another statement re-denying.  My opinion is that they are definitely all on the same IP(s) and the likelihood of several people on the same IPs editing similar types of articles and even voting in tandem on more than one occasion is absolutely zero.  Outside of one small exception that I don't recall now, I could find almost no overlap in editing times between any of the accounts.  I tried to rule this out but could not.  I'm happy to support leniency but not if he won't admit to the socking.  By leniency, I mean a week block instead of, say, a month - I am not looking for an infinite block in any case.  I am trying to gather opinions on the issue at WP:ANI#Review requested for Soxrock sock ring indefblock.  —Wknight94 (talk) 15:34, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

text: That was renamed via WP:CHU which means the old account literally does not exist.  All of the edits are transferred to the new account.  I don't know if they can even do a checkuser in a case like that.  —Wknight94 (talk) 14:29, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I see. I revised the entry. I just don't want the infamous User:Catherine Woods to be forgotten, at least not in this context. I found that user's obsessions very disturbing. Baseball Bugs 14:44, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The same disturbing edits are now in the history of Sarah Goldberg instead.  Frankly I find this whole case disturbing.  Some of the grotesque pictures uploaded by Sarah Goldberg and FoxSportsRadio especially.  And I'm giving benefit of the doubt in unblocking the Soxrock account but I don't feel 100% good about it...  —Wknight94 (talk) 15:12, 5 August 2007 (UTC)